Showing posts with label phoenix. Show all posts
Showing posts with label phoenix. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

This Week in Amtrak

Morning on Amtrak's Capitol LimitedImage by Madbuster75 via Flickr
After a slow August in the world of passenger rail, we return to a busy soon-to-be autumn.

According to Fred Frailey in TRAINS magazine,

Union Pacific has told Amtrak that changing the Sunset Limited‘s frequency from tri-weekly to daily will cost the government-supported company about $750 million in capital improvements.

That’s almost as much as Phoenix spent building an entirely new 20-mile “light rail” system — including two large bridges and a complete modern maintenance facility and fifty computer-controlled trolley cars. We eagerly await U.P.’s wish-list. One wonders, once you spend some millions to restore a missing connection at San Antonio to eliminate back-up moves, add a couple formerly removed station tracks at places like Tucson, add a bridge here and some signals there … how do you come up with three-quarters of a billion dollars to run one train once a day?

Meanwhile, Berkshire’s BNSF issued a two-part $750 million bond, $250 million for a 10-year period at 3.616% and a 30-year $500 million part at 5.074%, both paying a premium over Treasury bonds.

In his annual letter to shareholders, Berkshire chief Warren Buffett wrote: “Overall, we expect this regulated sector to deliver significantly increased earnings over time, albeit at the cost of our investing many tens — yes, tens — of billions of dollars of incremental equity capital…” So the same dollar figure that U.P. wants for one passenger train, it seems, is the same as BNSF’s first installment in sprucing up its entire system. Does one of those numbers seem a bit off?

Next, to Ohio, where Republican gubernatorial candidate John Kasich has “vowed to kill the 3C plan if elected.” This train, which would connect Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus and Cleveland, is in line for a $25 million for a preliminary study. Kasich and his advisors apparently are fretting over the $400 million starting price tag, and continuing state outlays. One does wonder, where is one penny of income from Ohio’s libraries? From Ohio’s fire departments? From Ohio’s superhighways? Oh, you say they result in increased education, decreased property losses, and increased economic and social activity, right? So why do we not frame trains in the same way? What is the cost of a trip not taken…

Yet we rail advocates find ourselves in a nasty predicament. Every time good work gets done, as in Ohio, toward a new train… or in Boise… or anywhere across the country where cities and states who want better transportation, and the social and economic benefits that stem from trains… Every time new Amtrak service is proposed, the price is so high and the service to be so slim that nothing ever happens. A year ago we looked at Amtrak’s Ohio report, one of three wrong-think reports issued around that time. We saw how “Amtrak really doesn’t want to be in the passenger railroad business” and, although there were some hopeful signs in subsequent months, we seem still stuck in the same doldrums as for the past 40 years.

One correspondent writes,

Amtrak’s complaints are so ingrained in politicians’ and voters’ minds that when some good public relations is needed, the cupboard is not only bare, but snarling back at those seeking relief.

Another writes that Amtrak,

has spent most of the last forty years not only saying, but proving, that passenger rail is a fiscal sinkhole. Needless to say the green eye-shade brigade in state capitals that must produce a balanced state budget every year takes on massive new obligations only with trepidation.

Add to this carriers like Union Pacific pulling massive numbers, some might think out of a hat, but perhaps out of reasonable expectations based on past dismal performance of a government-run passenger railroad, and here we sit, stalled again.

Perhaps the most excellent description of the conundrum is Steve Forbes’ recent commentary on high-speed rail. Forbes, logically unconvinced by what trains might be able to do, looks at projects like the Acela so-called high speed train which have failed to deliver on practically any of their promises, and at the cost of billions including a hidden billion-dollar loan from Canada… and rightly asks, Where is the benefit? Forbes doesn’t see any. And without benefit, what is the point of pouring billions more dollars into it? At some point, there have to be results. Call it return on investment.

To succeed in business, to succeed in the real world, you have to become indispensable. Apple has done that. Google has done that. Some might say Amtrak seems to have concentrated on becoming irrelevant.

Perhaps the renaissance of passenger trains will have to occur from the bottom up. USA Today reports that Denver has broken ground for its commuter train to the International Airport that replaced Stapleton Field. This is to be the long-anticipated first of four commuter lines radiating from Union Station which will complement Denver’s light-rail system. The article continues,

Denver joins a growing list of U.S. airports that are trying to promote public rail transportation. Others that will be connected directly via rail in the coming years include Dallas Love Field, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Miami, Dallas/Fort Worth, Oakland, Washington Dulles and Los Angeles.

An AP newswire story tells how even Arizona is planning on a commuter and regional train system:

“It will not be possible to accommodate growth and avoid traffic congestion by improving roadways alone, so passenger rail should become a key component of the Sun Corridor transportation system,” the draft plan stated, referring to a planning area that stretches from Prescott on the north to Nogales on the south and includes both Phoenix and Tucson.

Phoenix is seeing results with its Metro trains, with monthly averages up to 44,000 daily riders, far above the projected 26,500, and continuing year-over-year increases. With few exceptions, every city that has built a rail system in the past decades has met or exceeded expectations, and brought new development and a renewed sense of place and community pride. The cost has shown its benefit. Why should there be any different standard for intercity trains?

Finally, as promised, this on first-class accomodations.
AMTRAK SLEEPING CARS ARE THE BEST VALUE AMTRAK OWNS

Commentary by Andrew C. Selden and Randy Schlotthauer, URPA

Note: This item was on (Congressman) Eric Cantor’s list of budget cuts he wants people to vote on. Only 48% of respondents to the poll favored the idea, but on Thursday, July 22, Mr. Cantor and some of his followers appeared on the floor of the U.S. House to extol the desirability of this cut. An amendment to a pending bill was introduced to implement the idea, but was rejected 234-179. We asked Mr. Selden and Mr. Schlotthauer to comment on the reasons this idea was not a good one. – Russ Jackson

Eric Cantor: “Prohibit ‘First-Class’ Subsidies on Amtrak; Potential savings of $1.2 billion over ten years. While only 16 percent of Amtrak long-distance passengers opt for “sleeper class” travel, as opposed to coach class, federal taxpayers provide substantial extra subsidies for this first class travel. Passengers in long-distance first class travel are provided a sleeping room, many with a private toilet and shower, turn-down service, and complimentary entertainment and pre-paid food. Yet, Amtrak loses more than twice as much per passenger (an average of $396) for first class service as compared to coach class service. These losses are made up by taxpayers. This proposal would eliminate subsidies for first-class service and require Amtrak to provide any first class service at cost.”

Andrew C. Selden: The issue is the corrupt Amtrak RPS-based internal MIS/cost accounting system. Large subsidies to western sleepers are an artifact, if not an intentional distortion, caused by the system, not the business activity. We can show (and have often done so) that these sleepers are substantial net contributors of free cash flow to Amtrak, failing only to cover arbitrarily allocated shares of other system, not operating, costs, only some of which are even indirectly related to the operation of these services.

The Superliner sleeping car, measured by business economic factors like return on capital investment, load factor, revenue per dollar invested, etc., is the best thing Amtrak owns. These members of Congress should look closely at actual sleeping car fares out west, where many passengers are paying thousands of dollars for a single trip. There is NO POSSIBILITY that these fares are losing money on a direct cost basis. The catch is always to audit deeply what costs Amtrak is charging against the sleeping car revenues to determine that a loss exists in the first place. That is where the members of Congress were being conned.

The collateral issue is the subsidy that these sleepers provide to the dining cars. FIRST, diners are indispensable to all travelers on LD trains, where the AVERAGE trip runs 15-20 hours in duration (varying by route). These people therefore (including every coach passenger) are on board over two to four meal periods (and of course some for even more). Lose the diner, and you’ll lose ALL the passengers, not just the “fat cat” families and retirees in the sleepers. The sleeper fare transfer to the diner is what keeps the diner on at all—by including meals in the sleeper fare, Amtrak guarantees a predictable base of revenue to the diner. Take away the sleepers and that fare transfer, and with the loss of sleeping car passengers (most of whom wouldn’t be caught dead making a two or three day trip in coach) and their fare transfers to the diner, the diner would have to charge obscene prices that would drive out the remaining coach passengers, and without meals over two to three day trips, no one will ride and the trains would be empty.

If Congress wants to look for subsidies to first class riders, have them divide the Acela first class revenue by its proportionate share of the annual two-thirds of a billion dollars of subsidy “invested” each year into the NEC. Those numbers are real and staggering, even though Amtrak never reports them as such.

Randy Schlotthauer: Were it not for the frightening lack of concern by our government about the concerns of citizens, not to mention their misplacing of the Constitution (I have several copies of my own that I would be happy to donate to them), this entire debate over “first class” subsidies would be so tiresome that I would not be drawn to the laptop to respond to it. Those of us that have been involved with Amtrak since THE BEGINNING (that would be before many supporters and opponents were born) have seen this windmill tilted at every year. I remember when we were desperately phoning and writing politicians, interest groups, and anybody else that would listen over a $246M TOTAL SUBSIDY that promised that the pin would be pulled on October 1, (fill in the year). This was in the good old days when there were just two types of cars: Amfleet and everything else, which wasn’t much. Though few of us at the time would have granted it, Amtrak President Graham Claytor managed to “modernize” the fleet with new equipment which in retrospect probably saved the LD trains, which we were convinced he was conspiring with THEM to eliminate.

Though designed with the promise and physical capability to deliver a high quality LD experience, through active sabotage by some crew members and a benign neglect (read: stupidity) on the part of management. None of the LD trains ever made full use of the features designed into the cars, and did not repair equipment that was damaged or stolen by passengers, crew, and the denizens of 16th St, 8th Street, and other “maintenance facilities”. As a result, even the best attempts by individual route managers to ended up flowering and then all too soon downgraded due to budget cuts that often were the disguised jealousies of other route managers. Despite the efforts of the original RailPAC-URPA group to introduce market economic laws and theories to Amtrak and it’s 485 owners, every year it was a battle for survival, with Amtrak management’s RPS accounting system proving that they could be profitable if not for those nasty LD trains.

Never was enough capacity provided to even approach break even, which was all any serious advocate discussed. If every seat in every car on every train on every day were filled at the highest tariff fare, there would still be a loss. Even Herb Kelleher (Southwest Airlines) couldn’t do anything with one triweekly plane to its largest potential markets. He recognized that planes (and trains too!) make money only if they are moving and filled with people. In fact Herb was one of Amtrak’s greatest opponents, because he knew what a well run passenger railroad could do.

So today we are discussing the proposed elimination of the First Class Subsidy, in order to “save” the railroad. First of all, the last trip I took in a Deluxe Bedroom on #3 and #4 could not be called luxury by any stretch of the imagination. Indeed, Denny’s offers superior food, service, and even entertainment (if you are at the right one at the right time of night). When you kill the sleepers you kill the diner and lounge. When you kill those, you are the Southern Pacific in the 1960′s, although this time there are not enough people that buy the line that America NEEDS Amtrak. I can build you a great case for a quality passenger rail service, including multiple classes of service. I can even build you a case of how you make it break even in 10 years. RailPAC-URPA’s Dr. Adrian Herzog did the math a long time ago, and it still works. What I cannot do is build a case to justify an Amtrak First Class Subsidy for LD trains. There is corporate culture at Amtrak that would fight any attempts to a really make things work.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

UTA testing CNG Buses

Los Angeles Metro BusImage by Anthony Ramos via Flickr
For the next two weeks UTA will be testing two CNG buses, one from Metro in Los Angeles and the other from the Phoenix area. The Salt Lake Tribune has a suprisingly well done article about the test (and just to note, I am not putting down the writers at the Trib, but the fact that the newspaper industry has cut to the bone in its attempt to survive so they know longer have people dedicated to subject and thus well informed about what everything they write about):

UTA tests natural gas buses

As the article pointed out UTA had 5 CNG Orion V buses purchased in 1992 and retired a couple of years ago. Also pointed out in the article is the buses were essentially failures in our market but those were early generation CNG buses and a lot has a changed in the last 18 years so it will be interesting how today's CNG buses will perform.

UTA also should be congratulated in looking at alternatives for the current fleet of diesel buses considering the continued high cost of diesel (of course that situation could reverse and has in the past).

The question is will the cost be examined. They do mention that the price of a CNG bus is more than a diesel bus but could be made up over the length of ownership (approximately 12 years). However, not just UTA but we as Americans are horrible at looking at the actual cost of a product.

Now if you asked the average person on the street what the difference between the price of a product and the cost of the product they would think there is no difference and maybe that is why we are so willing to buy so much cheaply made crap at stores like Wal-Mart.

However, the when we discuss cost we are talking about how much it will cost for the lifetime of the product. I having studied it recently but a few years ago the cost to maintain CNG buses was higher than the cost of diesel buses. However, as CNG buses have become more common the cost difference may be getting closer together.

Also for anyone who complains about the seats in UTA buses (I know there has to be some out there), I hope they get to ride the lovely anti-vandal seats in the LA Metro bus (its been several years since I been to Phoenix so I am not sure about the seats in those buses). I think the seats in the ex-San Jose UTDC cars are better than the ones Metro orders. I found them to be the most uncomfortable transit seat I have ever rode on and considering how many different transit systems and buses I have rode on over the years that is saying something.

Another annoying thing about LA Metro buses that will hopefully be deativated when the bus is here is the television monitors in the bus. Several of the buses I rode on in Los Angeles most recently had monitors that would broadcast commercials and general information about the transit system. Sorry, when I get on a transit bus or train I do not want to look at a stupid television monitor. Albertson's (the original Albertson's company) installed a ton of lcd's throughout their 5600 South and 900 East store at the checkouts and in the produce department. My response was to stop shopping at the location except in extreme emergencies.

Heck, I don't even watch the television at home for the most part. I have not had cable in 6 years (so long comcrap) and its been at least two months or more since I even bothered to sit down and watch something on television. I guess if your addicted to have the stupid television on then having the monitors on the buses are no big deal but to me I rather have peace on my transit ride.

The buses will only be here for two weeks and in service only one week so get a ride on them while you have the chance.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

This Week in Amtrak

Photo of the North side of the old Union Stati...Image via Wikipedia



Volume 7, Number 15
May 26th, 2010


A weekly digest of events, opinions, and forecasts from



United Rail Passenger Alliance, Inc.

America's foremost passenger rail policy institute



1526 University Boulevard, West, PMB 203 . Jacksonville, Florida
32217-2006 USA

Telephone 904-636-7739, Electronic Mail info@unitedrail.org . http://www.unitedrail.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------


National Train Day

National Train Day passed uneventfully in Phoenix. Union Station, the mission-style depot turned fortress, protected by its tall prickly steel fence painted cactus green, was immune to invasion by curious passers-by. No-one rode a train through the station, except one hobo who waved from the end platform of a covered hopper -- all freight trains must now traverse the lone remaining passenger track, the bypass line having been removed a few years ago.

A man with a camera lurked in the shadow, afraid he might be asked for identity papers by Homeland Security, as a dry scrap of newsprint talking about transit cuts and tax hikes scudded across the broken concrete remnants of the platform.

Somewhere, Fred Harvey, whose ghost long ago departed the station's mahogany-and-brass news-stand with its eight-by-four-foot lead-lined humidor still scented with the ever-fainter aroma of Havana tobacco, turned in his grave. Amtrak, the nationalized passenger railroad, deserted the station for America's fifth largest city nearly fifteen years ago, with hope of its return having been repeatedly crushed.

Meanwhile at Dallas Union Station, Russ Jackson of the United Rail Passenger Alliance witnessed a healthy station in an upbeat city. North Texas is booming with new and extended programs from streetcars, light rail, commuter rail, and Amtrak intercity rail. Train Day in the Metroplex showcased all these, attracting people of all ages were to Dallas Union Station and to the Intermodal Transportation Center in Fort
Worth:

On display at Dallas Union Station were the 1931 M-180 Doodlebug in
Santa Fe colors that years ago worked the line to Carlsbad, New
Mexico, and a heritage Pullman sleeping car, both now housed at the
Museum of the American Railroad at nearby Fair Park. That museum is
now under orders from the city to vacate the property, as it is
underfunded and the land is needed for other purposes. The museum
intends to move to nearby Frisco when funding is obtained. The
successful TRE commuter line, that runs from Dallas to Ft. Worth
displayed a train set of a newly repainted F59PH locomotive and two
bi-level Bombardier (UTDC)-built coaches. Inside the historic
station were staffed displays from the successful DART system, which
is undergoing the same financial crises as in other cities, and the
new under-construction Denton County "A- Train" commuter rail line,
a model railroad club, music, face painting, etc., and the Texas
Rail Advocates who were selling souvenir t-shirts and whistles.
Where was Amtrak? They had a full staffed display table across from
their ticket window, giving away packets of information including
the timetables that would be out of date two days later. The new
ones "were in the back somewhere," but would not be available until
they go into effect. And, Amtrak 821, the southbound Texas Eagle
arrived in Dallas 30 minutes late with 3 coaches, Diner-Lounge,
Dining Car, and two sleeping cars (one of which is the crew dorm as
well). That day was not one of the thru trains that connects with
the Sunset Limited, but everyone we talked to is anxiously awaiting
news as to when daily service through the West to California will
begin. After loading and unloading, #821 quickly departed for Ft.
Worth..

Thirty miles away in Ft. Worth Amtrak had several of their cars on
display from the Heartland Flyer pool, and, like Dallas, had the
packets and drawing tickets for travel on the Texas Eagle. The BNSF
had a locomotive on display and employees there to answer
questions. The Union Pacific displayed the newly painted 2010, the
Boy Scouts of America commemorative locomotive, and North Texas
Historic Transportation displayed their NTT interurban and had
information about the proposed City of Ft. Worth Streetcar
Circulator. TRE trains came and went through the station, the
southbound Heartland Flyer arrived, the northbound and southbound
Eagles arrived and departed, there was music, face painting, and the
Texas Rail Advocates were there as well. Yes, there is a "rail
presence" in the Metroplex, and while there is much to do and
finances to do it are getting scarce, the foundation has been laid.

The Dallas station, despite its perfectly suited location, is crippled by having only three platform tracks, because city leaders who renovated the facility in the early 1980s believed Amtrak when it said that would be enough for any conceivable future needs. The station once had at least ten through tracks, an upper concourse perpendicular to the tracks with stairs to each level for quick and safe passenger flow, and a freight-and-baggage subway. DART's trolleys now serve the station, which is good, but in a way that precludes restoring platforms that would be needed for Dallas to act as a proper hub for regional trains. A little engineering and a lot of hard work could rectify the situation but it's yet another roadblock that could have been prevented. Vigilance today resolves tomorrow's problems.


Keolis moves closer to taking Virginia trains from Amtrak

The Washington Post on 11 May reported

that the company soon to "take over operation of Virginia Railway Express trains from Amtrak wrapped up its first month of nationwide recruitment efforts as it prepares for the June transition." VRE's press release says operation will begin July 1 of this year.

Keolis Rail Services America is a division of Keolis, "a significant operator of tramways as well as operating bus networks, funiculars, trolley buses and airport services" according to Wikipedia ; Keolis is owned by a group that includes SNCF, the French railway.


Coast Starlight group pushes plan for better service

The Coast Starlight Communities Network ("a coalition of various interests with the goal of protecting and improving rail service between Washington, Oregon, and California") has prepared a whitepaper describing the route, how trip times have increased by several hours since Amtrak's founding, and what can be done to improve the train's ambience and appeal, and expand the purpose of the train. A positive attitude like this is key to getting results.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are reading someone else's copy of This Week at Amtrak, you can receive your own free copy each edition by sending your e-mail address to



freetwa@unitedrail.org



You MUST include your name, preferred e-mail address, and city and state where you live. If you have filters or firewalls placed on your Internet connection, set your e-mail to receive incoming mail from twa@unitedrail.org ; we are unable to go through any approvals processes for individuals. This mailing list is kept strictly confidential and is not shared or used for any purposes other than distribution of This Week at Amtrak or related URPA materials.





Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

This Week in Amtrak

Silver Meteor train #98, under electric power,...Image via Wikipedia




This Week at Amtrak; March 22, 2010


A weekly digest of events, opinions, and forecasts from



United Rail Passenger Alliance, Inc.

America’s foremost passenger rail policy institute



1526 University Boulevard, West, PMB 203 • Jacksonville, Florida 32217-2006 USA

Telephone 904-636-7739, Electronic Mail info@unitedrail.org • http://www.unitedrail.org



Volume 7, Number 9



Founded over three decades ago in 1976, URPA is a nationally known policy institute which focuses on solutions and plans for passenger rail systems in North America. Headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida, URPA has professional associates in Minnesota, California, Arizona, New Mexico, the District of Columbia, Texas, New York, and other cities. For more detailed information, along with a variety of position papers and other documents, visit the URPA web site at http://www.unitedrail.org.



URPA is not a membership organization, and does not accept funding from any outside sources.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amtrak is now saying the right things. Will they start doing the right things, like correcting last year’s flawed route studies as the first step toward a dramatically expanded national system?


But first, a correction on the list of Florida stations in the last issue. Amtrak serves Kissimmee and Lakeland between Tampa and Orlando. The other stations are were on the alternate Jacksonville-Tampa line, which Amtrak no longer uses. I am writing the column from Scottsdale; I have lived in the Phoenix area since 1991, Northern Virginia before that, and Boston for most of my first 23 years. I mistakenly copied the wrong list of stations, probably remembering my trips on the Silver Star and Silver Meteor to St. Petersburg and Clearwater in the 1980s. Mea culpa.

Now, to this week.


In the 1940s, a consortium of companies symbolically led by General Motors drove the privately-owned street railway business to bankruptcy.

Seven decades later, the streetcar returned the favor.

No, that’s not strictly true; but it is a curious reversal of fortune — karma? — suggested by one of three college students who visited the Phoenix Trolley Museum on Saturday afternoon. (The intelligence of the young never ceases to amaze. And signing up some bright new members who have been spending their days and nights devouring everything about trains and buses that the Internet can offer, is a very good thing.)

National City Lines, organized by G.M.’s Alfred P. Sloan to purchase trolley lines and replace them with rubber-tired, fuel-burning buses, was at least a symptom if not one of the myriad causes of the failure of the street railway industry. The trolley was a bellwether for the impending crisis in passenger trains generally.

Conversely, the growth of cities building rail transit in recent years has mirrored a growing dissatisfaction. The postwar suburban consumption-based lifestyle has proven to be an ecological, social, and economic cul-de-sac. Yet in my city of Phoenix, as elsewhere, business along the streetcar — pardon me, “light rail line” — is the bright spot of the local economy; Mesa, which once grudgingly permitted a single rail station to be built just inside its border, has seen the light called “transit means business” and is extending the line to bring shoppers, workers and students to its moribund downtown.

And this reversal of the streetcar’s fortune is proving to be a bellwether for the passenger train generally.

We now turn to two guest columnists. Rob Bohannan attended Amtrak’s Town Hall in Chicago last week; Daniel Carleton wrote in January on why the route studies completed in 2009 exposed fundamental barriers to our much-needed passenger train system expansion. The juxtaposition of these two columns raises the question: If Amtrak is now letting the once-hidden good ideas from inside bubble to the surface, when will we see the potential of a new equipment order resulting in new routes all across the country? Does Amtrak’s new emphasis on long distance trains as fundamental to its mission and future represent the first steps toward correcting the issues Mr. Carleton raises?

I leave you with these reports and those questions, which we shall ponder again next time. — William Lindley

Illinois Report
by Robert H. Bohannan, AICP (March 2010)

Saturday, March 6, Amtrak and Trains Magazine co-sponsored a “Dialog for Progress” Town Hall Meeting at the Merchandise Mart in Chicago. Many of Amtrak’s “top brass” were there, including Board Chairman Tom Carper, President Joe Boardman, and Chief John O’Connor of the Amtrak Police Department. The three main topics of discussion were the Amtrak Photography and Videography Guidelines, Fleet Strategy, and Long Distance Service.

Photography. Chief O’Connor did an excellent job of explaining Amtrak’s photography policy. Essentially, Amtrak would like to be notified in advance if one is going to do extensive photographing on Amtrak property—other than photography taken by boarding and alighting passengers or photos taken onboard trains—of the passing scenery, for example. Given the proven use of photography by terrorists in preparation for attacks on infrastructure, it is not unreasonable to have a few, simple, reasonable rules. [A strong minority points out that we once laughed at the Soviet Union and other totalitarian states for such absurdities as prohibiting photography and requiring citizens to carry identification cards. Nevertheless, railroad stations are in some fashion private property and it is entirely within Amtrak's purview to have some sort of rules. - Editor] Of course, Amtrak struggles to get the word out about the degree of leniency to all the station and other personnel nationwide and concedes that “over-zealous” employees have needlessly chastised rail fans for taking photos. Moreover, the rules only apply to Amtrak property—different rules apply for photos taken on property of other railroads, and so forth. We advocates and our “railfan” friends have a responsibility to assist Amtrak in educating others about their reasonable photography policy.

Fleet Strategy. A significant aspect of the fleet policy for readers of TWA is that Amtrak is using stimulus funds to repair cars and locomotives at Beech Grove. After the meeting Saturday, we were all invited down to Union Station to see a rebuilt train consisting of two sleepers, a diner, and a locomotive—all of which had been wreck damaged. The equipment looked great: The diner was decorated in pleasing shades of navy blue and brown, and looked really classy.

Long Distance Service. Regarding long distance trains, Amtrak made official their intent to restructure the Sunset and Texas Eagle routes by operating a daily Los Angeles-San Antonio-Chicago train with a connecting San Antonio-New Orleans train. The LA-Chicago train would have full dining and lounge services. Amtrak has divided their 15 long-distance trains into three groups of five. The five worst performers — including the Sunset and Eagle—will be addressed this year, the middle five in 2011, and the five best—such as the Empire Builder and Southwest Chief — will be tweaked beginning in 2012. The undesirability of tri-weekly service on any route was noted.

Perhaps more significantly, Amtrak seems to be grasping—and willing to emphasize publicly — the importance of their long distance trains. One of the slides in a presentation devoted to long distance trains was titled “Long Distance Trains are Fundamental to Amtrak’s Mission and Future”. The slide included pie charts that showed that, while long distance trains provided 15 percent of Amtrak’s riders, they accounted for 24 percent of Amtrak’s revenue. Long distance trains account for 39 percent of Amtrak’s train miles but 46 percent of passenger miles. Moreover, long distance ridership and on-time performance has been steadily improving.

Regarding on-time performance, Amtrak is changing the metric to include arrivals at intermediate stops, instead of just end points. Officials commented at the meeting that this change took the passengers’ point of view into consideration as well as the Operating Department’s point of view. The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) provides that, beginning in 2013, there will be an on-time performance tolerance of 15 minutes for intermediate stops.

Overall Impression. As encouraging as these developments are, the most significant aspects of the “Dialog for Progress” were that it was conducted in the first place, and that Amtrak recognized the need to reach out directly to the railfan and advocacy communities—the event was open to anyone who saw the notice in Trains and was one of the first 300 to register—rather than simply report the findings to any particular group.

Tom Carper, Joe Boardman, and the other officials were present throughout the session and at the subsequent equipment display and responded patiently and concisely to all the questions. This was at times no small feat, with an audience so amazed at finally having a chance to speak and hear candid responses that emotions sometimes ran high. Amtrak intends to conduct more of these events and I encourage TWA readers to plan on attending.

The Long Distance studies: Amtrak buy the numbers
by Daniel Carleton (late January 2010)

Amtrak, in the past months, has proffered three studies regarding the re-establishment of service on three lines: The Sunset Limited east of New Orleans, the Pioneer and the North Coast Hiawatha. The Hiawatha was discontinued in October of 1979 as the country reeled from the consequences of the world’s third oil shock. The Pioneer was discontinued in May 1997 as Amtrak banked its future and fortune on a then-yet-to-be-named high speed train in the Northeast. The Sunset was indefinitely suspended east of New Orleans due to track damage sustained in August 2005 and repaired by January of the following year.

Section 224 and 226 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) required Amtrak to develop plans for restoring service to these routes. Much has been written and shall continue to be written as to the validity of these studies; the rhetoric is long and facts are questionable. As regards equipment, however, this boilerplate paragraph appears in both studies for the Pioneer and Hiawatha:

“Restoration of daily service on the three long-distance routes Amtrak has been directed to study by PRIIA – the North Coast Hiawatha; the Chicago-Seattle Pioneer; and the Sunset Limited between New Orleans, Louisiana and Sanford/Orlando, Florida – would require approximately 100 additional Superliner cars. That equipment does not exist today. Amtrak has 20 repairable “wreck status” Superliner cars, which it plans to restore to service in order to alleviate equipment shortages on existing Western long distance trains. In addition, if Amtrak is to continue to provide existing services on long distance routes, it must in the very near future replace nearly 100 remaining “Heritage” cars that are now more than half a century old.”

When summing up the hypothesized dollar figures for equipping the expanded services the amount runs between $477-534 million, depending on what options are acted upon. Amtrak appears to be settled on the inflated figure of $4.5 million per Superliner, bringing a 100 car order to $450 million. The balance would purportedly be expended on motive power.

To the uninitiated it would be reasonable to assume that a public carrier would enjoy certain benefits unavailable to a private company. The rolling stock of a common carrier railroad is private property and as such subject to applicable property taxes. Private companies take great pains to justify what assets are kept as well as the spare parts on hand to keep them in a state of operation. Such justification must take into account the ebbs and flows of business. Therefore, during the ‘golden age’ of passenger rail transportation there could be found in or near major rail hubs rows of passenger cars awaiting the call to duty during times of heavy traffic demand. In 1946 the Pullman Company alone operated 5500 cars; by 1956, this was down to just over 2600.

Amtrak is a public corporation and not subject to property taxes. And since Amtrak could be viewed as a work-fare program it is not a stretch to imagine public monies spent for fleets of passenger cars awaiting the call to duty during heavy traffic loads. In 1972, the roster held 1262 cars. If Amtrak’s advertising is to be believed, this was about one-third of the total cars inherited from the private railroads. Currently Amtrak rosters 1367 active passenger cars; exclusive of Acela and Talgo trainsets. Where is all the extra capacity when needed? Where is the work-fare program to sustain the domestic railcar manufacturers? Instead of the rows of passenger cars on standby there is a one-size-fits-all passenger train running 365 days a year. Instead of a robust domestic railcar industry there is silence with the last, the Budd Company, closing its doors in 1987.

Currently, Amtrak stables about 250 active diesel-electric road locomotives, exclusive of the dual-mode locomotives in the Northeast. At the height of the F40 era at Amtrak there were 216 on the roster (plus 25 GE P30CH‘s); please bear in mind there was as yet no electrification east of New Haven, Connecticut. Today, the F40 is extinct on Amtrak. With the exception of Ontario’s GO Transit, Amtrak is the only original owner of the F40 locomotive to completely phase them out. On the private railroads, locomotives could be rebuilt under a Capital Rebuild Program allowing the unit to be depreciated over the anticipated additional life of the unit. As Amtrak is a public entity and not subject to property taxes no value was seen in the F40 fleet, and they were sold to commuter railroads, freight service or for scrap.

The national malaise toward serviceable passenger rolling stock has not gone unnoticed by those states desiring service. California, Washington and North Carolina have acquired cars (and in some cases locomotives) to properly address the needs of their constituents. Soon Wisconsin will join this once exclusive club as they reequip their Milwaukee to Chicago service with new trainsets from Talgo.

The national malaise toward service expansion has not gone unnoticed by the federal government as may be witnessed by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grants (ARRA) for High-Speed Rail. In an effort to revitalize America’s passenger rail network the feds have bypassed Amtrak and instead are seeding monies directly to the states. None of these projects tapped for funds will actually attain true high speed (greater than 150 mph) but will improve or expand existing rail services.

Even to the most casual observer the role of Amtrak is being minimized. Attempting to reverse this trend Amtrak’s president recently gave a speech declaring their relevance, “Being a healthier Amtrak helps position itself as THE provider and partner of choice for commuter, intercity passenger rail and high-speed rail service. We currently have partnerships with 15 states accounting for nearly 50 percent of our average weekday departures and we plan to foster more.”

However, when there is a legitimate need for a service to be rendered a way shall always be found. Lately it appears that ‘way’ does not include Amtrak. Is it the fault of the track worker who was given defective concrete ties to install? Is it the fault of the Viewliner car attendant whose car is shaking apart around her? Is it the fault of Pullman-Standard or Budd whose doors closed for good for a lack of orders? Is it the fault of management whose priorities change just a often as the politicos they answer to? Ultimately, it must be recognized that Amtrak does not deliver any of the possible benefits of a public corporation and all of the disadvantages of a welfare program.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



If you are reading someone else’s copy of This Week at Amtrak, you can receive your own free copy each edition by sending your e-mail address to



freetwa@unitedrail.org



You MUST include your name, preferred e-mail address, and city and state where you live. If you have filters or firewalls placed on your Internet connection, set your e-mail to receive incoming mail from twa@unitedrail.org; we are unable to go through any approvals processes for individuals. This mailing list is kept strictly confidential and is not shared or used for any purposes other than distribution of This Week at Amtrak or related URPA materials.



All other correspondence, including requests to unsubscribe should be addressed to



wlindley@unitedrail.org



Copies of This Week at Amtrak are archived on URPA’s web site, www.unitedrail.org



URPA leadership members are available for speaking engagements.



Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

This Week in Amtrak

A double-deck passenger sleeping car of China ...Image via Wikipedia

This Week at Amtrak; September 9, 2009



A weekly digest of events, opinions, and forecasts from



United Rail Passenger Alliance, Inc.

America’s foremost passenger rail policy institute



1526 University Boulevard, West, PMB 203 • Jacksonville, Florida 32217-2006 USA

Telephone 904-636-7739, Electronic Mail info@unitedrail.org • http://www.unitedrail.org





Volume 6, Number 36



Founded over three decades ago in 1976, URPA is a nationally known policy institute which focuses on solutions and plans for passenger rail systems in North America. Headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida, URPA has professional associates in Minnesota, California, Arizona, New Mexico, the District of Columbia, Texas, New York, and other cities. For more detailed information, along with a variety of position papers and other documents, visit the URPA web site at http://www.unitedrail.org.



URPA is not a membership organization, and does not accept funding from any outside sources.



1) Do you choose greatness, or mediocrity? Do you choose a healthy, robust passenger rail system, or a continuation of the shame of Amtrak as we know it today?



At the beginning of the 1950s, America still had the greatest passenger rail system in the world. By the end of the 1950s, that system, through the introduction of the Eisenhower Interstate Highway system and the Boeing 707, had started sliding first into depressing mediocrity, and then, by Amtrak Day in 1971, an abysmal black hole.



Yet, we, as the greatest nation on earth, have accepted Amtrak because we’ve been told time and again it’s the best we can expect. Falsely, we’ve been lectured to that it was a matter of money. So many people have blindly believed that annoying canard.



Falsely, we’ve been indoctrinated that passenger rail is rightly a child of government, because no one is smart enough to understand how to run passenger rail without the financial strength of government.



Sadly, as a nation we’ve bought into all of this degenerate rhetoric because the glamour and glitz of passenger rail was snuffed out with the last runs of the Twentieth Century Limited, Broadway Limited, Super Chief, North Coast Limited, and Florida Special.



We looked to the skies filled with jets from Pan Am, Eastern, National, TWA, and Braniff for our glamour and glitz. The Hunt Breakfast which used to be served in first class between Phoenix and the West Coast on Western Airlines replaced the spotless linen of the dining car on the Golden State of the Rock Island and Southern Pacific railroads.



The siren of the complete freedom of the automobile tugged at the restlessness in our breasts and souls, ever seeking to explore new places and stay along the way in always dependable Holiday Inns and Howard Johnson’s motels instead of the slightly swaying bed of a Pullman sleeping car. In every Holiday Inn or Howard Johnson’s room you had a private bath and a shower. On a Pullman sleeping car, you had a lavatory sink for bathing.



Instead of creating the next generation of long distance trains, we created child of government, Amtrak. Yes, Amtrak gave us Amfleet, but, really, is an Amfleet coach seat any more comfortable than a coach set on any previous Budd built or Pullman Standard coach? And, yes, Amtrak gave us Superliners and Viewliners, but, if left up to private innovation without the heavy hand of government regulation, what would we have had today instead from the private marketplace?



We already had the Metroliner on Pennsylvania Railroad’s Northeast Corridor. That was a huge step forward; what else would we have had? Perhaps, a still functioning Pullman Standard passenger car manufacturing company in Chicago? American ingenuity instead of Canadian, European, and Korean ingenuity? Would we have had the disappointment of Acela trainsets without them being created by a company that was a child of government? Perhaps, if complete accountability had come into the picture, would the many trials and tribulations of Acela never have occurred?



As a nation, we are on the cusp of perhaps the next golden age of railroading on many levels. Public and private partnerships are being forged where everyone is a winner. Private freight railroads are weathering the recession, and seemed poised to come back strong as business revives. In the meantime, more and more managers have come to understand there is money to be made in the passenger business. Most people have no clue how much activity there is currently in the private marketplace for new and innovative passenger plans. But, it’s there, all working in the glory of the free market system.



If we’re fortunate, we as peoples of North America will continue to come to rediscover the many advantages of passenger rail on every level. Those with vision will rise to the top, leaving shuffling bureaucrats and negative attitudes of “no, we can’t” back in the dust.



The day is coming. Are you ready?



3) Words, names, labels – they all matter when it comes to how we think about things. William Lindley of Phoenix, Arizona suburb of Scottsdale has a few words on the subject.



[Begin quote]



By William Lindley



There has been much hand-wringing about the terms "high speed rail" and "commuter rail" in the United States. This has occurred because most of the new "high speed" systems aren't really all that fast compared to Spain's, France's or Japan's, and because many of the new "commuter rail" systems have broken from the 1950s-think "inbound mornings, outbound evenings" schedules.



This is evident in the August 2009 Railway Age magazine. Railway Age writes more about expansion of passenger rail across the country – with the sometimes supportive, sometimes grudging approval of the Class I railroads – than would have even been seriously considered as a guest editorial in a "fan" magazine like Trains magazine 20 years ago.



Before we as a nation consider new services, let's look at how terminology and "old-think" have stifled the growth of passenger trains and transit for years.



In my college years at Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts, I grew to be friends with the late George Sanborn, the "puckish" – the Boston Globe's word, not mine – librarian of the State Transportation Library. George, who started with Boston’s transit service, the MBTA, when it was still the Boston Elevated Railway, seemingly knew everything about the history and future of transit in the Bay State. He got me not just understanding the past, but thinking about shaping that future – he turned me from a "railfan" into an "advocate."



Two things stand out which were gleaned from Mr. Sanborn – one, a 1904 map illustrating the "Steam Railroads and Street Railways of Massachusetts," and the other, the opening of the Alewife extension of the Red Line in 1984-1985. The latter made George laugh as he showed me the original plans to extend the Cambridge Subway – as the Red Line was originally known – very much along the 1980s alignment, to Arlington, and even as far as Lexington, and they were dated 1912! Clearly, the wheels of progress grind slowly. And as to that 1904 map – compare it to the modern MBTA "commuter rail" lines and the bus lines, and there are few differences. This despite that streetcars were in high competition with railroads for local passengers.



Indeed, even today, local and express buses in Boston exist in almost complete denial of commuter trains. In my old hometown of Bedford, Massachusetts, there is no attempt by transit to connect the town with train lines which operate in Concord – just a few miles west – or to the Burlington Mall, three miles to the east, or either to Mishawum station in Woburn, 10 miles to the east.



I then lived in Woodbridge, Virginia, where the onetime "Prince William [County] Commuteride" buses have been replaced by "PRTC" – which still runs express buses to the Pentagon, flying in the face of the fact Virginia Railway Express trains have existed since 1992. True, the Pentagon employs tens of thousands, but why is a public bus company designed to serve a single building, instead of the whole city? There are a couple local loop shuttles in Woodbridge, but they make paltry connections to the VRE station there... clearly, there is no thought of a transportation “system” – just a variety of disconnected bits.



Countless examples surely abound across the country. So long as our transit modes, even ones operated by the same agency, refuse to co-operate and work as a local matrix, they will never fulfill their proper roles, and will waste billions of taxpayer dollars on inefficiency.



Part of the problem is not just "we have always done it that way," but the terminology itself. Words are powerful.



In my current hometown of Phoenix, Arizona – since 1991 – the transit system has improved much in 20 years, but still has far to go. I fought for years to get a "drop-off only" sign at the Valley Metro Route 532 express bus stop at Scottsdale and McKellips Roads removed... because even though the Bus Book said the bus stopped there, the drivers wouldn't let passengers – who had departed the morning bus there from Mesa to go to Arizona State University in Tempe or to work in Scottsdale – back on in the evening! The bus was designed only to carry people downtown, and the drivers were told not to let paying passengers on who wish to make the return trip. Amazing.



This sort of foolishness persists today in newer "Rapid" buses, designed again as "commuter" routes. These Rapid buses run in from the west from 79th Avenue along Interstate10, about nine miles to the State Capitol at 19th Avenue, making local drop-offs downtown – and then turn around and run back to 79th Avenue empty... despite other Rapid buses from east Phoenix are arriving off I-10, making local stops downtown and running back empty to the east from the Capitol! Apparently, nobody is permitted to desire to wish to travel from west to east through downtown – as if there are no jobs in the west valley which attract east valley workers, or vice versa. Better to run empty buses in the mindset of transit managers!



The same "commuter only" mentality has been turned on its head now that the same Valley Metro has surveyed the riders of its new trolley system. Not only did a near majority of train riders rarely, if ever, use buses previously, but most trips were not "commuter oriented," but trips to lunch, to visit friends, or just for fun. These trips were utterly missed by all the traditional projection models in the original design.



Meanwhile, despite all indications these trains are used not for commuting, but for everyday, all-day travel – 35% of METRO riders surveyed are new to transit, and 40% use light rail to travel between home and a destination other than work – Valley Metro is forging ahead with an ill-conceived extension west in the median of I-10, which will have just two or three stops, each located unwalkably over a quarter of a mile from anything, with platforms surrounded by screaming, diesel-belching, tire-dust shredding-18-wheelers... stations sunken in the depressing concrete canyon which is a modern superhighway.



This scenario, despite that "commuter rail" surely will run on the parallel Union Pacific tracks a mile or so away within a few years, and despite that Thomas Road, parallel to, and a mile and a half to the north of I-10, has the highest bus ridership of any in the system – Thomas being fronted by apartments, shopping, and offices along its entire length. Valley Metro refuses to give up the misguided highway routing and put the trolley where it would actually serve real people, instead of the imaginary commuter traffic models projected.

Even more baffling, Valley Metro never gave its train stations any names – just intersection addresses. Instead of "Sun Devil Stadium," which is a landmark at Arizona State University, the adjacent station is called "Veterans Avenue and College Way" – a place even Congressman Harry Mitchell, formerly mayor of Tempe for years, had no clue where it was after he said he was off to ride the train. Is it any wonder the common man can't figure out how to talk about the stations? One magazine apparently gave up on such unwieldy names, and prints a map of the confusingly long names and then says, "This delightful restaurant is located at Station 7."



All this shows why "old think" and the associated buzzwords "commuter rail" – even modern buzzwords like "regional rail" and "high speed rail" – need to be discarded. They encourage "wrong-think." (Please excuse my temporary lapse into Orwell's Newspeak.) The old ways and ill-chosen words lead not just in unease in the public's mind, but in the planner's mind, as well.



Instead, let us take a cue from what worked before. Instead of "commuter rail" and "regional rail," consider Local Trains. Some of these, yes, serve commuters – but the emphasis is local, all day, every day, cross-town connectivity.



Instead of "high speed corridor" trains, let us have Express Trains. And overlaid on this, instead of thinking "intercity train," which locks us into the early 1970s mindset – Limited Trains.



Both historically in the United States and across modern-day Europe, it is the network – the matrix – of a variety of trains, which make a viable system. Europe's fast TGV, Thalys, or AVE trains depend on connections with local trains, streetcars, and buses to feed and distribute passengers to endpoints. In France, SCNF trains code-share with numerous airlines, permitting through-booking to a variety of French cities.



Most important, high-speed operators like Thalys and AVE run both types of trains which make just a few stops between their endpoints, as well as some serving a few suburban stops and intermediate cities.



Amtrak has attempted on several occasions to run non-stop endpoint-to-endpoint trains, such as Metroliners in the Northeast Corridor and in the Pacific Surfliner corridor. All these attempts suffered low ridership, partly because few passengers wanted to go only from downtown to downtown, but also because of missing, or poorly coordinated local train service.



Perhaps today, with proper integration with Pacific Surfliner partner train services of Coaster, Metrolink, and Los Angeles subways, an express Surfliner might make more sense than a decade ago, but unless major intermediate stops like Oceanside are added, the matrix effect is so greatly diminished, such a service only would be reasonable as a supplement when the regular trains become over crowded.



The Matrix effect – not just among trains of equal class but among all trains and local transit, is the driving force behind a successful national transportation system. Ideally, at major gateway cities – spaced across the country in a grid, each no less than 150 miles apart – limited trains from multiple directions would converge several times a day to permit transfers to all points... not unlike what airlines do with hubs. At these gateway cities, local trains would provide the links to the surrounding suburbs and smaller cities, while Express trains would give fast links for connecting passengers to nearby metropolitan areas.



As the matrix of different trains and transit increases, and the number of daily trains increases, the need for Clever Scheduling decreases. Amtrak, traditionally having just one train a day on most routes, needs Clever Scheduling to operate its skeleton system. Yet, when each route sees two to four daily trains, there is always a train in a few hours... which solves many problems, from minor delays causing major inconveniences, to crew rest times and expensive overnight hotel stays at Amtrak's expense. When stations are staffed full-time, they cost less per passenger to run – even with a larger staff – than a station open just a few hours a day.



The single factor hobbling rail ridership today is that you simply can't get there from here, with the exception of a few places depending where "here" is. If you live in Dallas, you can get to Oklahoma City, St. Louis or Chicago, El Paso or Los Angeles – and basically nowhere else. Let's see how that changes with a matrix.



I've placed a sample "timetable" of sorts at http://unitedrail.org/images/20090908.html which shows just some of the places you can get to, with a single connection from a train in Texas, under the late Dr. Adrian Herzog's updated plan, as featured in this space in August.



Indeed, in this snapshot chart, there are far more transfer points and far more intermediate destinations than can be shown on a single chart – but, if you compare this to today's connections (shown in red), there are many more x's in Dr. Herzog’s proposed matrix.



As the number of destinations increases dramatically, and convenience increases when there is more than a single train a day to most places, the train becomes a serious transportation option for more and more travelers.



Dr. Herzog wrote in 2000, "...interconnecting a network into a complex matrix of origin-destination pairs even at constant levels of market penetration drives increases in transaction volume (ridership) exponentially."



Serious growth is unprecedented on trains in America since the advent of subsidized highways, but across Europe, ridership in many places is at or above historic highs, even as highway and air travel continue to be strong and grow.



True, air ridership has dropped dramatically in places where high-speed trains now run; and indeed, Air France may bid to operate trains on SNCF's lines; but realistically, operating jetliners for distances of much less than 500 miles makes little economic sense. Once a plane and crew has spent the time and fuel to climb to altitude, it costs relatively little to fly a few more hours. This doesn't even count the maintenance expense and ground charges incurred with each takeoff and landing. Airplanes do what they do very well, and so do trains; but there is little overlap.



In each metropolitan area, then, we begin with a base matrix of pedestrian access, bicycles, city buses, streetcars, and subways. Overlaid on this is a matrix of local trains, serving a greater metropolitan area with all-day, in addition to peak period, service. Overlaid on that are express trains which start on one side of a city, call at the downtown station and again on the other side, and make a few more stops into one or more cities down the line... calling at airports and selected city or suburban transit hubs, passing through the final downtown, and terminating on the far side of the destination city.



The final layer is our limited trains – somewhat like today's intercity services – which connect the country from west to east, south to north, in a matrix, a grid so you can get there from here. Often these Limiteds may call only at one or two stations in each city besides the main downtown terminal, but they almost never make a single stop, except for major intermediate cities or destinations.



The Limiteds must connect with the Express and Local trains, and directly with the airports, where possible. And, almost every Limited train, because there will be two to four of them each day on each route, will continue to serve small town America – places like Deming, New Mexico; Whitefish, Montana; and Alpine, Texas. In the wide open spaces of America, these trains become a mix of long-distance and local.



You can already see this on today's Amtrak trains... sit in the lounge car and chat with a German tourist on one side and the college kid from Green River, Utah going to Lincoln, Nebraska on the other. The Limiteds are not endpoint-to-endpoint services – that's the oldthink – rather, they are the interconnection which make the whole underlying matrix work.



[End quote]



3) The latest from Ken Orski, at Innovation NewsBriefs. This is Volume 20, Number 17. For more information, visit www.innobriefs.com.



[Begin quote]



September 8, 2009



Congress Will Most Likely Extend the Existing Transportation Authorization



Among the pressing legislative priorities facing Congress this autumn – besides the highly visible health care and climate change bills – is an extension of the federal surface transportation program. The program authority expires on September 30 and its renewal is essential to keep the federal transportation money flowing. As we reported in our NewsBrief of August 8 on the eve of the congressional adjournment, the House and the Senate have been on divergent paths in their approach toward renewing the program. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, under the leadership of Chairman James Oberstar (D-MN), has been intent on passing a six-year $500 billion surface transportation measure ($450 billion for highways and transit, $50 billion for high-speed rail) during this session of Congress. In late July, a bill to this effect was reported out by the House Highways and Transit subcommittee. Chairman Oberstar announced at the time that he would hold a full committee mark-up soon after the House returns from its summer recess.



The Senate, on the other hand, has been working toward an 18-month extension of the existing surface transportation program. Its rationale for doing so was succinctly stated by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee and Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) ranking minority member. There simply is no way, the two senate transportation leaders concluded, that Congress could pass a multi-year authorization of the surface transportation program before the program’s expiration at the end of September. "There are just too many big questions left unanswered, not the least of which is a lack of a consensus on how to pay for it," Boxer and Inhofe stated. A better approach, they said, would be to pass an 18-month extension as recommended by the Obama Administration. Left unsaid were probably two other motives for wanting to postpone enactment of a long-term legislation: (A) an 18-month extension would allow the Senate to take a more active role in shaping the legislation and influence the nation’s future transportation policy; and (B) by early 2011, a more favorable economic climate might allow a significant boost in federal fuel taxes – a boost that both the Senate and the House leaders have ruled out during the current economic recession.



Three Senate committees having jurisdiction over the surface transportation program (the Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee; the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee; and the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee) completed action on their bills to extend the existing program before the recess. Also approved was a measure that would effectively ensure adequate funding for the 18-month extension. The bill in question (S. 1474), sponsored by Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT), would replenish the Highway Trust Fund through a transfer of $26.8 billion from the General Fund. The funds were said to represent reimbursements for lost interest payments owed to the Fund since 1998 and for past disaster emergency expenditures.



This briefly summarizes the situation as it appeared when Congress adjourned for the summer recess. What follows is an attempt to assess the likely course of events in the days ahead. Our analysis is based on conversations with sources on Capitol Hill and members of the Washington transportation community. The report presents a snapshot view of the situation as we see it at the time of publication in early September. Nothing can be asserted with certainty, however, until the Senate and House leaders have sat down and hammered out a negotiated compromise sometime during the month of September.



Where the Matter Stands in the House



Chairman Oberstar says he has a commitment from the House leadership to bring the bill to the House floor by the third week of September if the Ways and Means Committee can come up with the revenue title to the bill. That's a big "if". So far, the W&M Committee has given no indication where the money might come from. According to press reports, a majority of the members of that committee are opposed to any tax increases as a means of funding the proposed $500 billion bill. Significantly, only 15 of the 41 committee members went on record in a July letter to committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY) supporting "prompt action" (i.e. in September) on a revenue package for the bill.



In the opinion of many observers, hope for the enactment of a long term transportation bill this year all but vanished when Rep. Oberstar himself acknowledged that he does not favor raising the fuel tax at this time to pay for the $500 billion transportation program. He made this admission in testimony before a hearing of a House Ways and Means Subcommittee on July 23. "Although increasing and indexing the gasoline and diesel user fee is a viable financing mechanism, ... I do not believe that the user fee should be increased during the current recession," Oberstar stated in his opening statement, echoing the posture previously taken by the White House and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. Although he suggested other potential sources of supplementary funding, Oberstar deferred to the Ways and Means Committee. "The Committee on Ways and Means," he said in concluding his testimony, "must undertake the difficult task of identifying the revenue to finance this bill...We’ll take any dollar you can scare up for us for the trust fund."



By taking the gas tax increase off the table, Rep. Oberstar acknowledged a political reality but also removed from consideration the most logical source of additional revenue. Other funding options appear limited. One solution could be to use general tax revenue to fund a transportation-focused "Stimulus II" bill . Such a measure might conceivably be rationalized as helping to bring down the level of unemployment – should high joblessness persist. A second option could take the form of a major bond issue to be financed by additional revenue generated from indexing the gas tax at some future date. Both options have been hinted at by Rep. Oberstar and Rep. DeFazio (D-OR) in past interviews. But political analysts do not consider either option as plausible, since both lack congressional and Administration support. Neither Congress nor the White House are eager to add to the already sky-high budget deficit. Several other funding options suggested by the T&I Committee leaders — such as imposing a fee on imported and domestic crude oil; taxing crude oil futures transactions (the subject of a DeFazio-sponsored bill, HR3379); and a flat sales tax on the purchase of gasoline — stand even less chance of congressional approval.



The Senate is Poised to Take Action



According to Sen. Inhofe, he and Sen. Boxer have obtained a commitment from Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to schedule the 18-month extension bill for early floor action, possibly as early as the week of September 7. The bill also will serve as a vehicle for repealing the $8.7 billion rescission of federal highway program contract authority required to take effect on September 30. Prompt action on the extension bill is necessary, say Senate sources, before states take irreversible steps to cancel existing contractual commitments to comply with the spending cutback. Pressure to repeal the scheduled rescission has been intense. In late July, AASHTO sent a letter to members of Congress noting that failure to promptly repeal the provision would lead to "devastating consequences" for the states. Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO), author of an amendment to repeal the scheduled rescission, has been equally emphatic: All 50 states will face "drastic cuts" to their highway programs, he said, if the highway rescission is not promptly repealed. The cuts could lead to 250,000 jobs lost in the construction industry, Bond noted.



Given an almost certain approval of the extension/rescission measure by the full Senate, the transportation community is rife with speculation as to the ultimate resolution of the Senate-House conflict. Undoubtedly, an extension of the existing program authority would provide more time to develop a broad-based consensus among the stakeholders on the needed policy changes and program reform. Such a consensus hardly exists today as our survey of transportation stakeholders has shown (see, NewsBrief, July 11.) Postponing the enactment of a multiyear authorization would also offer the Senate and the Administration a chance to participate more fully in the overhaul of the nation's transportation policy. This argument, we suspect, while seldom expressed openly, is probably in the back of the minds of many Senators and senior Administration officials. The current House version of the authorization bill has been developed with virtually no substantive input from the Senate or the Administration, sources tell us.



Whether a full 18-month extension is needed or appropriate is a matter of judgment. It may be argued that a postponement until the spring of 2011 makes sense because passage of a gas tax increase will be politically more feasible in a post-recession economy. But others argue that getting a gas tax increase enacted in the spring or summer of 2011 is not going to be politically any easier. An 18-month extension would expire a mere three months after the start of a new Congress. With new faces and a possible political realignment in Congress, the extension could easily morph into a two-year or longer delay. This point of view has been emphasized by Rep. Oberstar: "An 18-month extension will just take us into the next presidential election cycle," he observed, "so it [the extension] will turn into four years."



Since both houses and both political parties are anxious to keep the transportation money flowing, the current conflict will be resolved through a compromise. The House will most likely drop its insistence on passing a multi-year transportation bill during this session of Congress; in return, the Senate will probably consent to a shorter extension of say, 8 or 12 months— especially as there already is some sentiment for a shorter extension among certain senators. The compromise will be sought in a Senate-House conference before the end of September in order to avoid any disruption in the federal transportation program.



Searching for a Consensus on a New Reform Agenda



Postponing the enactment of a long term transportation authorization does not have to mean a pause in searching for a broad consensus on a new vision for transportation policies and programs. Indeed, a National Transportation Policy Conference, to be held September 9-11 at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center of Public Affairs in Charlottesville, may mark the beginning of such a search. Co-chaired by two former Secretaries of Transportation – Norman Mineta and Samuel Skinner, and directed by former Undersecretary of Transportation Jeff Shane, the Conference will aim to develop "an informed, forward-looking, credible agenda to guide the legislative process." Panelists and invited participants include some of the best known and most highly regarded members of the transportation community.



The Conference will begin by reviewing the current state of thinking about transportation policy reform by examining the recommendations of the two congressionally-chartered transportation commissions, and the reports of the Brookings Institution and the National Bipartisan Policy Center. It will then focus on four problem areas: funding, urban congestion, freight movement and multi-modalism. The Conference will conclude with a roundtable in which participants will develop a set of "clear, credible and achievable legislative and policy recommendations for a new transportation authorization." The Conference findings and recommendations will be presented to leaders in Congress and the Administration and to the editorial boards of major newspapers (they also will be featured in a special edition of the NewsBriefs).



We think the conference will mark an auspicious beginning to a dialogue that will reach across ideological lines and develop a true bipartisan consensus on a "transformative" national transportation policy and program.



[End quote]



4) Some of the old silliness and modal envy is still hanging around, particularly in organizations which allegedly claim to help Amtrak.



There is still whining about all of the horrible unfairness of it all; those mean, nasty, ugly highways are sucking up all of the money, and there is no money left to shovel into rail. After all, these ill-informed people say, no passenger system in the world makes money, right? So, why can’t passenger rail have more free government money?



Such unabashed hogwash.



The only people saying silly things like that are people who believe in the nanny state, and government is the cure-all for everything, and government can solve all problems by spending someone else’s money.



None of these people stop to have a rational thought or (Gasp!) come up with a real reason to support passenger rail. The real reason is not because highways get all sorts of money. The real reason is because a true case for passenger rail can be made through a rational business plan.



It’s all about having a solid business plan which provides the greatest return on investment. It’s not about forcing people involuntarily out of their private automobiles, and it’s not about taking money away from air traffic control. It’s about showing people investment in rail provides a desirable alternative which produces results.



The reality is, in this big, huge, endless horizon country of ours, automobiles are never going away. While smaller, more efficient cars may be suitable for city driving, big, brawny, oversized trucks and SUVs are best for rural driving and real work. Telling drivers of either to leave their vehicles at home and get on a train will only generate stares at you, with people wondering if you’re from another planet.



Making comparisons to small-space countries like those in Europe, or pint-sized spaces with big populations like Japan makes no sense, either. After the devastation of World War II and the subsequent rebuilding, those spaces were rebuilt based on existing rail and rail cultures.



After WW II here in North America, we, as a nation, chose to create the Eisenhower Interstate Highway system, and paired that with the Boeing 707 jetliner.



Those choices created our current culture of transportation, which will last for generations to come. Nothing is going to change overnight.



However, wise people such as former Federal Railroad Administration Administrator Gil Carmichael have come up with a plan, which he dubbed Interstate II.



Interstate II take the innovation and formulas of the Eisenhower Interstate Highway system and applies it to rail for the twin benefits of freight and passengers.



It’s a plan which makes a lot of business sense. It combines many of the best features of free markets and capitalism with the strengths of government to create a fluid, practical system of moving freight and passengers.



Stop making the case for passenger rail based solely on what someone else receives in free federal monies. Make the case based on hard, cold, facts such as the overall lower cost of building rail infrastructure, better operations costs, and the automatic benefits which come with passenger rail development. Leave the whining to the other guys who have to work much harder to make their case.



It has been demonstrated time and time again, whether on a local, regional, or national level, when the traveling public is offered a reasonable choice through passenger rail, enough travelers willingly choose rail without provocation, but simply through free choice.



Free choice always make the most difference.



5) The always superb and informative Passenger Train Journal magazine has hit the news stands with its latest issue, 2009-3, Issue 240. Discerning readers may be interested in pages 30-33, “A fresh look at Amtrak’s map,” which is a condensed version, with a delightful map, of a previous This Week at Amtrak issue from earlier this year.



As always, the gentle hand of editor Mike Schafer has produced a most satisfying product.







If you are reading someone else’s copy of This Week at Amtrak, you can receive your own free copy each edition by sending your e-mail address to



freetwa@unitedrail.org



You MUST include your name, preferred e-mail address, and city and state where you live. If you have filters or firewalls placed on your Internet connection, set your e-mail to receive incoming mail from twa@unitedrail.org; we are unable to go through any approvals processes for individuals. This mailing list is kept strictly confidential and is not shared or used for any purposes other than distribution of This Week at Amtrak or related URPA materials.



All other correspondence, including requests to unsubscribe should be addressed to



brucerichardson@unitedrail.org



Copies of This Week at Amtrak are archived on URPA’s web site, www.unitedrail.org and also on www.todaywithjb.blogspot.com where other rail-related writings of Bruce Richardson may also be found.



URPA leadership members are available for speaking engagements.



J. Bruce Richardson

President

United Rail Passenger Alliance, Inc.

1526 University Boulevard, West, PMB 203

Jacksonville, Florida 32217-2006 USA

Telephone 904-636-7739

brucerichardson@unitedrail.org

http://www.unitedrail.org

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Monday, July 27, 2009

This Week in Amtrak

Amtrak Cascades leaving Edmonds StationImage via Wikipedia

This Week at Amtrak; July 27, 2009



A weekly digest of events, opinions, and forecasts from



United Rail Passenger Alliance, Inc.

America’s foremost passenger rail policy institute



1526 University Boulevard, West, PMB 203 • Jacksonville, Florida 32217-2006 USA

Telephone 904-636-7739, Electronic Mail info@unitedrail.org • http://www.unitedrail.org





Volume 6, Number 25



Founded over three decades ago in 1976, URPA is a nationally known policy institute which focuses on solutions and plans for passenger rail systems in North America. Headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida, URPA has professional associates in Minnesota, California, Arizona, New Mexico, the District of Columbia, Texas, New York, and other cities. For more detailed information, along with a variety of position papers and other documents, visit the URPA web site at http://www.unitedrail.org.



URPA is not a membership organization, and does not accept funding from any outside sources.



1) The irrepressible William Lindley of Scottsdale, Arizona, frequent contributor to This Week at Amtrak, has come up with some sage thoughts about train stations. Mr. Lindley, in the Arizona heat, occasionally rides his motorcycle, drives his car, and frequently uses the metropolitan Phoenix areas bus and light rail transit system in his travels around town. He would very much like to ride Amtrak trains to and from Phoenix for his domestic and world travels, but, alas, none exist. Read, think, and enjoy.



[Begin quote]



By William Lindley



Imagine putting a 10-story building in the middle of Los Angeles International Airport's runway. Ridiculous! you say. Yet, that's what Kansas City did with their Union Station – built a mid-rise building right smack in the middle of the train platform area, destroying its ability to be a train station. Saint Louis built a mall inside its Union Station, but at least most of that could be removed fairly easily (malls are always changing, anyway).



Are our historic train stations only to become museums (like Kansas City's) or should they have a rightful place in our transportation future?



Atlanta recently made what appears to be a bad decision that will prevent some mainline trains from conveniently entering its planned new downtown station, but at least the station will be downtown. Saint Paul, Minnesota likewise is moving forward with the renovation of its Union Depot, close to downtown – as light rail, and possibly a southward extension of the upcoming Northstar commuter trains get underway.



These cities understand, as in most real estate, station sites are about Location, Location, Location. That means walking distance to downtown; it means connections with commuter trains and streetcars and buses; it means a place where mainline trains can move in and out easily, and where rail services can be provided.



When the national argument for passenger rail was at its lowest point, Dallas shortchanged itself on the latter, by providing only three platforms – barely enough for Trinity Railway commuter trains and one or two intercity trains. San Antonio, in contrast, found new life for its main depot building as a food an entertainment complex called Historic Sunset Station at St. Paul Square, but, built a harmonious, functional, and pleasant new adjacent passenger and train servicing facility just a few feet away, using the original passenger platforms.



If the original station does not fit today's demands, it is appropriate to build a new building “around” an existing depot as at San Antonio. But, also have the fortitude to build an updated facility in a new location convenient to the city's modern activity centers. Some of our best historic stations and depots, often over a century old, are located in parts of cities and towns no longer desirable for 24-hour public use because of dangerous neighbors.



While it is highly desirable to keep these older structures and find new uses for them, it is equally important and more desirable to meet the needs of the traveling public by providing a station facility in a safe and secure location. The most beautiful or historic station can be meticulously restored, but if it’s in a bad part of town or lacks adequate parking or transit connections, the purpose of a proper, useful, and desirable gateway for rail passengers into a city or town is defeated.



An interesting point of discussion has been for former New York Central train station and tower in Buffalo, New York. The building has been empty since 1979 and is in a high state of disrepair. The sprawling station complex is located 2.5 miles from downtown Buffalo, and was designed to host an astonishing 3,200 passengers per hour. Debate and plans are raging in Buffalo as to how best preserve this architectural gem, perhaps through reincarnation as a high speed rail terminal.



In Detroit, a similarly magnificent structure is in even more dire condition; the old Michigan Central station and tower in another huge complex sits outside of the normal traffic flow of downtown Detroit. The local government in Detroit has decreed the building should be torn down it is in such bad condition, but supporters of this huge architectural marvel are looking to create a new life for the station either through rail-related purposes or as a convention center and casino, perhaps an international trade processing center (The station is near the Ambassador Bridge and gateway to Canada.), or as police headquarters for the City of Detroit.



When Michigan Central originally constructed the complex in 1913, it was built to last a lifetime, and Amtrak used the facility until 1988. At the time of its construction, it was the tallest railroad station in the world, with its massive tower atop the station, going up 18 floors and comprising 500,000 square feet of space, including the station areas. Located about two miles southwest of downtown Detroit, the station was always considered to be outside the loop of normal downtown traffic. The hope today is a revival of the station building will also bring a revival of the surrounding neighborhood.



In Jacksonville, Florida, the downtown Union Station is today the Prime F. Osborn III Convention Center, named in honor of the late CSX Transportation Chairman of the Board who took a personal interest in saving the historic Jacksonville Union Station, designed by New York Architect Kenneth Mackensie Murcheson. Murcheson also designed Pennsylvania Station in Baltimore, Maryland, which is still in use today by Amtrak on the Northeast Corridor.



When Jacksonville Union Station opened at midnight on November 17, 1919, with its vast array of through-service and stub end tracks, it was designed to handle up to 210 trains a day. On opening day, the station handled more than 110 trains and 20,000 passengers. Every U.S. president from Woodrow Wilson through Richard Nixon traveled through the station. The station was mothballed in 1974, and Amtrak was moved to a far suburban station in the middle of one of Jacksonville’s industrial areas with a high crime rate.



While today’s primary use of the Union Station complex is a convention center, plans are also on the drawing board to remake the complex into a full multi-modal facility, which will include Amtrak, commuter rail, intercity bus, local transit, and downtown airport check-in facility where passengers will be able to come to the complex, check in for their airline, and then take secure bus service from the downtown station to the airport on the north end of Jacksonville. Ideally, when Amtrak moves back downtown, the present, far-suburban Amtrak station will stay in use as a second facility in a sprawling metropolitan area.



For all modern, full service stations, all the local connections – commuter trains, streetcars, buses, taxis, parking – create a "lesser matrix effect," where the intercity train matrix meets the local distribution matrix. The better these two systems tie together, the more useful they both become. Relieved of the necessity to carry every passengers everywhere, intercity trains can again rely, as they did in earlier days, on feeder regional and commuter trains. But, that does mean the Limited needs a stop at one or two suburban stations on either side of downtown, perhaps 10 to 30 miles out, at regional train stations (with that 10-to-30 mile spacing based on regional service levels), to collect and distribute passengers.



Let's look at one more example.



In Phoenix, the 1923 Union Station is still the junction point between BNSF and Union Pacific right downtown. The station is three short blocks from City Hall and a few more blocks away from the new City Hall light rail station (which Valley Metro Rail, in its wisdom, calls "First Avenue and Jefferson Street and Central Avenue and Washington Street Station" – not terribly easy to write and remember).



Phoenix Union Station maintains its alignments for the original six through tracks (a seventh was added during World War II) and several stub-ends on both sides of the depot. There is no other location close to downtown which could accommodate more than perhaps even two platforms, because of the street layout and the historic warehouse district.



Advanced studies are underway for both commuter rail in metro Phoenix and for express trains to Tucson (120 miles to the southeast). The Tucson trains would not be "high speed," but would likely travel at 79 MPH or 90 MPH on upgraded (double-and-triple-tracked) Union Pacific rails. UP, BNSF, and Arizona's short-line railroads are involved, and it is known the railroads are businesses and expect any passenger agreement to be beneficial to their freight business. Arizona has learned from California and New Mexico, Utah, and other western states which have succeeded in working relationships and actual operations with host freight railroads.



Valley Metro Rail ("METRO"), meanwhile, is planning a westward extension in the median of Interstate 10, taking LRVs potentially right past the railroad depot. There has been some talk also of historic or modern streetcars along Washington Street from downtown to the Capitol at 19th Avenue, should the LRT line be deferred or rerouted – and these streetcars could certainly connect Union Station to the Capitol with its thousands of daily workers at the west end, and the LRT line at the east end.



The city of Phoenix has certainly grown since the historic downtown station was built. In the 1920s, a civic goal was 100,000 citizens; today the city boasts 1.5 million, and the metro area over 4 million. But, as the population has expanded fifteen-fold, transportation options have expanded, too. Union Station was built to handle 90% of the transportation needs of a city of 100,000, so it certainly could handle 10% of transportation of a city ten times larger. It still fits the city.



And, it fits the city, too, in its Mission Revival architectural style. It is not enough for a station to be correctly located (both in the city and on the railroad mains) – a station also serves as a gateway, setting the mood for travelers entering a city or town. A station is part of a city's identity; and Phoenix Union Station does fit.



So, in Phoenix, at least for the upcoming decade, Union Station is the only logical intercity train station.



In the future, following Berlin, Germany's motif, a new modern station could be built west of the Airport LRT station (which METRO again calls "44th Street and Washington Street" instead of “Airport”). There is room enough between 38th Street and 44th Street to build an eight or 10 platform railroad station with connections to the new people-mover (to all airport terminals, parking garages, the car rental center, taxicabs and tour buses). This new station would handle commuter trains, intrastate express trains, intercity trains from Los Angeles, San Diego, the Grand Canyon, El Paso, Albuquerque, and points east.



Yet, even in that scenario, Union Station remains the only choice for a downtown depot. Perhaps the commuter trains and express trains will stop there, with the intercity trains serving the Airport station. Once regional commuter trains cover the intermediate stations, a modern Golden State intercity train would likely stop at suburban Gilbert on the east side and suburban Goodyear on the west, with those stations' regional rail connections. Arizona Express trains would likely serve Union Station, the Airport, Tempe (with Arizona State University's huge main campus), Mesa, and Gilbert and just a few more intermediate stops north of downtown Tucson.



A mix of trains and services then blankets southern Arizona. Union Station steps back at that point from some of its design role, and becomes more an historic gathering place, a meeting place, perhaps with conference facilities or shopping in addition to regional rail and streetcar connections.



Southern California has the newest and among the most robust examples of several overlaid systems, although there is room for improvement even there. Los Angeles Union Station has been well refitted to its modern role, a re-interpretation of its historic one; the same is true of San Diego's Santa Fe station. These serve as models for other cities; look, too, to Saint Paul. Learn from mistakes at Kansas City and near-misses like Dallas. Denver would be wise to consider the constraints at Dallas as it looks to reconfigure its historic station built in 1881 as part of a new development, even as it seeks to bring commuter and more intercity service back to the station.



Many of our historic train stations should continue their revival along with their passenger trains... past is prologue.



[End quote]



2) It’s contest time here at TWA! How many train stations can you name where a local or state government treasury has paid to rebuild, upgrade, or create a new station on behalf of Amtrak, and only perhaps months or very few years later Amtrak abandons or severely curtails service to that station?



Here’s a short sample to start your thinking process:



Tampa, Florida

Lakeland, Florida

Dade City, Florida

Ocala, Florida

Pensacola, Florida

Tallahassee, Florida

Chipley, Florida

Lake City, Florida

Madison, Florida

Atmore, Alabama

Bay St. Louis, Mississippi

Gulfport, Mississippi

Tempe, Arizona

Louisville, Kentucky



Okay, that should get you started. Send your list to TWA at info@unitedrail.org and we will publish a complete list along with the name of the winner. When you send the list, please include the name of the train which served the former station and, if possible, when the service was discontinued.



3) Just before all the commotion began about Amtrak’s grievously flawed Gulf Coast report restoring passenger train service east of New Orleans, news came from Wisconsin the state was purchasing two train sets, totaling 14 cars, from well-respected Talgo of Spain to place in service on a high speed route between Chicago and Wisconsin stations.



Those with a current copy of Amtrak’s Summer 2009 timetable will notice it is a Talgo train set speeding along Puget Sound en route to Olympia, Washington and Eugene, Oregon for Amtrak’s Cascades service in the Pacific Northwest.



Most people, including this writer, thought Talgo had been banished from expansion in the United States because of safety restrictions imposed by the Federal Railroad Administration. Talgo had received a waiver for those restrictions, but was only allowed to operate trains on approved trackage in the Pacific Northwest. Just a couple of weeks prior to the Wisconsin announcement, it was learned from insider sources the FRA had been studying a relaxation of its perhaps overly rigid standards for Talgo. That information proved to be true with the Wisconsin announcement.



As a bonus, Wisconsin convinced Talgo to perform final assembly of the Talgo equipment in the state, creating local jobs along with buying shiny new trains.



Some old time railroaders have lightly grumbled about mixing in too many types of equipment into Amtrak’s fleet, and the need for overall uniformity for ease and lower cost of maintenance. Certainly, a case can be made for that, but an equally compelling case can be made for the right type of equipment on each individual route.



Along those lines, there are a number of present Amtrak routes where the old Colorado Railcar/now US Railcar DMU self-propelled units are the perfect answer to lower operating costs and matching the right type of equipment to the right type of passenger demand and route.



4) Continuing with that subject, Amtrak has published an RFP for Viewliner 2 passenger cars. In part, here is what the RFP said:



[Begin quote]



PURCHASE OF “VIEWLINER 2” LONG-DISTANCE SINGLE-LEVEL PASSENGER CARS



RFP# X-047-9167-001



INTRODUCTION:



Amtrak intends to issue a competitive Request for Proposal for a vendor to design, manufacture and deliver 130 “Viewliner 2” Long Distance Single-Level Passenger Cars, with an option for Amtrak to purchase up to an additional 70 cars. The “Viewliner 2” rolling stock which is fully described in the Technical Specifications, will be used as Amtrak passenger trains, primarily in long-distance service, but capable of operating anywhere within Amtrak’s system. There are four (4) “Viewliner 2” car types: Diners, Sleepers, Baggage-Dorms and Baggage cars. The “Viewliner 2” cars will be modeled on the concept of the Amtrak “Viewliner 1” cars.



[End quote]



The RFP goes on to state ultimately the contract for purchase of these cars and the start of construction will be issued in May 2010, with a notice to proceed in June 2010.



So, with all due lack of speed, we’re a year away from anything even being brought to a point of construction.



Let’s break down the specific order.



– 130 cars total, with an option to purchase up to 70 additional cars, for a grand total of 200 cars, if every option is exercised.



– The 130 cars will be divided into four types: Diners, Sleepers, Baggage-Crew Dorms, and Baggage Cars.



Even if you divide 130 relatively evenly, you still come up with only 32 or 33 cars per type of car. That will not double the existing 50 car Viewliner 1 sleeping car fleet, which is so worn out it can only charitably be described as a long line of rolling slums.



Amtrak’s single level dining car fleet is exclusively made up of Heritage fleet diners, which have operated far beyond their initial service life expectancy. At present, Amtrak doesn’t operate any crew dormitory cars, but instead wastes sleeping car revenue space with crew billets (Granted, you have to put the crews somewhere, but a better solution would have been to keep the older Heritage crew dorms running than taking up high-dollar revenue sleeping car space.).



Baggage cars are all Heritage fleet cars, and there is always a need for more baggage cars.



So, even adding the additional 70 cars for the optional order, once again, Amtrak is doing nothing more than replacing fleet instead of adding to its fleet – inadequately so.



This may be news to Amtrak’s financial folks and senior executives, but, why is Amtrak always buying equipment? It’s very rare among common carriers – especially airlines – to actually buy passenger equipment. Amtrak already knows how to lease locomotives, why can’t it lease passenger cars, too? What is the purpose of getting free federal monies from Congress to buy, when private capital can be used to lease? Is this another example of Amtrak’s lack of financial sophistication? Is it just easier to beg money from Congress every year instead of doing something proactive in the leasing market?



5) Look at some of Amtrak’s internal numbers. Amtrak reports revenue several different ways (not different revenue, but revenue as it relates in different ways). One of the ways it reports revenue is “revenue per car day.” This measures coach revenue versus sleeping car revenue, and it’s done by route. The numbers are based on average days.



This particular set of figures is based on 12 months prior to and including November of 2008; this is NOT a fiscal year report.



Route and classes of revenues



Empire Builder

Superliner Coach – $5,163

Superliner Sleeper – $5,015



City of New Orleans

Superliner Coach – $4,624

Superliner Sleeper – $3,253



Southwest Chief

Superliner Coach – $4,419

Superliner Sleeper – $4,467



Auto Train (Northbound, Train No. 52) *

Superliner Coach – $4,339

Superliner Sleeper – $5,286



Auto Train (Southbound, Train No. 53) *

Superliner Coach – $4,255

Superliner Sleeper – $5,583



California Zephyr

Superliner Coach – $3,251

Superliner Sleeper – $3,587



Coast Starlight **

Superliner Coach – $3,134

Superliner Sleeper – $2,818



Capitol Limited

Superliner Coach – $3,048

Superliner Sleeper – $3,243

Texas Eagle

Superliner Coach – $2,238

Superliner Sleeper – $2,603



Sunset Limited

Superliner Coach – $1,972

Superliner Sleeper – $2,545



12 Month Average

Superliner Coach – $3,476

Superliner Sleeper – $3,835



* Auto Train is reported as two separate figures, north and south.

** Coast Starlight figures include long periods of the train not operating due to the mudslides included in this period, and when the train did operate for some of the period, it only operated on part of the route and without sleeping cars.



What do we learn from these figures? On average, sleeping cars generate more revenue than coaches. What do we conclude from these figures? Sleeping car and first class travel are an important part of the future growth of Amtrak and should have equal – if not greater – weight than coach travel when planning for the future and compiling new car orders.



The most important fact to remember when looking at how well the sleeping car business does for Amtrak long distance trains is that sleeping cars are an even greater secret to Amtrak passengers than Amtrak is itself to the traveling public.



Everything Amtrak does overall is aimed at the coach passenger. When calling an Amtrak reservations center, an assumption is automatically made by res agents passengers only want coach, and in most cases, sleeping car accommodations are never mentioned as an option. When booking through Amtrak’s Internet portal, coach tickets are offered first, and sleeping car accommodations are offered only to hawk-eyed ticket buyers as an afterthought.



In reality, just like Amtrak continually ignores long distance trains in its future plans, it even more ignores sleeping car passengers.



6) This always filters back to the same question: Where is Amtrak’s vision for the future? Where is Amtrak’s long term plan? Where will Amtrak be five, 10, or 20 years from now? Based on what we’ve heard so far, probably exactly the same place it is today, constantly begging for money from a government treasury, and ignoring the most lucrative parts of its business.



7) Comments continue to come into TWA about the grossly flawed P.R.I.I.A. Section 226 Gulf Coast Service Plan Report.



A number of people have asked about simply restoring the route of the Floridian between Chicago and Florida, which was discontinued in 1979 during the Carter administration. The quick answer is some of that railroad infrastructure is gone, and other parts of that route have been severely downgraded to “creeping along” track speeds. Many will remember the short-lived Kentucky Cardinal, which operated between Chicago and Louisville, Kentucky. The biggest part of the problem of that route was slow track; the train crept along at speeds not much faster than speed walking.



While a restoration of the Floridian – or any Chicago to Florida route, especially one via Atlanta – is desirable, from an economic standpoint and the ability to quickly restored Chicago to Florida service, the cheapest and best bet is to either extend the City of New Orleans from New Orleans to Florida, or the Capitol Limited from Washington, D.C. to Florida. Restoring the Floridian route or a similar route would require an entire new set of station infrastructure, upgrading hundreds of miles of railroad to acceptable passenger speeds, and have a need for a number of new sidings or double tracking of very congested railroads. Simply extending the City of New Orleans or Capitol Limited would require no new stations, and only additional train sets, not completely new fleets of equipment.



Depending on originating terminal departure times, either the City of New Orleans or the Capitol Limited could make it to Florida by traveling one night, but it would be two very long days on either side of that one night’s travel. By extending existing schedules, two nights of travel are required, but, based on the success of multi-night schedules in the west, this is not an insurmountable problem.



Here are comments from several TWA readers.



[Begin quote]



I look forward to receiving each issue of This Week at Amtrak and appreciate URPA's consistent support for the restoration of rail service east of New Orleans. I am especially pleased to see I am not alone in my analysis of Amtrak's prejudged, fraudulent report concerning the restoration of this missing link in the national rail passenger system.



Back when the Sunset Limited ran through to Florida I was a frequent rider and spent many hours observing Sunset operations and speaking to station agents and train crews. When timekeeping became a major problem for eastbound train No. 2, the station agents and on board crews whom I had come to know collectively came to the conclusion the traveling public would be better served by an extension of the City of New Orleans to Florida. This would reestablish through service between Chicago and Florida and would maintain westbound service to California via a connection at New Orleans. Eastbound passengers from California would likely be required to make an overnight layover in New Orleans before heading to Florida, however, this would be no worse than the present routing via Chicago and Washington in terms of travel time. The net gain would be the ability to operate a timely service with great savings to Amtrak which often had to bus passengers east of New Orleans and/or provide overnight lodging in Jacksonville due to late operations and/or missed connections.



Amazingly, Amtrak never thought of this option on their own despite often having to annul two out of three trips per week of train No. 2 in New Orleans due to excessive lateness. This also necessitated the cancellation the following trip of westbound No. 1. After paying massive amounts of money for the recently released report, Amtrak points out the Chicago option would be the most effective, yet, thanks to fraudulent expenses, this (and all options) appears to be extremely costly.



The report lists expenses for station improvements along the route despite the fact the facilities across North Florida are basically in the same condition as when Amtrak abruptly left the scene after Hurricane Katrina, a move straight out of the playbook of Baltimore Colts owner Robert Irsay who snuck out of town in the dead of the night and moved his team to Indianapolis.



The full service stations in Pensacola and Tallahassee were constructed and/or improved with ADA compliance in mind. Platforms were constructed with the appropriate safety features that had just come into use elsewhere in that day and time. The Tallahassee station, which was actually a remodeled freight station, had ADA compliant ramps added to allow easy access to the off grade waiting room/ticket office. Since Amtrak's pullout, a local group of film buffs has used the waiting room periodically to show movies. The organizer of this group tells me people in wheelchairs often attend. I challenge Amtrak to explain to me why massive amounts of money are needed to rebuild the platform and make other ADA improvements at that station. Likewise, what changes are needed in Pensacola since the station is basically a grade level facility?



There are numerous other inaccuracies in the report such as the time required to train crews and the absurd allocation of money for a new Sanford station. These have been well documented in your newsletter, hence, I will reserve comment.



Thanks again for your leadership in exposing this report. Hopefully, Amtrak will be pressured to restore service at least at the tri-weekly level sooner rather than later, with a goal of making that daily in the near future. To do that, Amtrak needs new leadership who has a vision, a plan to build a large amount of new equipment so that additional routes can be added, and existing trains can be operated with adequate capacity.



[End quote]



[Begin quote]



The Amtrak report on service from New Orleans - Orlando comes as no surprise. It is typical of the work Amtrak puts out. In the 1990's Amtrak produced a report on Chicago–Milwaukee service which concluded that not only should there not be any more intermediate stops, but that ridership would be greatest if the then two existing stops, Sturtevant and Glenview, were eliminated, thereby allowing the service to run non-stop, i.e. faster.



We all said "Huh?". Then I figured out their mathematical model obviously factors in a speed/population combination that the faster the schedule, the more people are likely to turn from driving to the train. Of course this is mostly [junk science]. No speed up of five or 10 minutes between Chicago and Milwaukee is going to attract more passengers, especially since the current 92 minute schedule beats driving, anyway. Common sense and/or real knowledge of the area being served is not important to Amtrak planners.



[End quote]



[Begin quote]



Since I am very much in favor of the return rail passenger between New Orleans, Jacksonville and points south; I desire to post my comments.



The greatest problem is Amtrak is the originator of this report with no auditing agency to review and comment on this report. This report should have been contracted out to a professional consulting firm and submitted back to Congress. Especially when Amtrak – even the CEO Boardman's – bias' have recently been made known regarding the long distance train system and reluctance to turn in a new car order reveal a lack of concern and empathy for the traveling public.



In 1993, when the Sunset started serving the New Orleans, Jacksonville, and Miami segment, I suspected a problem when the word came back we can’t offer daily service since we need more train sets. It seems Amtrak’s Cardinal and Sunset are unwanted step-children, merely tolerated.



I find it interesting Amtrak is willing to take the Texas Eagle to Los Angeles but extend the City Of New Orleans to Florida? no way! Amtrak is willing to run a train from San Antonio to New Orleans, but why not continue that same train to Florida instead of a separate train from New Orleans to Florida? Why not restore the Floridian? Isn’t the real goal here to expand the system? Oh, I almost forgot, Amtrak needs more train sets!



You brought up an excellent point on interconnecting trains! By not restoring the Sunset to the New Orleans-Florida segment, leaving the segment vacant of train service is perhaps an even greater loss for the traveling public.



Thanks for allowing me to share my thoughts!



[End quote]



[Begin quote]



Where is the story on the St. Louis Cardinal's Baseball Team riding passenger trains for the first time in 40 years? It was on yesterday's NPR, that the team was riding Amtrak's Northeast Corridor.



[End quote]



Sorry, not being at all a follower of National Public Radio, and only a very, very casual observer of baseball, we missed that story.



[Begin quote]



Perhaps the good part of the "Sunset Report" is the fact it is the smoking gun of incompetence/lack of vision/dull thinking/passivity/ignorant-arrogance that is the decision making process of the present Board and management of Amtrak. There is no denying it! What to do? I always write my two senators and now have written Ray LaHood but, who is in a position to change the board and direct them to buy out the senior managers and replace them with competent people?



I am uncertain of the line of authority here ... I doubt if Vice President Biden will do anything, and I have gotten no response from Senator Durbin on another Amtrak matter. Perhaps the alternative of just pushing for private – Veolia for instance – companies to bid on new and existing routes would be more productive. Both BNSF and NS executives seem to have some entrepreneurial interest in a role in passenger service, and perhaps they should be encouraged to explore some ownership/management models.



Maybe putting the freight fox in the Amtrak board chicken coop would do something constructive? I am hoping this administration is open to new, collaborative ideas about building a 21st Century world class passenger railroad system which will include some bold moves on the Amtrak problem.



[End quote]



[Begin quote]



Is there any chance Veolia might be interested in taking over Amtrak lock, stock and barrel and then be given free reign? Seems like a WIN-WIN situation to me, for all concerned.



[End quote]



Our thanks to everyone who takes the time to write and share their thoughts and opinions. Regrettably, we are unable to share every e-mail due to space limitations, but we share those which are representative of groups of e-mail.



And, thank you to everyone who reads This Week at Amtrak; we continue to have a rapidly growing subscriber base.





If you are reading someone else’s copy of This Week at Amtrak, you can receive your own free copy each edition by sending your e-mail address to



freetwa@unitedrail.org



You MUST include your name, preferred e-mail address, and city and state where you live. If you have filters or firewalls placed on your Internet connection, set your e-mail to receive incoming mail from twa@unitedrail.org; we are unable to go through any approvals processes for individuals. This mailing list is kept strictly confidential and is not shared or used for any purposes other than distribution of This Week at Amtrak or related URPA materials.



All other correspondence, including requests to unsubscribe should be addressed to



brucerichardson@unitedrail.org



Copies of This Week at Amtrak are archived on URPA’s web site, www.unitedrail.org and also on www.todaywithjb.blogspot.com where other rail-related writings of Bruce Richardson may also be found.



URPA leadership members are available for speaking engagements.



J. Bruce Richardson

President

United Rail Passenger Alliance, Inc.

1526 University Boulevard, West, PMB 203

Jacksonville, Florida 32217-2006 USA

Telephone 904-636-7739

brucerichardson@unitedrail.org

http://www.unitedrail.org

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]