Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p>[quote user="MidlandMike"]</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <div><img src="/TRCCS/Themes/trc/images/icon-quote.gif" /> <strong>YoHo1975:</strong></div> <div> <p> </p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <div><img src="/TRCCS/Themes/trc/images/icon-quote.gif" /> <strong>Sam1:</strong></div> <div> <p> </p> <p>The FY10 average net operating results per passenger, which are a function of revenues minus  costs before depreciation, interest, and other expenses, were $4.96 for the NEC, due in large part to the positive operating results for the Acela offset by losses for the regional and the special trains, compared to a $16.67 loss for the corridor trains and $128.61 loss for the long distance trains.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> </div> </blockquote> <p> </p> </div> </blockquote> <p> </p> <p>The inference that I have gotten from some of the posts in this thread is that since the long distance train's cost are 6 times more per passenger than corridor trains, then they are that much more wasteful of taxpayers dollars.  However, there does not seem to be any passenger-miles component in the figures.  Since many LD routes are 6 times longer than corridor routes, if you look at costs per passenger mile they may possibly be comparable.  Do we know the average passenger trip length on the different types of service? [/quote]</p> <p>I am working up the numbers, but it will take me a couple of days.  I have other things on my to do list. On a per mile basis I believe the long distance trains numbers look better.  Unfortunately, Amtrak does not show how much depreciation, interest, and other expenses are assigned to the long distance trains, so I have to iterate it.</p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag