Sam1 is our reality check. Is $25 the best price point? What proportion of riders are discounted monthly pass or 10-ride ticket holders; and are the discounts too deep (again, the price point)? What could be done about costs?
What's more interesting is that it's the Fed, and not Amtrak, that is taking the initiative. Someone (Don Philips?) recently decried how Amtrak over the years has been too passive in fighting for funds to expand. Of course there are a lot of nobodies out here speaking to deaf ears for a long time.
Phoebe VetGosh what a surprise, Sam doesn't like NC train plans. The reason the Feds are participating in the upgrade is because it is part of the route for the planned Southeast High Speed Rail project from DC to Charlotte and eventually to Atlanta and Macon.
Gosh what a surprise, Sam doesn't like NC train plans.
The reason the Feds are participating in the upgrade is because it is part of the route for the planned Southeast High Speed Rail project from DC to Charlotte and eventually to Atlanta and Macon.
I didn't misunderstand - it was another senior moment. I didn't realize that I wrote Charlottesville (VA) instead of Charlotte (NC).
As for Richmond-Raleigh, I might see spending the ginormous dollars to ease curves - essentially relocate and rebuild almost the entire xSBD for 185-215 mph; but certainly not for just 110 mph. What a snake path! For 110 mph, I'd rather see improvements - grade separation, two main tracks, and even electrification on the xACL CSX A-Line; and more 90 mph improvements on the NS between Alexandria and Greensboro. If Richmond-Raleigh hasn't been committed to; maybe there is time to modify the application.
You and I are pretty much in agreement in the " I'd rather see " department, but the current plan is a significant improvement over what exists now. NC & VA have been committed to and working on this plan for years. They originally wanted it to be a MAGLEV route, but that plan quietly went away sometime around 2003.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
HarveyK400It's interesting that North Carolina is focusing on Asheville and Wilmington for expansion, something within their control. I think it's a shame Amtrak hasn't pursued additional services between Washington, DC and Atlanta to round out services in Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia. For Amtrak to extend the NEC to Richmond seems highly discriminatory while avoiding any new or expanded services in other interstate corridors. What's depressing is the long lead time for implementation of any of this.
As for why Amtrak doesn't extend from Charlotte to Atlanta...they can't even figure out they need a suburban stop on both sides of Atlanta. The Crescent is making the same station stops it did in 1956 - I looked it up yesterday. Atlanta has grown from less than 500,000 to over 4M in the meantime, most of it suburban on the north side much of it along the SOU main. If it hasn't occurred to them to add a stop to the existing route where the people live, it'll never occur to them to change or add service...
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Jacksonville, FL has had 'Clifford Lane Station' for years and years, with no downtown station. It is a "suburban station". Only problem is, no one lives in those "suburbs"! I heard that it recently got metro JTA bus service, after ages of $20+ taxi rides. Be careful what you ask for!
Hays
oltmanndAs for why Amtrak doesn't extend from Charlotte to Atlanta...they can't even figure out they need a suburban stop on both sides of Atlanta. The Crescent is making the same station stops it did in 1956 - I looked it up yesterday.
I lived in Stone Mountain from 1980-87. Even then it had grown a lot. I understand now it extends quite far to the NW, N, NE, and E. One would think a short-haul/suburban line to Athens would make sense.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
My impression was we are asking for strategic suburban stops in addition to a city center station. This works well for the Chicago area at Glenview, Naperville, Joliet, and Homewood. New York, another example, has Newark and Metro Park among others; but I'm also familiar with the Richmond Staples Road station and can appreciate the decision.
Hammond (IN) was the location urged by a Whiting railfan despite my efforts to encourage a stop farther east, particularly at Buffington and Gary which were more central and accessible to the northwest Indiana population. Buffington (Gary, IN) would have been just off the Cline Ave Expressway (SR-912) and convenient to I-80, near Gary Airport, and now would be adjacent to the casino. Gary, at a restored Union Station on Broadway, could have been connected to the Cong Adam Benjamin TC and South Shore station across the Toll Road and the [Gary] Civic Center; and would have been convenient to I-65 and I-80 to the west.
BNSFwatcherJacksonville, FL has had 'Clifford Lane Station' for years and years, with no downtown station. It is a "suburban station". Only problem is, no one lives in those "suburbs"! I heard that it recently got metro JTA bus service, after ages of $20+ taxi rides. Be careful what you ask for! Hays
henry6 The other part of that is how much would it cost to build a road and subisidize a bus or private car for the same trip per person? Or for a short hop helicopter or private plane? Lets put all means of transportation on the spend/cost/return balance sheets instead of throwing spears at one!
The other part of that is how much would it cost to build a road and subisidize a bus or private car for the same trip per person? Or for a short hop helicopter or private plane? Lets put all means of transportation on the spend/cost/return balance sheets instead of throwing spears at one!
Good point and I would put all transportation funding into one pot to be distributed as best fits each area's needs.
Phoebe Vet You may have misunderstood the cities. The Piedmont and the Carolinian Go from CHARLOTTE to Raleigh, with the Carolinian continuing on through Richmond to NYC. Neither one goes to CHARLOTTESVILLE. The Crescent goes through CHARLOTTE and CHARLOTTESVILLE en route between NYC and New Orleans. It does not go to Raleigh. The SEHSR corridor will go from DC to Charlotte through Richmond and Raleigh. It will not go through Charlottesville. In the future it is planned to be extended to Atlanta and Macon. Since the early '90s NC has been upgrading the ROW between Charlotte and Raleigh. They have been removing or upgrading grade level crossings, replacing switches, minimizing curves and installing double track. There is still a bunch of single track and areas with low speed limits that they are trying to eliminate. The plan is to make the entire route 90 MPH track. From Raleigh to DC is going to be 110 MPH track.
You may have misunderstood the cities. The Piedmont and the Carolinian Go from CHARLOTTE to Raleigh, with the Carolinian continuing on through Richmond to NYC. Neither one goes to CHARLOTTESVILLE.
The Crescent goes through CHARLOTTE and CHARLOTTESVILLE en route between NYC and New Orleans. It does not go to Raleigh.
The SEHSR corridor will go from DC to Charlotte through Richmond and Raleigh. It will not go through Charlottesville. In the future it is planned to be extended to Atlanta and Macon.
Since the early '90s NC has been upgrading the ROW between Charlotte and Raleigh. They have been removing or upgrading grade level crossings, replacing switches, minimizing curves and installing double track. There is still a bunch of single track and areas with low speed limits that they are trying to eliminate. The plan is to make the entire route 90 MPH track. From Raleigh to DC is going to be 110 MPH track.
Harvey: These figures of Phoebe are correct. To give a further idea the Cresent now takes about 7:50 Wash - CLT, The Carolinian takes 9:20. This is mainly because it is 103 miles further by way of Raleigh - 479 vs 376. This averages speeds to 48 MPH by way of Charlottesville and 51 MPH by way of Raleigh and Selma. This is mainly due to several slow restriction on the SOU route of 30 MPH that will be very costly to eliminate. If the SEHSR is finished it will be about 6:30 by way of Richmond, petersburg, Raleigh , Greensborough, NC. This route will be thru a much more populated area than Charlottesville even though it is not as much % difference as it once was.
The speed increases are documented in NC's proposal mile by mile and project by project. The proposal was originally set for 79MPH but when proposals were solicited NC quickly was able to show all locations easily upgradeable to 90 MPH and I suspect some engineering is already going on to locate those places where it can become 110 MPH.
Granted NCDOT has a leg up because it owns the ROW.
schlimmI lived in Stone Mountain from 1980-87. Even then it had grown a lot. I understand now it extends quite far to the NW, N, NE, and E. One would think a short-haul/suburban line to Athens would make sense.
blue streak 1Phoebe Vet You may have misunderstood the cities. The Piedmont and the Carolinian Go from CHARLOTTE to Raleigh, with the Carolinian continuing on through Richmond to NYC. Neither one goes to CHARLOTTESVILLE. The Crescent goes through CHARLOTTE and CHARLOTTESVILLE en route between NYC and New Orleans. It does not go to Raleigh. The SEHSR corridor will go from DC to Charlotte through Richmond and Raleigh. It will not go through Charlottesville. In the future it is planned to be extended to Atlanta and Macon. Since the early '90s NC has been upgrading the ROW between Charlotte and Raleigh. They have been removing or upgrading grade level crossings, replacing switches, minimizing curves and installing double track. There is still a bunch of single track and areas with low speed limits that they are trying to eliminate. The plan is to make the entire route 90 MPH track. From Raleigh to DC is going to be 110 MPH track. Harvey: These figures of Phoebe are correct. To give a further idea the Cresent now takes about 7:50 Wash - CLT, The Carolinian takes 9:20. This is mainly because it is 103 miles further by way of Raleigh - 479 vs 376. This averages speeds to 48 MPH by way of Charlottesville and 51 MPH by way of Raleigh and Selma. This is mainly due to several slow restriction on the SOU route of 30 MPH that will be very costly to eliminate. If the SEHSR is finished it will be about 6:30 by way of Richmond, petersburg, Raleigh , Greensborough, NC. This route will be thru a much more populated area than Charlottesville even though it is not as much % difference as it once was. The speed increases are documented in NC's proposal mile by mile and project by project. The proposal was originally set for 79MPH but when proposals were solicited NC quickly was able to show all locations easily upgradeable to 90 MPH and I suspect some engineering is already going on to locate those places where it can become 110 MPH. Granted NCDOT has a leg up because it owns the ROW.
Phoebe Vet Gosh what a surprise, Sam doesn't like NC train plans. The reason the Feds are participating in the upgrade is because it is part of the route for the planned Southeast High Speed Rail project from DC to Charlotte and eventually to Atlanta and Macon.
Sam does not have a view on NC train plans. I have not ridden them. I said that passenger rail is a desirable transport solution in relatively short high density corridors, but reporters and advocates should present the whole story, not just the upside aspects of it. This includes comparative costs.
When our engineering friends talk about rail technologies, they tend to present all relevant sides of the story. Why is this proper, but it is not proper to present the economics (cost) of passenger rail or any other mode of transport?
The passenger per mile subsidy for rail is many times greater than the corresponding subsidies for airline passenger miles and motor vehicle miles traveled. That said, if the good citizens of North Carolina and Virginia, as well as California, want to build a high speed or moderate speed passenger rail system to connect their cities, they should pay for it. The same is true for Texans.
Ideally, if transport in the U.S., as well as most other countries, was not the political football that it is, no form of transport would be subsidized, with the possible exception of the start-up infrastructure. Each mode would wear its true costs, which would be paid for in ticket prices or at the pump, and be required to stand on its own. Or fall over! If this came about, airline passengers, motorists, etc., would know the true cost of their chosen mode of transport, and once they picked themselves up off the floor, many of them would find that passenger rail is a viable option. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen.
Two weeks ago I took the Texas Eagle from Austin to San Diego and back. Had a great trip! What was the purpose? Take a train ride! I am retired with more than a few dollars in my jeans, no spouse or kids, and so I can afford it. I love traveling by train. But I am not overlooking the fact that I got a $1,499.96 subsidy for my trip. And that is before interest and depreciation. My trip cost Amtrak $2,187.96 before interest and depreciation. Thus, I paid 31.4 per cent of the tab before interest and depreciation and taxpayers wore the bulk of it. The justification for this subsidy is difficult for me to fathom.
oltmannd As for why Amtrak doesn't extend from Charlotte to Atlanta...they can't even figure out they need a suburban stop on both sides of Atlanta. Yes how true. The Cresent makes suburban stops at Newark, Trenton, Wilmington, Baltimore, and Alexandria especially but does not make a stop at either Chamblee or Doraville on the NE or Austell on the west. With the upgrades NS is making on the route from Atlanta - Meridian the time saved would enable no increase in total travel times for the Cresent. The Crescent is making the same station stops it did in 1956 - I looked it up yesterday. Atlanta has grown from less than 500,000 to over 4M in the meantime, most of it suburban on the north side much of it along the SOU main. If it hasn't occurred to them to add a stop to the existing route where the people live, it'll never occur to them to change or add service... Added service could be instituted by taking the Piedmont's time slot or another of the planned additional services and having a 7 PM departure from NYP to Richmond - Raleigh - CLT - ATL and arrive ATL about midnight. Leave ATL 11:00 AM take new trip's slot schedule to Raleigh and arrive NYP about 6:00 AM. Will it happen anytime soon not likely---equipment, operating money, lack of will in staqte of Ga DOT, etc.
As for why Amtrak doesn't extend from Charlotte to Atlanta...they can't even figure out they need a suburban stop on both sides of Atlanta.
Yes how true. The Cresent makes suburban stops at Newark, Trenton, Wilmington, Baltimore, and Alexandria especially but does not make a stop at either Chamblee or Doraville on the NE or Austell on the west. With the upgrades NS is making on the route from Atlanta - Meridian the time saved would enable no increase in total travel times for the Cresent.
The Crescent is making the same station stops it did in 1956 - I looked it up yesterday. Atlanta has grown from less than 500,000 to over 4M in the meantime, most of it suburban on the north side much of it along the SOU main. If it hasn't occurred to them to add a stop to the existing route where the people live, it'll never occur to them to change or add service...
Added service could be instituted by taking the Piedmont's time slot or another of the planned additional services and having a 7 PM departure from NYP to Richmond - Raleigh - CLT - ATL and arrive ATL about midnight. Leave ATL 11:00 AM take new trip's slot schedule to Raleigh and arrive NYP about 6:00 AM. Will it happen anytime soon not likely---equipment, operating money, lack of will in staqte of Ga DOT, etc.
Sam1Why is this proper, but it is not proper to present the economics (cost) of passenger rail or any other mode of transport? The passenger per mile subsidy for rail is many times greater than the corresponding subsidies for airline passenger miles and motor vehicle miles traveled.
Why is this proper, but it is not proper to present the economics (cost) of passenger rail or any other mode of transport? The passenger per mile subsidy for rail is many times greater than the corresponding subsidies for airline passenger miles and motor vehicle miles traveled.
One of the problems with the sort of statistics you present is that the presumption is that the number of passengers per mile is a relatively fixed value. If that were true, then rail travel would make little sense. But most proposals make the valid assumption (based on passengers per unit of distance on developed corridors in other countries) that the number of passengers will greatly increase if the proper route, marketing, scheduling, etc. is carried out. Since many (though not all) of the costs are fixed, the cost per passenger mile would be accordingly reduced. (Magnitude savings) Predictions are always difficult, but to extrapolate from the data of a ridiculous route such as the Sunset (with one piddly cruise train, has little bearing on a potentially densely traveled route such as many discussed here. The analogy would be if Atlanta Hartsfield had only two RT flights a day. Can you imagine how much an airline ticket would need to cost to cover that? Even now in Chicago, the airlines are trying to back out of paying for the final O'Hare expansion because to pay would put them out of business. Clearly that is not going to happen, nor should it.
oltmanndschlimmI lived in Stone Mountain from 1980-87. Even then it had grown a lot. I understand now it extends quite far to the NW, N, NE, and E. One would think a short-haul/suburban line to Athens would make sense.You have no idea how much the north side has grown since then. Gwinnett county now has 660,000 people in it. I know that doesn't sound like a lot to others outside GA, but GA has tiny counties. There are over 50 in the state (a man on horseback had to be able to make a round trip to the county seat in a day). Don you would not pass the required high school test about Ga. It is 159 countys statewide and trying to go to 160 (the MIlton county proposed split of Fulton Co). One fact -- Ga is the largest state in area east of the MIssissippi. North Fulton is similarly jamb-packed. An Amtrak stop in Duluth or Buford (or even Doraville or Norcross) would make HUGE sense. It would be within 10 miles of at least a million people.
Don you would not pass the required high school test about Ga. It is 159 countys statewide and trying to go to 160 (the MIlton county proposed split of Fulton Co). One fact -- Ga is the largest state in area east of the MIssissippi.
North Fulton is similarly jamb-packed. An Amtrak stop in Duluth or Buford (or even Doraville or Norcross) would make HUGE sense. It would be within 10 miles of at least a million people.
Well we are both liking the same area Chamblee - Doraville - Duluth - Buford
blue streak 1Well we are both liking the same area Chamblee - Doraville - Duluth - Buford
I heard there is another mega-mall beyond Gwinnett now, even bigger?
blue streak 1Ga. It is 159 countys statewide and trying to go to 160 (the MIlton county proposed split of Fulton Co). One fact -- Ga is the largest state in area east of the MIssissippi.
And Illinois, considerably smaller in area, has 102. Most states should reduce the number of counties by 75%.
schlimm The analogy would be if Atlanta Hartsfield had only two RT flights a day. Can you imagine how much an airline ticket would need to cost to cover that? Even now in Chicago, the airlines are trying to back out of paying for the final O'Hare expansion because to pay would put them out of business. Clearly that is not going to happen, nor should it.
The analogy would be if Atlanta Hartsfield had only two RT flights a day. Can you imagine how much an airline ticket would need to cost to cover that? Even now in Chicago, the airlines are trying to back out of paying for the final O'Hare expansion because to pay would put them out of business. Clearly that is not going to happen, nor should it.
YYes and the O'Hare people better be careful. All it takes is for any airline to do a quick bankruptcy and then dump all the contracts they want.
You can't give the Crescent the Piedmont's time slot. That would leave Kannapolis, Burlington, Durham, Cary, and Raleigh without service in those two time slots and Raleigh to Charlotte is a large part of the Piedmont mission.
Phoebe Vet You can't give the Crescent the Piedmont's time slot. That would leave Kannapolis, Burlington, Durham, Cary, and Raleigh without service in those two time slots and Raleigh to Charlotte is a large part of the Piedmont mission.
NO NO I was speaking of another train service. New train NYP - RIC - Raleigh - CLT - ATL
I just reread your post, a little more carefully this time, and it sounds like the proposed SEHSR service.
Phoebe Vet I just reread your post, a little more carefully this time, and it sounds like the proposed SEHSR service.
Yes but I was thinking more to start the service as a conventional train once equipment was available. Then once the Petersburg - Raleigh route is opened then it could be HSR and will be 2 HRS faster than the Cresent not counting any upgrades Raleigh - CLT. That does not take in account any upgrades WAS - Petersburg and CLT - ATL.
Let me add my 2 cents and say that Doraville looks like a good choice with a transfer to MARTA and access to I-285. Another stop might be at Suwanee, half way between Doraville and Gainesville.
blue streak 1oltmanndschlimmI lived in Stone Mountain from 1980-87. Even then it had grown a lot. I understand now it extends quite far to the NW, N, NE, and E. One would think a short-haul/suburban line to Athens would make sense.You have no idea how much the north side has grown since then. Gwinnett county now has 660,000 people in it. I know that doesn't sound like a lot to others outside GA, but GA has tiny counties. There are over 50 in the state (a man on horseback had to be able to make a round trip to the county seat in a day). Don you would not pass the required high school test about Ga. It is 159 countys statewide and trying to go to 160 (the MIlton county proposed split of Fulton Co). One fact -- Ga is the largest state in area east of the MIssissippi. North Fulton is similarly jamb-packed. An Amtrak stop in Duluth or Buford (or even Doraville or Norcross) would make HUGE sense. It would be within 10 miles of at least a million people. Well we are both liking the same area Chamblee - Doraville - Duluth - Buford
schlimmblue streak 1Well we are both liking the same area Chamblee - Doraville - Duluth - Buford I heard there is another mega-mall beyond Gwinnett now, even bigger? blue streak 1Ga. It is 159 countys statewide and trying to go to 160 (the MIlton county proposed split of Fulton Co). One fact -- Ga is the largest state in area east of the MIssissippi. And Illinois, considerably smaller in area, has 102. Most states should reduce the number of counties by 75%.
The only thing wrong with Doraville as a stop is the nothern part of I-285 and the junction of I-285 and I-85 are some of the most congested areas in Atlanta. If you are coming from Gwinnett or north Fulton and you get that far, it's not a big deal to go all the way to mid-town where the existing station is.
schlimmSam1Why is this proper, but it is not proper to present the economics (cost) of passenger rail or any other mode of transport? The passenger per mile subsidy for rail is many times greater than the corresponding subsidies for airline passenger miles and motor vehicle miles traveled. One of the problems with the sort of statistics you present is that the presumption is that the number of passengers per mile is a relatively fixed value. If that were true, then rail travel would make little sense. But most proposals make the valid assumption (based on passengers per unit of distance on developed corridors in other countries) that the number of passengers will greatly increase if the proper route, marketing, scheduling, etc. is carried out. Since many (though not all) of the costs are fixed, the cost per passenger mile would be accordingly reduced. (Magnitude savings) Predictions are always difficult, but to extrapolate from the data of a ridiculous route such as the Sunset (with one piddly cruise train, has little bearing on a potentially densely traveled route such as many discussed here. The analogy would be if Atlanta Hartsfield had only two RT flights a day. Can you imagine how much an airline ticket would need to cost to cover that? Even now in Chicago, the airlines are trying to back out of paying for the final O'Hare expansion because to pay would put them out of business. Clearly that is not going to happen, nor should it.
oltmanndThe only thing wrong with Doraville as a stop is the nothern part of I-285 and the junction of I-285 and I-85 are some of the most congested areas in Atlanta. If you are coming from Gwinnett or north Fulton and you get that far, it's not a big deal to go all the way to mid-town where the existing station is.
I assume Cobb County continues to not participate in MARTA? Are they thinking of heavy rail commuter service? And what about service from Atlanta north to Chattanooga and/or beyond?
Maybe start another thread on Atlanta? I've driven through to Florida on 75; but stopped once to ride MARTA out to the north end and down to Hartsfield, walked through the airport and took the tram before 9-11.
I'd say commuter rail has a chance if capacity improvements can be funded. The rail lines aren't the most direct route in some cases; and would be evaluated against the HOV lane buses. I have no idea how that's working, or if a train would do better in attracting riders.
Expressways around Atlanta are mind-boggling; and the Chicago area has twice the population and fewer route miles! Amazing how a small role for transit translates into huge road volumes.
schlimmoltmanndThe only thing wrong with Doraville as a stop is the nothern part of I-285 and the junction of I-285 and I-85 are some of the most congested areas in Atlanta. If you are coming from Gwinnett or north Fulton and you get that far, it's not a big deal to go all the way to mid-town where the existing station is. I assume Cobb County continues to not participate in MARTA? Are they thinking of heavy rail commuter service? And what about service from Atlanta north to Chattanooga and/or beyond?
HarveyK400Expressways around Atlanta are mind-boggling; and the Chicago area has twice the population and fewer route miles! Amazing how a small role for transit translates into huge road volumes.
That's an interesting example: 9.6 mil. metro Chicago vs. 5.3 mil. metro Atlanta. The traffic was bad enough in the 80's in Atlanta; when I was there three years ago, it was awful. MARTA is pretty limited compared to mass transit in Chicago (CTA, Metra and PACE).
schlimm Sam1 The passenger per mile subsidy for rail is many times greater than the corresponding subsidies for airline passenger miles and motor vehicle miles traveled. One of the problems with the sort of statistics you present is that the presumption is that the number of passengers per mile is a relatively fixed value. If that were true, then rail travel would make little sense..... The analogy would be if Atlanta Hartsfield had only two RT flights a day.
Sam1 The passenger per mile subsidy for rail is many times greater than the corresponding subsidies for airline passenger miles and motor vehicle miles traveled.
The passenger per mile subsidy for rail is many times greater than the corresponding subsidies for airline passenger miles and motor vehicle miles traveled.
One of the problems with the sort of statistics you present is that the presumption is that the number of passengers per mile is a relatively fixed value. If that were true, then rail travel would make little sense..... The analogy would be if Atlanta Hartsfield had only two RT flights a day.
The operating subsidy per passenger mile is a variable of the gross passenger load and would be influenced by market density. If more passengers can be attracted to the train, the subsidy per passenger mile would go down and, if enough passengers were attracted at a rate high enough to cover the operating costs, the operating subsidy could be eliminated. Realistically, the probability of this happening in the foreseeable future is low.
In the only corridor where Amtrak has had a bit of consistent operating success, financially speaking, the Acela service had an operating profit of 11.8 cents per passenger mile in FY09. The regional trains, which carried 70 per cent of the NEC passengers, lost 6.3 cents per passenger mile, thereby wiping out the Acela operating profit. These figures are before interest and depreciation.
After factoring in interest and depreciation, the NEC lost a significant amount of money. Unfortunately, Amtrak does not disclose the exact amount for the NEC, nor does it provide the required information to calculate the per passenger mile cost of the interest and depreciation. Therefore, it is impossible to know whether the Acela broke even after interest and depreciation. I doubt it. Most of the interest and depreciation attributable to the NEC should be charged to the Acela services because the bulk of it was incurred for the improvements to the NEC that were made to hoist the Acela. The Acela may have come close to breaking even; the regional trains in Amtrak's most densely populated corridor could not cover their operating costs let along the interest and depreciation.
The cost per passenger mile or vehicle mile is the metric used by most transport economists and accountants for comparison purposes. It is the only one that makes sense. The operating costs are made up of the firm's variable costs, e.g. labor, fuel, heat, light, etc. The fixed costs are not mixed with the operating costs. They consist of equipment leases, depreciation, right-of-way amortization, etc.
According to a March 2009 issued by the Government Accountability Office, which is respected highly for its objectivity, none of the high speed rail projects that it examined in other countries (Francs, Germany, and Japan) covers its costs. All of them require a substantial government subsidy, although it takes a variety of forms and is not always transparent. Some of them cover their operating costs, although the accounting follows different standards than the standards in the U.S. The accounting for the French system, as I pointed out in a previous post, is a bit dodgy.
The Sunset example was intended to show that there is scant justification for subsidizing any form of transport. Assuming that you pay federal income taxes, your taxes paid for 2/3rds of my trip, which included a $27.39 subsidy to ride from LAX to San Diego. The Pacific Surfliner corridor is a much denser corridor than the North Carolina - Virginia corridors, but it still requires an operating subsidy of 10.7 cents per passenger mile. If Amtrak cannot cover its operating costs between LAX and San Diego, what makes you think that it can cover its costs in North Carolina? Or Illinois for that matter?
If Atlanta's Hartsfield had only two flights a day, it would be in deep financial trouble. It doesn't! The analogy does not make any sense.
Sam1:
OK, OK, the "usual suspects" are going to "round themselves up" and "refute your arguments." At times I am numbered among those usual suspects, so I hope you can be patient with what I have to say, even if we have some philosophical disagreements.
I, for one, buy into the reasoning "let's subsidize access to the tracks and the stations, but from the 'railhead up', trains or any other conveyance need to break even." Maybe if for no other reason than as a thought experiment or as a shibboleth to find out where a persons' thinking goes.
For one thing, I am looking for some manner of social contract, some "engineering system boundary around the subsidized portion of the system", so people would just plain give up on the complaint, "why are people complaining about Amtrak subsidy and don't-get-me-started-about-the-airlines!" Put the modes on a level playing field and call it a day. But once you do that, don't come back complaining about how the low level of support for Amtrak is "unfair" and how rail is "underfunded."
For another thing, people outside the narrow rail advocacy community are amenable to this sort of thing. Someone from among the broader community of political activists approached our train advocacy people and said something along the lines "You could probably get whatever money you want for capital costs provided that you don't need to tap outside sources for the operating cost." What was interesting was that our advocacy people bristled at this advice, "How dare people say we can't subsidize the operating cost!"
From an engineering perspective, perhaps a little different than an accounting perspective, my question is why isn't a train simply a stainless-steel bus?
What I mean by that is that up by my dad's place, a one-time dairy farmer neighbor has a barn full of late model intercity motorcoach-type buses. Babler Bus Company. Gosh knows how you need a mega-farm to earn a dime in dairy these days, and don't know if our neighbor still milks a small herd, but he has this herd of shiny blue and white motorcoaches. He has a sign out front talking about trips you could take to Chicago or Milwaukee or Green Bay do do stuff -- sort of reverse Door County back to Chicago tourism stuff.
Yeah, the Babler family pays motor fuel tax to pay for the highways, but I don't rightly know if they are paying their fair share for the highway or over or under his fair share. Let's just say that they are subsidized, just like Amtrak is subsidized. But something tell me that they are not subsidized for the mortgage payments on those shiny new blue-and-white motor coaches, for drivers wages, insurance, diesel fuel, property tax on the one-time cow barn where the buses park, etc. etc. On an "above where the rubber meets the road" basis, they have to at least break even or have pulled the wool over the eyes of some bank lender.
I am beginning to strongly suspect that even if you had the level playing field people want, that trains would still require large operating subsidies.
So what is it about trains that make them much more expensive to operate than a fleet of motorcoach buses? Maybe it is a labor rules kind of thing. Sort of like the trolley car with a motorman and a conductor being replaced by a single bus driver. Maybe the bus driver only commands 40-50 seats, but the bus driver is "everything" -- driver, ticket taker and fare collector, baggage handler, tell the unruly teen to get his sneakers off the seats person, and so on. Maybe buses are easier to maintain than railroad cars. Perhaps the steel wheel on steel rail vibration and coupling shock environment is much harsher than the bumps experienced by a bus on rubber tires.
Maybe it is amenities. A bus crams 50 people into, well, a bus. A proper train has "get up and walk around" space. Judging by some book by some dude who rode all the Amtrak trains and got that Kunstler fellow to write a forward scolding us about Peak Oil, that Amtrak replaces a lounge-diner duo with a single lounge-dinette combo car is some kind of crime against humanity. Our rail-riding hero is all for train travel until he had to sit next to a fat person in an Amfleet coach on the Lakeshore Limited. And that somehow was the fault of the underfunded-ness of Amtrak rather than an intrinsic property of common carrier transportation, that every once in a while you need to sit next to a fat dude.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Sam1The operating subsidy per passenger mile is a variable of the gross passenger load and would be influenced by market density. If more passengers can be attracted to the train, the subsidy per passenger mile would go down and, if enough passengers were attracted at a rate high enough to cover the operating costs, the operating subsidy could be eliminated. Realistically, the probability of this happening in the foreseeable future is low.
You mention many statistics and I do not doubt their accuracy but I wonder precisely what is their source? It isn't cited.
I don't think most folks expect train revenues to cover the operating costs, because there are other benefits. Ditto with transit systems. Another way of putting it is that the full cost to society of many endeavors is not found on a corporate balance sheet. There are many hidden subsidies. You disparage other countries' accounting standards, but the example of Arthur Anderson and Enron and others makes that sound like the kettle...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.