Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="Paul Milenkovic"] [quote user="schlimm"] You really aren't addressing the issue. Comparing with airline and road traffic in this case is as pointless as the advocacy groups endless banter about subsidies.   If the necessary infrastructure for several short to medium corridors is put in place, the amount of traffic will grow very quickly as the public becomes increasingly aware of the advantages, just as the public has in the NEC as its speed has increased and times between major nodes has decreased. Since Acela shows a net plus on revenue minus operating expenses, it is not irrational to conclude the same will gradually occur on other, well-selected corridors. <div style="clear:both;"></div> [/quote] How much capital spending went into Acela, what is the ridership, and how does it compare with NextGen? Let's see, does the NEC including Acela and Regional account for half Amtrak passenger miles.  So we are talking about .5 percent of the passenger miles NextGen is supposed to accomodate.  What is .5 percent of 50 billion dollars -- 250 million dollars?  Are you telling me that the NEC capital input that enabled Acela was 250 million dollars? [/quote] At the end of FY11 Amtrak had a gross investment of $15.7 billion in property, plant, and equipment, less accumulated depreciation of $5.6 billion,leaving $10.1 billion of unamortized pp&e on the books.   Amtrak does not make public the location of these investments, i.e. amounts attributable to the upgrade of the NEC, Acela and NEC regional equipment vs. other equipment, etc. Therefore, it is difficult to know how much capital investment is attributable to the Acela. However, it probably is reasonable to conclude that 75 per cent of Amtrak's depreciable assets and interest is attributable to the NEC. If I am correct, approximately $11.8 billion of Amtrak's capital assets can be attributed to the NEC.   In FY11 Amtrak carried 30.2 million passengers; the NEC had 10.9 million and of these 3.4 million or 31 per cent could be found on an Acela train.   NetGen is a new air traffic control system. It will serve commercial flights, general aviation flights, and military operations in civilian airspace. The biggest user will be general aviation, which accounts for approximately 60 per cent of all air traffic operations in the U.S. It is not comparable to passenger rail. It won't carry anyone. As you have pointed out on several occasions, whatever the government plans to spend on NetGen has nothing to do with the key questions regarding passengers rail: where does it make sense; how should it look, i.e. equipment, speeds, etc., and how should it be funded. I plead guilty to responding to comments regarding subsidies for other modes of transport. But they are irrelevant to the questions regarding the future of passenger rail.
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