Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="henry6"] Come on Sam, you know well that Amtrak pays for track and signal improvements  in order to gain and maintain a route a route.  I gave the example of how Amtrak paid for D&H improvements to Montreal for I think 55 mph passenger speeds and the railroad got 45-50 mph freight speeds instead of 35mph.  And part of the railroad agreements is to maintain track for passenger speeds which are usually 10mph higher than freight speeds.  Amtrak pays for that level of track either outright or through lease agreement.  Some of these agreements go back to the beginning of Amtrak and the participating host railroads just as use of the Corridor agreements are based on Conrail's ownership and use before it was turned over to Amtrak.  Yes, too much of Amtrak is stuck in tradition and "the way we've always done it" mentality.  And that has to change.  And it is often insinuated, even verified, that freight haulers believe Amtrak gets in their way and gives Amtrak sidings and red boards instead of keeping them going.  Even Amtrak's allowing freight on their passenger railroad is different than when Conrail or PC or PRR owned the Corridor.  Today's oversight agencies don't want freight an passenger services on the same track...some railroads don't want the two on the same right of way.  We've got to get out of our own way before Amtrak passenger trains and private freight railroad trains can make weigh.  [/quote] Your response contains generalities without any verifiable facts.  How much did Amtrak (taxpayers) contribute to upgrade the D&H?  How much did the D&H contribute?. What adjustments in the rentals were made to reflect the benefits accruing to the freight railroad if any?   Without knowledge of the railroad's property accounting railroads, as well as Amtrak's, it is impossible to know how much the freight railroad contributed to the improvements for Amtrak, the amount the taxpayers contributed on behalf of Amtrak, and the extent to which the parties benefit. Based on Amtrak's annual rental payments to the freight railroads, which were $123.4 million in FY11, the argument that Amtrak is not footing the real cost of hoisting its trains appears to have some traction. Net net I suspect the freight railroads are not being compensated adequately to hoist Amtrak's trains, although I don't know for sure because I don't access to their accounting records.  And there is not sufficient information in the public reports (SEC) to answer the question. You don't know whether the freight carrier capitalized the improvements and, therefore, you don't know how the cost flows through the accounting records. This information, which would be reflected in the rentals, is critical in determining the economic value of the improvements to all parties.  The information could be obtained by filing a FOI request, which would cost $38 an hour, plus materials. Go for it! Also, as I pointed out, Amtrak does not have any money to contribute to any capital improvements.  The improvements were paid for by the taxpayers. Where to you think Amtrak or any other operator will get the money to pay for "freight train free" rights-of-way?  U.S. government debt (federal, state, and local) is more than $19 trillion.  Add in another $46 trillion (the low estimate) for unfunded liabilities, and the United States is facing potential debts obligations of $66 trillion.   One thing is pretty clear.  The capital markets are not likely to pony up the funds to build "freight free" railroads.
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