Riding My Train

To Lorton In "WGC"

2012-02-14T07:34:00.001-05:00

Auto Train Voyage #20 was Northbound from Sanford to Lorton aboard #52 (29 JAN).

This was part of a six day trip that I must acknowledge was four nights “on the road” and the remaining two were in Florida. That Sunday, January 29, had me leaving The Villages for a Lunch time meet up with Member Ocala Mike somewhat South of his namesake city. After our Lunch, it was time for a leisurely drive over to Sanford (65 miles) arriving there at 230P for the 3PM closing.

This journey was not going to be a moneymaker for Amtrak, the 109 auto and 219 passengers were still aboard the sixteen car “fixed” AT consist. My auto was aboard within five minutes of surrendering it, and there was no line whatever when I checked in. While checking in, I learned tat the term “fare Bucket’ is official Amtrakese; previously I thought it was only “fanese”. I was surprised to find that no longer tickets are printed for the AT - or at least at Sanford. The necessary info such as accommodation and vehicle load number is recorded by hand on to the Auto Train folder. Personally, I would like to have a ticket, but then the majority of people nowadays apparently simply do not care, as I have learned that only a fraction of people using a credit card for a purchase will even retain their Customer Copy, if in fact the merchant even tenders one..

Well to the train; this journey was to be in Bedroom C of 10BR car “W Graham Claytor”. Conveniently the car was A End forward which meant a forward ride - a “plus” with me as I would guess anyone else here at the Forum.

The wine tasting started promptly at 3PM, and can be a “wine chugging” if one is into that. To my surprise, there still remains one Sightseer car, 33043, assigned to the AT. The car has been reconfigured with all tables upper level with the Smoking Lounge ‘down below’. The latter “did its job”, or maybe no one was smoking any time I was in the car. According to Mr. Ainsworth’s site, all of the 3310X damaged at Crescent City have been returned to service; there should be one available as a spare. Therefore with the “if you’ve seen one Pine Tree, you’ve seen ‘em all” scenery along the route, it appears a waste to have a Sightseer permanently assigned to AT.

Departed Sanford at about 350P.

First serving of Dinner started promptly at 5PM; the Beef Tournedos were prepared exactly as ordered, all service other than dessert were with metal, glass, and ceramic ware - and the “comp” wine “flowed”. Somehow, I don’t think there are too many Food & Beverage sales in the Lounge car - maybe in the Coach Lounge, but not in Sleeper.

Movies are still shown after Dinner, and evidently since all Lounges have been upgraded with flat screen monitors, they are not about to go away.. But then, that is why I had a Bedroom - and for that matter, an unread Sunday New York Times.

About the only minor incident that took away from the pleasure of the trip occurred when I started to do a walk through the train. So far as I knew, Sleeper passengers have the “run of the train..’ Well, I got kicked out of the Coach diner (courteously but still assertively… “your Lounge is back in the Sleepers, sir‘). Then if that wasn‘t enough the two Conductors were sitting in an empty Coach and said to me “you must be some kind of company spy“. “Well I was with a railroad thirty years ago, but I‘m a paying passenger; here‘s my ticket“. “Well, you sure know how to walk aboard a train, and not too many around here do‘. So what am I going to do, forget how to walk on a train? “Have a good evening , sir“.

Oh well, time for The Times, then bedtime.

Aside from a minor issue requiring a stop to “reboot’ one of the locomotives, all went well.

“Continental Breakfast’ was served for me passing through Richmond; if there is any scenery on the route, it is on the RF&P. Arrival in Lorton was about 950A or 20min off. My auto was about first off; in fact I was talking with some travelers I had met in the Lounge earlier when this guy was teaching his wife about Bridge. I remember saying to her, “just say seven No and it‘s all over‘, of course he said “then I say Double..’ Nice people, so my auto sat out there for some fifteen minutes.

My autos are used to being last off - and I have two “consolation prizes“ in my collection for being such.

Otherwise, the drive home with an overnight in Akron was essentially without incident.

I still hold that along with Acela First, Auto Train is Amtrak’s “best foot forward’, Voyage 20 affirms my “more positives than negatives” overall rating of my Amtrak travel experiences.

So far as I'm concerned, I got value for the $610 total fare paid.

Amtrak's "Finest Hour"??

2012-01-03T17:45:00.002-05:00

Today could well be Amtrak's "Finest Hour' in that never has public acceptance of Amtrak's services been stronger.

I'm inclined to hold this may be it; the closest could well be early '80's when W. Graham Claytor was at the throttle.

During that era, everything was new - Amfleets, Superliners, F-40's, and AEM-7's. While needless long distance routes had been eliminated by the Carter Cuts, other routes such as The Desert Wind and Pioneer were inaugurated (those were taken care of by the Mercer-Clinton Cuts). WGC, with his vast railroad and governmental experience appeared to be a "fit" that Amtrak had never previously enjoyed.

Even though patronage rose under WGC, it was still below the 1974 "gas crisis" levels. Today, Amtrak has left that mark in the rear view mirror.

So despite aging equipment, a fair amount of "horror story' travel experiences, and sky high fares, Amtrak today enjoys public acceptance not seen at any other time in its history. The momentum is there and should there be a Romney administration (if you care to believe as Karl Rove recently wrote in The Wall Street Journal, there will be), they will choose not to disturb what is there (blow some wind, of course) - and by many a measurement, works.

Amtrak Joins "The Revolution"

2011-10-31T11:52:00.014-04:00

Amtrak proclams at their Facebook page, that they soon will be offering Wi-Fi service on more of their trains than not:

Brief passage:

Responding to strong passenger interest, Amtrak is launching today a major expansion of its free AmtrakConnectSM Wi-Fi service to 12 East Coast routes. As a result, trains that carry nearly 60 percent of all Amtrak passengers now have Wi-Fi connections.

Even if I am somewhat astounded, I can't help but note how important 24/7 access to the internet appears to be to some, as with so many infrequent and first time Amtrak travelers the inquiry "is wi-fi available?" made. I have seen consternation on-board; I can't forget how aboard Auto Train this past February, I was sitting at a table in the Lounge for the pre-departure wine tasting and this Mother and teen age daughter sit down on the opposite side. The girl was "at the wailing wall' when she learned that the wi-fi was only good at Lorton and not en-route; she hustles off to their room. The Mother tells me "thank goodness you said something; she has school assignments to prepare and she must have on-line in order to get them done".

To me it sounds as if they were "expecting' that wi-fi would be available.

Personally, I could care less; to be "a day or two" without being on-line is "no biggie'. Most any hotel at which I have occasion to stay during the 21 or so nights a year I'm out of town has a Business Center or Lobby computer; sometimes you have to pay, sometimes not. But I should be prepared to accept that those younger than my age 70+ demographic, it "is a biggie' and is just as expected on-board as is working HVAC and toilet facilities.

Needless to say, the only computer I own is this Dell desktop from which I now write; so I have to ask in all sincerity, is this "need" for wi-fi as prevalent through any societal demographic or is it mostly within a young, computer savvy demographic that frequent blog sites such as here?

I of course note that Amtrak is spending "heap big wampum" to add wi-fi to its fleet. It almost seems to me that Amtrak was slow to "wake up and smell the other guy's coffee brewing' and that if they don't get their own kettle on the fire, they will lose many a potential rider.

A Cash-Free Amtrak Dining Car?

2011-10-02T12:29:00.021-04:00

As likely many of my readers here know, Amtrak is mandated under PRIIA '08 to prepare Performance Improvement Plans for each of its Long Distance routes. They have made, in my opinion, a sincere effort to comply with this provision. The Improvement Plan for all-single level trains other than The Cardinal, which was addressed in another report, has now been released.

I think this Plan, mandated under PRIIA 08, shows that reasonableness and practicality rule. There are no proposals to increase frequencies or to reroute away from existing routes. Advocates who seek an expansion of the Long Distance system will be disappointed.

The point I find most interesting is first introduced within the Report's Executive Summary:
Converting the Lake Shore Limited dining car to a “club-diner” is expectedto improve financial performance and customer service. In this pilot initiative, the dining car will operate as a cashless club-diner in which payments will be made by credit/debit cards; the diner will have extended hours for beverage service; and the lounge car menu will be upgraded to provide coach passengers wanting freshly prepared foods with an alternative to purchasing full meals in the diner. These changes will increase food service options and allow diner staff to serve customers during time now spent accounting for cash transactions. Separately, an analysis of meals served in the dining car was conducted and it was determined that one less food service employee would be required during off-peak periods.

I would think that anything, repeat anything, Amtrak could do to minimize, if not totally eliminate, the amount of cash (currency) 'sloshing" about on-board would benefit all, save the few dishonest employees "subjected to undue temptation' (I've seen that phrase within transcripts of hearings I reviewed while in Labor Relations with a Class I railroad).

The largest problem is that while the report notes that airlines have largely gone to a cash-free environment for in-flight purchases, it is a fairly safe assumption that any adult airline passenger has some kind of electronic transaction card (credit or debit); In fact, I think you need have one in order to purchase an airline ticket. The same can hardly be said of an Amtrak (or Greyhound) passenger - and these passengers have just as much "right' to purchase Food & Beverage on-board as do the others. What I fail to see addressed in the report is how to accommodate these passengers.

I would think some kind of prepaid meal arrangement could be offered definitely for the Diner and could even be implemented, even though the Report does not address such, for Snack Bar purchases. Passengers could purchase a 'gift card' prior to boarding, but I believe Amtrak would be obliged to make a ready refund without penalty of any amounts unused. The downside of this proposal is that impulse buying would be curtailed - and this would be of particular "hurt' for high margin alcoholic beverages.

While it can be easy to envision a cash free environment in a Snack Bar as well, let's address the Diner first, as unit accountability is in place for the Snack Bar inventory. The Diner is where Amtrak property can "grow legs' (much of same with railroad operated Diners as well).

All told, interesting idea that I think is long overdue.

The Report is worth a read - at least the Executive Summary.

The Michigan Debacle

2011-08-06T10:29:00.033-04:00

September TRAINS has a report regarding the deterioration of the Wolverine service. . A recent review of Amtrak's Train Status shows Wolverines arriving Detroit not less than 1'30" late - and this is on top of a 5'30" schedule from CHI over a route that can be driven adhering to posted speeds in about 5 hours. Presumably bus operators, with limited stop service, could "beat the pants off" Amtrak.

The report notes that negotiations are moving forth with the Norfolk Southern to sell what to them is a secondary line (their traffic moves South from Detroit to Toledo thence handled on the ex-NYC East or West as need be) to a public agency. If Michigan is sincere about the promotion of rail passenger service, then there is simply no alternative as the "Feddytrough" is already doing its part by providing three a day without any Local assistance. Of interest, TRAINS further reports that the "same degree of utility' provisions of RPSA '70 and the May 1, 1971 Agreement 'sunset-ted' during 1996 and were not part of the ARAA '97 legislation. Had such provisions been in place and enforceable, NS would be in violation allowing the line to deteriorate to the extent it evidently has.

Judging from the passenger loadings on the trains I rode during an Easter weekend trip to Detroit (for a Detroit Symphony performance), there is business. However, that business seems comprised of young people who could well lack having a roadworthy auto. It seemed that when East of Kalamazoo, the trip could only be described as "tortuous", and NS's actions will only make it more so. In short, once these young people have an auto available or the means to afford an airline ticket (Southwest, folks, is no longer cheap), THEY will hang up the Adios drumhead TO Amtrak. Again I note, the business is there, but somehow I think it is business by default and if those passengers had ready other means, they would be using them. In the Midwest, I believe Amtrak enjoys business by choice, i.e. the passengers have other means such as a roadworthy auto, Chi-Milwaukee and Chi-Springfield. Hopefully 'six a day" and a 4.5hr Chi-Det schedule will give the Wolverines "business by choice".

If NS can serve their major on line shippers such as Kellogg's at Battle Creek by means of an existing North South routing from the NYC Water Level route, then imposing the slow orders is no different than when BNSF imposed same Newton-La Junta - a line redundant to their freight operations beyond accessing on line industries. If Amtrak wants to be competitive in the market, then maintaining the track to efficiently operate passenger trains is their responsibility and not that of NS.

By contrast, the Amtrak owned ROW on that route Porter-Kalamazoo is a railroad worthy of efficiently operating passenger trains. Since the Wolverines are solely Federally funded, I'm not certain how interested Michigan would be in having their additional grant from the ARRA '09 rescissions applied to a Federal service.

Now what likely is paradoxical is that Amtrak is of the "just send us the bill" mindset with regards to maintenance of Newton-Albuquerque that hosts "one a day' and with a road ready to accept a reroute of that train, 3-4 Chief, and possibly, with Wichita and Amarillo being on line, generate more traffic than at present. Even though Michigan is not supporting the Wolverines, Amtrak may hold that some, if not most, of the ARRA grant can be applied to this route.

However, even though I want to go and support the Detroit Symphony next season; be it assured I'll be getting there by auto or air. The ride last April was simply "torturous' - and that was before many of the existing speed restrictions were imposed. Somehow the thought of poking along at 25 (there was enough of that as was for the Easter trip) when my buggy could be rolling along at a lawful 70) and now that I know the "lay of the land" I'm not concerned about M&M, the rap artist and Chrysler pitchman, sidling up to me and say "hey dude, we don't drive that Asian junk around here'.

All told, until the matter of track deterioriation can be addressed, either by Amtrak committing funds for proper maintenance, I hold that the best option for Amtrak is to annul all Wolverine trains East of Battle Creek and provide connecting bus transportation onward, as the existing on-time performance is quite simply "unacceptable'

disclaimer; author holds long position NSC

Corridor to Private Enterprise - Mica

2011-05-27T09:08:00.002-04:00

Rep John Mica (R-FL7), who again holds the chairmanship of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, has dusted off the Bush administration proposal to separate the NECorridor from the rest of Amtrak - and of course stimulate private investment for both competitive services and infrastructure upgrades;

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/house-gop-proposal-would-privatize-high-speed-rail-along-amtraks-northeast-corridor/2011/05/26/AGBEZKCH_story.html

Brief passage:

House Republicans want to dismantle Amtrak, giving private investors the task of building and operating high-speed rail service between Washington and Boston.

They believe that an infusion of private capital would enable the system to be built in 10 years, a third of the time that Amtrak projects for completion of the $117 billion project, and that service would improve if operations were put in the hands of a for-profit company.

At a hearing Thursday, House Transportation Committee Chairman John L. Mica (R-Fla.) condemned Amtrak as having “one of the most dismal records on earth for any rail service, particularly in the Northeast Corridor.”

His plan to privatize the operations in the densely populated region from Washington to Boston was pounced on by Democrats and unions who represent Amtrak employees.

“The railroads didn’t want to run a railroad,” said Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), pointing to the demise of private passenger rail service more than 40 years ago. “They went bankrupt on passenger service. They begged the government to take it.”

This material appears at the Committee's site:

http://transportation.house.gov/News/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1280

This proposal would clearly represent a divide and conquer strategy. If a lawmaker wants to vote on the one proven absolutely essential service Amtrak operates, he can answer to his constituents for that.

If however, the lawmaker choses to vote for maintenance of the Long Distance system, he can also do that and answer to his constituents accordingly and independent of his vote regarding the Northeast Corridor. Any such proposal if enacted (and it won't be during the Obama administration) would neutralize the contention that the LD's represent the catalyst to have Federal level funding for the regional Corridor.

It could also mean the Long Distance trains would be "in jeopardy".

As previously noted, this is simply a "dust off' of a proposal made during the Bush administration - and during Rep. Mica's earlier chairmanship of the Committee. It is probably nothing more than a 'this Committee is now under new management; and we now again believe in strong Republican values of free enterprise, freedom of choice........(blahblah).

I would think this is a no start until there is again a Republican in the White House; and now that their possible '12 contenders are looking for the Exit signs and "Sarah the Sacrificial Lamb' is moving towards center stage, that likely will not be anytime sooner than '17.

Finally, if there is any interest in private sector investment, assuming risk to reap a potential reward, for rail passenger service, how about "baby steps first' - 40 additional Acela Coaches with two of such being aded to the existing 20 train sets.

Happy Fortieth - Amtrak!!!

2011-05-01T07:32:00.003-04:00

Even though much of your Long Distance operations are presently disrupted through no fault of yours or your Politico "overseers", make the best of the day. Lest we forget, you have clearly outlived your life expectancy anyone within the industry (including management lesserlings like myself) gave you by now more than thirty years.

Of interest here is a related topic from an enthusiast site Railroad Net:

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=155&t=1203

From The New York Times:

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive/pdf?res=F10913FF345913748DDDAB0894DD405B818BF1D3

The Big Lie

2011-02-05T11:39:00.005-05:00

While of course hardly either the first or last time a government will falsely represent its actions or intentions to those who are governed, I'd like to address how intentions were set aside regarding Amtrak Long Distance (LD) routes.

First, allow me to note that, although hardly some kind of avid railfan hobbyist, I enjoy riding trains. In fact, it seems as if I go a year without a "ride for real", i.e.somewhere to go and a Long Distance train is convenient, I'm out taking a joyride, i.e. the only reason I'm traveling is to ride a train.

But simply because I enjoy riding trains is not reason for me to join an advocacy group to seek more of such, or for that matter even maintaining the existing system. Even if in certainty there isn't any publicly circulated written material to support such, the strong inference remains that the Class I industry (OK let's get the disclaimer out of the way: author holds long positions in KSU, NSC, UNP), in which I was employed on A-Day or May 1, 1971, was victim of "the Big Lie'. That lie was simply the industry was told that within five years, 1976, the Long Distance trains would start to be discontinued in an orderly fashion (New Orleans-LA Sunset and New York-Chicago, but tri-weekly and via circuitous routing, Cardinal would be first; Lake Shore (NY-Chicago via most direct route and six major population centers along such) would likely be last. That plan actually started with the 1979 "Carter Cuts" that took care of the Chicago-Miami Floridian and the New York-Kansas City National Limited, but as endemic with any social program, which is what I believe Amtrak LD to be, politics get in the way.

That was as far as what the Class I's were promised got.

The Clinton-era "Mercer Cuts" only addressed the "political" routes (Chicago-Portland Pioneer and Chicago-LA Desert Wind) added during the '80's when powerful Congressmembers thought a train was a means to "bring home the bacon" to the folk that marked the ballots.

The Bush 43 administration was able to do some minor "pruning" namely the Three Rivers (a secondary NY-Chicago route with only Pittsburgh as an intermediate population center) and the Orlando-New Orleans Sunset East, whose political supporters simply had "moved on".

Somehow, even though the incumbent Obama administration is moving more "centrist" during the second half of the first term (sound like Clinton, anyone?), I think Amtrak cuts surely to be proposed by the Republicans (especially their populist fringe movement; AKA the Tea Party) may meet "resistance" from 1600 Penn; a "weapon" is that LD ridership is on the rise.

But the fact remains that LD's are costly to operate and cannot command the fare level (in Coach at least) that can the Corridors - especially the Northeast. What is often overlooked is the indirect cost to the Class I railroad industry arising from the interference that any train operating on a schedule has upon an industry that no longer conducts its operations on a "boulevard of steel" but rather that of an "industrial pipeline". Imagine how a train operating at 79mph and on a strict schedule (and people aboard who can pick up the cell phone and say "Hi Congressman") will affect freights that operate between 45 and 60mph. They will simply have to take sidings to allow this 79mph object to get through, and in the case of an Amtrak train, is "not doing very much' to contribute to that investor owned railroad's bottom line.

So put it all together and had an industry that be assured was far more "desperate" than it is today had this magic wand waved in front of them that you will be relieved of the costs of operating these trains that have been imposed upon you by regulatory fiat and they will start to be gone in five years, but in fact turned out to be a "buddy, you're stuck; sorry 'bout that" situation, I think no Class I would have signed up. Accordingly there would have been no Amtrak, and the LD's would have come off quite quickly after the statutory (under RPSA '70) five year moratorium expired, if not sooner. Any that somehow survived would have been immediately gone once the industry was deregulated from rates and services under the 1980 Staggers Act.

A Modest Proposal - Taxation of Railroad Property

2011-01-31T08:50:00.004-05:00

Over at a respected railroad discussion site, Railroad Net, a member has set forth "a modest proposal" (pardon me, Mr. Swift) regarding taxation of railroad property that host passenger train service. Here is the proposal:

From my article "Amtrak in the New Century" on Railroad.net, Given that the Federal government continues to fund and operate [Amtrak] trains, in exchange for access and service guarantees by the private railroads, the rights of way Amtrak operates on should be exempt from local and state property taxes.

This proposal forms the core of my argument for providing a more efficient means of ensuring high quality rail passenger service in the United States for the next 100 years. It also addresses historic problems with rail passenger service in the United States that Mr. David P. Morgan wrote about in April 1959's iconic issue of Trains. If the federal government is going to pay to operate trains 'in the public interest' along these corridors I do not see why state and local governments should be able to 'double-dip' and receive both federally funded train service and property taxes from privately owned rights of way. In my view this situation is akin to allowing the taxation of properties owned by the United States Postal Service.

http://www.railroad.net/articles/columns/guest/Amtrak_New_Century.php

There is much merit to this proposal. The Local taxing jurisdictions through which Amtrak trains pass, be they Corridor or LD, do receive some benefit, even if I personally hold quite small in the case of the LD's, for having those trains there. It would also provide additional remuneration to the Class I's that host Amtrak trains. While the amount and basis of such remuneration is contained within a bi-lateral contract that is not subject to public disclosure, it is reportedly in the bargain basement range - especially considering the potential interference with freight operations these trains can represent.

A problem, however, would arise with jurisdictions through which trains operate but do not make any station stops. For example, Amtrak trains #3-4, Southwest Chief, operate non-stop between Newton and Dodge City KA - 120 miles. Who knows how many local taxing jurisdictions that comprises - and some of course will be quick to cry foul. By that line of thought, only jurisdictions in which the station stops were located should have to participate in the abatement - and then one must ask how much benefit would inure to the Class I.

Even though real property taxation was an area in which my railroad career never touched, I do know that railroad property is quickly allocated into two categories - namely Operating Property and Non-Operating Property. Non-operating Property, or that property not being addressed here, is taxed ad-valorem, or in just the same manner as is your home. However, Operating Property is taxed by means of a formula which not only encompasses assessed value, but also the revenue that a railroad attains from such. This simply means "lots of trains, lots of taxes". and hence making the abatement more valuable to the Class I, but, on the flip side, more costly to the affected Local jurisdiction. If the affected jurisdictions, through the auspice of a citizen residing within such, petitioned the Federal government for relief (namely to have their representatives initiate legislation to have Federal funding meet the revenue shortfall), then we come down to the 'chicken-egg' analogy of tax incentives simply represent an appropriation. Therefore, why the subterfuge; simply increase Amtrak's appropriation and have such "earmarked' as additional contract payments to the Class I hosts.

Finally, I'm sure that anyone here who actively railfans has seen a railroad siding on which one or two lone boxcars sit. The reason for such is with a track remaining in place and the cars periodically switched out, that particular parcel remains Operating Property - and property that is generating no revenue. The most visible case of that was to anyone visiting the observation deck at Sears (now Willis) Tower in Chicago. After the B&OCT (CSX) abandoned (well before A-Day) Grand Central Station, several boxcars would be placed on a remaining track near the head house - and even after that was torn down.

The Party's Over

2011-01-07T16:10:00.006-05:00

As 2010 drew to a close, there is much to suggest "the party's over" for passenger rail. While the "$8B for HSR" provisions enacted under ARRA '09 (Stimulus) have awarded funds that will benefit existing routes, such as the "incremental" track improvements on the Chicago-St Louis route and restoring dormant rights-of-way accessing Chicago to minimize freight traffic interference, all too many have been seen for what they are - needless "pork" for largely needless passenger train routes. Two states, Wisconsin and Ohio, awarded funds under the legislation have rescinded the funding and recognize that the funding will simply be applied to rail passenger projects elsewhere. A third state, Iowa, appears on the brink of making a like rescission.

But the biggest of all rescissions did not involve Amtrak or intercity service; that of course was the cancellation of new tunnels under the Hudson River to be used solely by New Jersey Transit. The additional capacity to operate passenger trains from New Jersey directly into Manhattan is clearly needed and would make New Jersey a more attractive locale in which high income persons holding jobs in Manhattan would want to reside. But a conservative Republican Governor has said "no dice" and withdrew the portion of funding controlled by the State. While the project may someday be revived, possibly after this Governor has moved from one White House named Drumthwacket to another with a street address of 1600, it is now "requisceat in pace' - need for such totally notwithstanding.

However, all told, Amtrak has had a good run during the first two years of the Obama administration, but with the Republicans having a majority in the House of Representatives and are preaching repeal of any agenda having Obama's name on it, somebody has pulled the emergency brake cord. A legislative target will be a rescission of any unexpended funds under ARRA '09 (Stimulus) - and much of that funding represents the passenger rail provisions, i.e. the "$8B for HSR".

But even if "the party's over", Amtrak has "done OK" during these past two years. Additional frequencies have been added to four routes, new electric locomotives and new passenger cars for LD trains, as well as Talgo equipment for two Corridor routes, have been ordered.

While of course to the railfan community, where there's never enough - especially Long Distance trains - there is disappointment that a balance of power, "Plural Democracy", has returned to Washington. But with the growing public acceptance of both Corridor and Long Distance services, I think it safe to say that Amtrak's existing route structure is here to stay.

Eugene Kerik Garfield 1936-2010

2010-12-30T08:31:00.002-05:00

I'm very saddened to learn of Gene Garfield's passing:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/business/30garfield.html

Brief passage:
----------------------------------------------------------
Eugene K. Garfield, who originated the American Auto-Train, ferrying passengers and their cars between Virginia and Florida, saving people the effort of driving to their winter vacation homes and the expense of renting cars when they got there, died in Hollywood, Fla., on Sunday. He was 74.

The cause was esophageal cancer, said Brenda Brush, his companion.

In the 1960s, Mr. Garfield worked in Washington in the administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson as assistant to the secretary of transportation, Alan S. Boyd, and as an assistant to the president’s chief of staff, W. Marvin Watson.

During his time there, the Transportation Department conducted a feasibility study for an auto-ferry service between the Northeast and Florida, and concluded that the service would be potentially profitable and best left for the private sector.

Shortly thereafter, when President Johnson declined to run for re-election in 1968, Mr. Garfield returned to the private sector.

“He came home one day and said to my mom, ‘I’m going to run a train,’ ” his daughter, Pamela Garfield, said in an interview.
---------------------------------------------------
Likely Gene Garfield was the last passenger rail entrepreneur (as distinct from administrator) to walk this planet and develop a concept attractive to private capital. Although his business enterprise the Auto Train Corporation failed, it established that there could be strong public acceptance for such in the "right" market. AT established the demand was there for a journey that could be made overnight, but yet, after committing private capital, found that for longer journeys, e.g. Sanford-Louisville, the demand simply was not. That is why I have consistently held "overnight is enough' and have dismissed the longer routes proposed at various passenger rail enthusiast sites.

Although Amtrak paid the Estate fair market for the facilities and equipment acquired when the service was resumed during 1983, what else they got was simply like the Master Card ads, "Priceless'. For $1.00, Amtrak reportedly acquired all the Goodwill and institutional expertise that Mr. Garfield instilled within his organization. Such expertise included how to efficiently load and unload vehicles (is it any accident that the ramps at Lorton face Northward and those at Sanford face South enabling vehicles to be handled Roll On-Roll Off?), what to tell passengers and what NOT to tell passengers (no estimates whatever when you'll get your vehicle back, even though they could tell you give or take five minutes).

I haven't traveled AT since 2009 ("never went down" this year), but should there be a journey next year, my thoughts will to turn to the memory of 'the man who made it happen".

A Post Election Amtrak

2010-11-03T07:50:00.005-04:00

While there is at least one rail forum at which I participate and at which the owner would really prefer "no politics', I hold it is simply not possible to discuss passenger rail affairs without recognition of their political environment. So, with this site owner's acceptance and if I may, let's address the 2010 Mid Term Elections impact on Amtrak.

While not for one minute do I think the new Republican House majority will be chanting "kill Amtrak,,,kill Amtrak" (and even after the election rhetoric dies down, I doubt they will be chanting "kill Obamacare...kill Obamacare"), I think we are looking at an Amtrak that "did OK" during the 111th Congress but now it is time to be thankful "you got what you got when you got it". It appears that regarding the major equipment orders, the 70 Siemens electric locomotives are fully funded, but the 130 single level cars from the Spanish concern are not. While I have fair confidence these cars will be delivered, somewhere at 100 Penn "wind will blow' regarding the 'waste' these cars (for LD's) represent.

While the continued and growing public acceptance of both Amtrak's Corridor and LD services are certainly a plus, sometime during the 112th Congress, the call will move forth for some "pruning'. To what extent can (or will) a greatly neutered 1600 Penn come to the rescue, I know not.

One thing of which I am certain is that at such time railroad traffic returns to 2007 levels (and it will; I've placed my bets on that) and if some proposal for needless service is moving forth, i.e. some LD route, the "confiscation' position may be more than just an off hand comment a journalist reportedly heard, but rather a stated industry position promulgated through the AAR. Again, lest we forget the UP did not reportedly spend $2B for capacity expansion just so they could handle more Amtrak trains over the Sunset route - and if they did, my shares will be voted to 'throw the bums out".

New Amtrak Locomotives - Get 'em While the Going's Good

2010-10-29T08:25:00.005-04:00

Amtrak has now awarded a contract for 70 new electric locomotives to the German concern, Siemens AG.

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobkey=id&blobwhere=1249216633199&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobheadername1=Content-disposition&blobheadervalue1=attachment;filename=Amtrak_ATK-10-141a_Amtrak_Electric_Locos_Release.pdf

Obviously, Amtrak is concerned that there will be a few "Restricting" signals on the Right of Way come November 3 (or later; depending on how many contested elections will have to be addressed).

Finally, begging the reader's and site owner's pardon, allow me to "go political". I can well recall 1960 Kennedy-Nixon; at that time that one 'was as close as they came" and along with suggestions of vote fraud (reportedly here in Chicago, a few corpses made like Lazarus and found their way to the polls). The loser, Nixon, when it was suggested the results be challenged, simply said "no, for the good of the country".

Doubt if "post Gorebushoff", or otherwise Bush v. Gore , 531 U.S. 98 (2000), such will occur again.

Anti-Passenger Rail Sentiment Rising?

2010-10-07T09:49:00.017-04:00

It would appear that the "roll" on which passenger rail has riding since President Obama was inaugurated is looking at anything between a Slow Approach and a Stop Signal, and that passenger train advocates should be glad they got what they got while they got it.

Likely, the "heady" days of the early Obama administration should have been recognized for what they were - passenger rail and any other socio-economic programs as well. Sure we had both the President and Vice President Elects coming to town on the train (won't see that happen again, as the President and anyone in the first five line-of-succession slots simply do not travel together), we had some 'ride Amtrak' words from Vice-President Biden within weeks of taking office, and of course the "$8B for HSR" provisions within the ARRA'09 (Stimulus) legislation.

Tangible progress has taken the form of awarded contracts of 130 single-level cars for Amtrak Long Distance trains and equipment orders for Talgo equipment by rail passenger agencies within Wisconsin and Oregon as well as bi-level cars by California.

New trains have been established within Virginia funded at Local level; many Amfleet cars that had been stored are being returned to service both to support the new Virginia trains as well as to handle increased ridership over existing routes.

But there are clearly Restricting Signals ahead.

First the political landscape has drastically changed. No doubt many of the young thought the new President could "walk on water' (I myself was youthful during the Kennedy administration; the same euphoria existed back then); they have now fast found he will sink just as fast as would anyone else. The opposition comprised of Conservatives and Populists, all seeking office under the banner of Republicans, will make considerable inroads to the existing one party domination of Congress, and the Administration will have to quickly learn how to govern within a "plural Democracy". Several pundits have already suggested that the President will not seek re-election come 2012.

Today we find that, while Amtrak continues to enjoy ever increasing ridership (up 5.7% during FY10), there have been missteps, although not necessarily the fault of Amtrak management and even passenger train advocates. One such misstep is the "$8B for HSR", which simply is not sufficient funds to have anything meaningful built on a National level. While real construction is moving forth in Florida, that construction could well end up as additional lanes on I-4 between Orlando and Tampa. Kansas with an HSR grant; sure it will feed consultants, but if any new service is to result, it will simply represent a reinstated LD train, namely the Lone Star that was discontinued during 1979. The $8B should have been directed to improvements along the Northeast Corridor with possibly some allocated towards "higher speed' rail in established Southern California markets. That funding would go a long way towards projects such as a new tunnel through Baltimore - and with the design work complete, it certainly would have met the President's criteria of "shovel ready".

Now the mid-term Elections are upon us - and while, as underdog politicians have a way of saying, "the only poll that counts is the poll that occurs on November 2nd", it appears that the Democrats will no longer enjoy the commanding majorities they hold in both Houses of Congress, and could well end up loosing control of both. Of the two, the House of Representatives appears most vulnerable.

The High Green Amtrak and its backers have enjoyed will soon be over. This is not to say there will a groundswell, even if only rhetoric, to "kill Amtrak', but rather there will be return to the Bush (43) years of "it's there".

Now there will be post mortems regarding to what extent Amtrak squandered the past two years of 'free flow funding'. Obviously, I personally hold the "$8B for HSR" was a squander and I hold concerns that it will represent a boondoggle, hardly of size to bring down the entire US economy, but of size enough to be "Amtrak's Bridge to Nowhere".

I further hold that if there were to be 130 units of new rolling stock ordered, those 130 units should have been 90 Coaches and Food Service cars for Northeast Corridor service and 40 additional Coaches to expand each Acela trainset to eight cars. The Long Distance trains, which, so far as this author is concerned, are simply an appendage of political expediency would just have to wait for another day to be re-equipped; and if the Bush era vis-a-vis Amtrak is to be repeated over the remainder of Obama's term, something, somewhere, will likely be "pruned' with a good guess being The Cardinal or the Silver Meteor (the Meteor could be discontinued without the 180 Day Notice under ARAA '97 - the only Long Distance train so "vulnerable').

While the Talgo trains for service in the Chicago-Milwaukee Corridor are simply the 'wrong trains for the wrong job', additions to the Pacific Northwest fleet are $$$ well spent. Released Amfleet cars could well serve any new Locally funded routes presently under consideration. If the initiative for new and expanded service in the Midwest is to go anywhere, bi-Level cars patterned after those presently in service on California routes are what's needed.

So all I can hope is that at Amtrak Headquarters, they are readying for stormy weather. Intercity rail passenger service is here to stay and the ridership increases, even through a severe recession, have shown there is public acceptance for such. As a result, a "rerun" of the Reagan administration battle cry of "kill it" is unlikely. The challenge will be to hold on to the gains of "Obama 1.0" and hope that the days of funding favor will someday return.

The March 6 "Town Hall Meeting"

2010-03-07T11:28:00.004-05:00

Likely, most readers of this blog are aware that TRAINS magazine sponsored a conference this past Saturday which was led by senior Amtrak officials, including CEO Joseph Boardman. The conference was held at the Merchandise Mart Conference Center in Chicago. Attendance was limited to 275 participants mostly drawn from the rail hobbyist (railfan) community; pre-approved questions were accepted by the Amtrak panel.

I did not attend; I'm simply not that much of a railfan anymore, and my personal views regarding the role of 21st century intercioty passenger service likely would be in conflict with the majority of attendees. However, I have reviewed postings made at discussion forums by members who have represented to be in attendance. Here are two "Brief passages" from such postings:

Emmett Fremaux [VP Marketing/Product Management] is up.

LD trains are a fundamental part of Amtrak's mission, and are not going away any time soon. However there are zero plans for any new trains. Zero. Not happening. In the past few years, LD service has been improving with all time highs in ridership, revenue, OTP, and customer satisfaction.

I think that the candor (safe assumption such was carefully scripted) of an Amtrak senior manager in front of an audience at which all too many would love to have shouted out 'when will we get our ----- (fill in the blank; Pioneer, Sunset East, whatever)...?' was indeed refreshing. It represented public admission of what I have contended since A-Day (anyone with grounding in railroad industry affairs knew all that "for profit; no funding' bluster was just that) that the LD system simply represents political expediency from a Federal agency that needs a legislative majority in order to ensure its continued funding. However, it is pleasing to note that it is management's position that we will give as good a travel experience as can be reasonably expected within our budgetary constraints. Very simply, this immediately translates to that any further cutbacks in the quality of the on-board Dining experience appear unlikely.

Another attendee reporting at a different site made the following observation on the same remark;

Amtrak is basically saying it won't launch any new trains / services outside NEC without state funding in place, which could lead to fairness discussions later on where some areas, like California provide the bulk of train funding, but NEC states get essentially a free ride.

There is no question that there is unfairness noted within this quotation. California, however "broke' they may be, first established and now continues to Locally fund a comprehensive and well planned system, i.e. they have held the 'where's our train' interests in Portola and Oroville in check, that enjoys reasonable public acceptance. Same of course applies to lesser extents with other localities. Yet, the nine states comprising the NECorridor as well as New York's Empire Service and Michigan's Wolverine Service all get free rides compliments of the Feddytill.

While Michigan is obviously a "Debit State', all Corridor states save Rhode Island and Maryland (Pennsylvania a virtual "break even'), are "Donor States", i.e. they put more in the the Feddytill from taxes paid by persons, live and fictitious, residing within those states than is taken out in the form of Federally funded programs (including Amtrak) benefiting those residents.

"Life isn't fair', but didn't you learn that, uh say, about when you were five years old?

Section 4.4 May 1, 1971 Agreement - Barrister's Field Day

2010-02-16T07:41:00.002-05:00

At this topic, I would like to address a provision within the May 1, 1971 Agreement between Amtrak and the Railroads that likely caused more contention than any with which I was familiar. As likely has been surmised, I "worked with this stuff for a living' during 'Early Amtrak". The provision is simply titled Section 4.4 Jointly Owned Terminals and Joint Trackage.

First let us address that a Terminal Company is a railroad that is owned by one or more line-haul railroads to provide switching and industrial delivery services to the using (not necessarily an owner) roads in a non-competitive manner. In contemporary railroading, the largest coming to mind include the Belt Railway of Chicago, Indiana Harbor Belt, Kansas City Terminal Railway, and Terminal Railroad Association St Louis. Possibly, Conrail Shared Assets is organized as a Terminal Company, but since that was formed long after I had left the industry, I'll defer to others regarding that point.

An interesting facet of Terminal companies is that they keep books in accordance with (now) Surface Transportation Board rules of accounting in such a manner that the 'bottom line, i.e. Net Income is $0. All expenses are allocated to the using roads in accordance with the company's agreement amongst the roads regarding such and revenues are allocated amongst same (usually the owning roads, as distinct from any non-owning roads known as tenants, get a little 'favoritism" with regards to revenues - especially those generated from non-rail sources).

Now to address passenger Terminal companies. and as noted above gave rise to one of the most "hot button' issues of the Agreement and surely kept Amtrak lawyers (in fact I know so), both in-house and outside counsel, quite busy. This provision allowed railroads to pass the entire cost, including the trappings of a well-embedded bureaucracy, to Amtrak - even where there was only 'one a day' such as at Cincinnati. This was likely a confluence of two parties, namely one anxious to stop running train and the other equally anxious to start running trains, as well as signed by persons who did not understand the ramifications of what they were signing.

Suffice to say, likely long about A-Day+1, both sides knew that "something had to be done' - that Amtrak would 'see 'em at Foley Square' and that the roads knew these provisions were "unconscionable' to such extent that they were unenforceable. While I have no substantiation for such, I once "heard' that Santa Fe darned near stayed out of Amtrak, not for the usual bluster and bravado fans like th believe that 'we can run 'em better that they ever can', but rather because they were concerned about costs to access CUS on one hand that Amtrak would find unconscionable and not pay regardless of what a piece of paper said vs. being tho only user left at Dearborn (Wabash had already built a separate shack for the Orland Park commuter train) and by default responsible for all costs of that facility. Amtrak of course made arrangements to vacate these terminals as rapidly as possible with the worst of worst, Cincinnati, being the first. That was followed by Richmond, Jacksonville, Kansas City, St Louis, and Minneapolis. Amtrak lawyers 'saw 'em all at Foley Square' as well.

Those terminals, namely Boston, Washington, and Chicago, having a high volume of traffic, were comparative non-issues as there were enough trains over which the costs of such could be allocated. But Amtrak solved the matter, and I think wisely, by acquiring those Terminal companies. While Boston has been dissolved, the other two remain as wholly owned Amtrak subsidiaries.

Finally, note I have avoided any discussion of Los Angeles; this is simply because I do not know of how any disputes regarding this property were handled. While of course well used for railroad and mass transit today, and the property owned by a real estate concern, ProLogis/Catellus, on A-Day there were were only "three and a half a day".

Thoughts - Amtrak at Decade's End

2009-12-31T08:30:00.005-05:00

While likely prepared prior to the closest shave in air travel security involving a US flagged aircraft during the past eight years, this quite positive article appears virtually "the day after' in The New York Times' Business Travel section and presents Amtrak corridor services as a viable business travel option;

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/business/29amtrak.html

Brief passage:

There are also signs that passengers are increasingly embracing trains. The number of Amtrak riders has increased steadily since 2001, surpassing 28 million in 2008, though a dip is expected this year because of the recession.

Amtrak estimates it carried 63 percent of travelers flying or taking the train between New York and Washington in 2008 — an increase from 37 percent before the Acela service began in 2000. Amtrak’s market share between New York and Boston was 49 percent last year, compared with 20 percent before Acela.

Amtrak hopes to push those numbers even higher, Mr. Lim said. The railroad plans to introduce free Wi-Fi service on all Acela trains in the second quarter of 2010, then add Northeast regional trains later in the year.

The ability to work on the train is one of the reasons Brian Silengo says he rides Amtrak for his weekly trips to New York from Washington. He uses a cellular wireless card to get Internet access, but as a sales executive for an interactive marketing agency, he mostly values the Acela trains’ reliability.

“They’re very good at getting you where you need to be on time,” he said

I believe there is finally recognition within the "Wonderland on the Potomac" that intercity rail passenger service is here to stay and that Corridor services are what 21st Century intercity passenger railroading is all about. Such services are definitely on the "upswing'. Acela service has been expanded to such extent that 17 of the 20 sets are now used to protect scheduled service, up from only 13 of the 20 within recent memory. All amenities of Acela First Class have been maintained. As noted by The Times, markets such as NY-WAS that had previously been ceded to air transport are again viable. I'm quite convinced that an order for new Corridor Regional Coaches will soon be on the books. There may even be additional Acela cars added to the existing sets.

Here in the Midwest, the additional trains added as part of the 2006 Illinois initiative are "doing well'. I was skeptical at first as it appeared an unpopular (some also say incompetent; all now say disgraced) Governor was buying a few votes - I'm very pleased to note that skepticism on my part has proven unfounded.

But now to address the other side of the business - the Long Distance trains. There is only one reason LD trains have existed in the Amtrak era - and that is political expediency. "No Yuma no moolah" is simply how the game is played. The Incorporators of Amtrak, despite all the "for profit" bluster' knew the enterprise was either going to be funded or it was kaput. Those of us in the industry knew it as well. Those in Congress learned it about a year later.

Amtrak was "sold' to the industry on the strength that there would be immediate relief from passenger train deficits, but that in about five years the LD system would be gone.

Obviously that little timeline proved fallacious. While I was never "privy" to the reaction "on the Eighth Floor (Mahogany Row)" at my road, I'm certain when it was learned that Amtrak had ordered the Superliners, the reaction was "grief, we're going to be stuck with these trains for another thirty years".

But let us consider that Amtrak LD during the Bush administration has survived relatively unscathed when compared with the preceding Clinton. During Bush, only the Sunset East and the Three Rivers were lost. Under Clinton (the so-called Mercer Cuts) all service over the "traditional UP", namely Pioneer and Desert Wind, was lost. To date, the Obama administration is showing that they encourage new services, but that those services will be short distance in nature and scope - and will be substantially funded at Local level.

So long as Amtrak gets its Federal appropriation, which in large part goes towards NECorridor infrastructure, then the level of LD service is quite adequate. But even though "I ride 'em' when convenient and come away with "more positive than negatives" travel experiences, I'm at a loss, and have been so throughout the entire Amtrak era, to see how LD trains can hold relevance to 21st century passenger rail.

Seniors Ride "For Half" Most Anywhere - FREE in Chicago

2009-12-11T10:10:00.005-05:00

Impeached and removed from office, former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich certainly left 'we the people' of this politically disgraced state a piece of baggage. During March 2008, as part of mass transit appropriation legislation, he insisted with the power of a veto, that any person age 65 and over, be allowed to ride any services, namely METRA Rail, PACE (suburban) Bus, and CTA, offered by the Regional Transportation Authority without charge.

Allow me to editorialize; even though I am a holder of a Seniors Ride Free pass (age 68; reside in DuPage County), I would like to see this program repealed at first opportunity.

In a recent editorial, the Chicago Tribune is "echoing" the thoughts I hold:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opin ... 6420.story

Brief passage:

A gratifying number of seniors recognized the gesture for what it was: irresponsible pandering. To this day, the Tribune gets a letter or two every week from retirees who say they didn't ask for the freebie and don't need it. Many of them cheerfully admit they're taking advantage of the perk anyway. Who wouldn't? Only a fool would walk into a restaurant that advertised FREE LUNCH and say, "No, thanks, I'd rather pay for mine." Nearly 400,000 seniors have been issued cards that qualify them for free rides.

In its present form, this program quite simply is discriminatory and further has presented the RTA with an unfunded $30M annual revenue shortfall. Suffice to say, the RTA is "broke', but what else is new.

First the program is available only to residents of the six counties served by the RTA. If you are from out of area but otherwise eligible, "sorry Charlie"; there are no "litmus' tests to establish need. As noted, I reside in "the land of the Burlingtons"; what likelihood is there that I or too many of my fellow DuPage residents have "need"?

If we the people of Illinois desire to offer free mass transit to certain Illinois residents, we have an existing program called Circuit Breaker. In order to be a participant in this program, a resident must establish "need". The guideline is age 65 and somewhere around $20K or less of annual income and financial assets of $5000 or less. Existing benefits range anywhere from a free Driver's License to free pharmaceuticals. Free mass transit regardless of where one resides within the State could be incorporated as a benefit of the program.

If such were enacted, a needy person residing in, say, Decatur or East St Louis would benefit.

In closing, I admit I am a passholder; I simply cannot look a gift horse in the mouth. But if the existing program is to be repealed, I'll surrender my pass without any hard feelings whatever, in fact it will be with pleasure.

Amtrak Route Performance Misstated - Pew Charitable Trust

2009-11-13T15:45:00.002-05:00

Here is the report from Subsidyscope; a program funded by the Pew Charitable Trust.

http://subsidyscope.com/transportation/amtrak

The issue that Subsidyscope addresses is that Amtrak, in its unaudited Monthly Performance Reports, is misstating the financial results (mostly losses that result in understatements) of each route in that they do not charge Depreciation as a cost of providing service over a route.

OK lets take a closer look at Depreciation and especially within Amtrak since on one hand it is a private enterprise and on the other a government agency.

To start, let's consider the definition of an Asset. Such is a piece of property, tangible or intangible notwithstanding, from which economic benefit will be derived over current and future accounting periods. Depreciation is a systematic method over which the cost, i.e. the expenditure of an asset incurred in a current period and from which economic benefit will be realized over a number of future accounting periods, is allocated to both the current and future periods.

Additionally, and this is important in the case of Amtrak and many another transportation company that use leased equipment, Depreciation also represents a restatement of lease obligations so that the cost of the economic benefit is better expressed over the asset's economic life as distinct from the timing of the lease payments. This is known as a Capitalized Lease and is required under existing accounting Literature so that a fair comparison may be made between enterprises that purchase their assets and those that acquire such by lease.

Virtually all of Amtrak's locomotives and rolling stock is leased.

Amtrak's audited Financial Statements of course recognize Depreciation as an expense; there is further recognition of Depreciation within the unaudited Monthly Performance Reports. However, it appears that no allocation of Depreciation is made to the routes resulting in an, as Pew sees it and for that matter the GAO, a misstatement of a Route's financial performance. Rather, Amtrak considers Depreciation be be an expense no different than that of the Bureaucracy - 60 Mass and elsewhere.

To restate route performance with depreciation of equipment assigned to such as an expense element would make for inconsistent reporting - and Consistency is a standard of financial statements considered by the Accounting profession. Additionally, we have to consider a significant difference between Government Accounting and that of private enterprises. In government, Depreciation is not recognized. For example if the Navy builds an aircraft carrier which takes five years to build and will see active service for thirty, the costs incurred each year it is being built will be reported during the construction period. After that, it sails the Ocean Blue and going "pop pop" after the Bad Guys, without any Depreciation. On one hand Amtrak is government so why have Depreciation and especially why allocate over each route? But on the other, Amtrak's "Depreciation" is mostly represented by lease payments so it IS 'cash out the door'. But on the other hand, Amtrak is private enterprise (or so they tell me ); therefore Depreciation should be recognized.

Wish I knew the answers - all I can do is set forth the parameters.

Positive Train Control and Amtrak

2009-10-30T15:28:00.002-04:00

It appears that the first impact of the provisions within the Rail Safety Act of 2008 are coming home to Amtrak, as TRAINS Newswire reports that the BNSF has "put out feelers" to Amtrak regarding reroute of the Southwest Chief via their main "Transcon" line that last saw a scheduled passenger train on A-Day. Such a reroute would again provide Amarillo TX and Wichita KS with service but would leave Raton NM and the Boy Scout's Philmont Ranch as well as Albuquerque without. While this proposal represents a "treading of old sod", this is the first mention of such since enactment of RSIA '08 and its 2015 target date for installation of Positive Train control over all lines that handle passenger trains, as well as on lines that handle any appreciable volume of Hazardous Material.

Here is straight from the Act:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 20157. Implementation of positive train control systems

‘(a) In General-

‘(1) PLAN REQUIRED- Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, each Class I railroad carrier and each entity providing regularly scheduled intercity or commuter rail passenger transportation shall develop and submit to the Secretary of Transportation a plan for implementing a positive train control system by December 31, 2015, governing operations on--

‘(A) its main line over which intercity rail passenger transportation or commuter rail passenger transportation, as defined in section 24102, is regularly provided;

‘(B) its main line over which poison- or toxic-by-inhalation hazardous materials, as defined in parts 171.8, 173.115, and 173.132 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, are transported; and

‘(C) such other tracks as the Secretary may prescribe by regulation or order.

‘(2) IMPLEMENTATION- The plan shall describe how it will provide for interoperability of the system with movements of trains of other railroad carriers over its lines and shall, to the extent practical, implement the system in a manner that addresses areas of greater risk before areas of lesser risk. The railroad carrier shall implement a positive train control system in accordance with the plan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Part 173.115 seems to cover anything that goes "up in smoke". 173.132 seems to be anything that could take care of your "sniffles" - and then a little more. I must note my surprise in that the Act does not address 173.50, or "things that go boom".

Here is a "quick reference" link to HAZMAT

http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/hazmat/placards/

I continue to hold, and others apparently concur, that the PTC mandate under RSIA '08 will result in reroutes of both passenger trains and HAZMAT. It will also raise the threshold at which a railroad will say 'that line is no longer worth it" i.e. it generated enough on-line traffic or was a nice detour to have "just in case' with its existing train control system. There could well be loss of passenger train service or, where loss of any rail service is on the table, the spectre of 're-reg'.

Now to address the issue at hand. As I noted, the Scouts have been very loyal to both the railroads and Amtrak over the years, and many a railroad executive 'got there' owing to contacts (whoops, networking in newspeak) he made through being active in Scouting. But loyalty has its price - and the maintenance to passenger train standards of some 200 miles of track solely to accommodate the "one a day", especially since the ante is being greatly raised as a result of the PTC mandate, just may now come at too high a price.

Another factor favoring the reroute is the double tracking through the Abo Canyon on the "Transcon". Apparently this project has moved forth - Recession notwithstanding. With or without passenger trains, that line either has or will have a train control system that will qualify as "PTC". There is also the possibility that passenger traffic potential at both Amarillo and , albeit "plane loving", Wichita will offset losses at Albuquerque which would likely continue to be served by an Ambus through Belen. Bypassing major cities is nothing new for Amtrak - even the "Amshack in the Styx" cases of Richmond and Jacksonville represent a "bypass".

In short, I think the industry could care less, and likely even endorse, any PTC implementation over publicly owned lines such as the NEC that predominately handle passenger trains. After all, who will pay the bills?

While the Metrolink incident at Chatsworth CA would have been avoided with an active PTC system, I still have to question how HAZMAT incidents occurring either at Weyauwega WI or Rockford IL could have been avoided even if such were in place.

All told, this one could well end up a "happen" this time.

Repeal The "$8B for HSR" Provisions of ARRA '09

2009-09-06T14:19:00.004-04:00

Here's one to think about.

Various postings at other passenger rail forums suggest that the Requests to Appropriations ($8B) ratio is in the range of a 12 to 1. Obviously, someone is going to walk away empty handed, but there is one certainty: the "wired in" consultants will be fed.

By the time any of these projects to be funded under this ARRA '09 provision move forth, the economy will be in recovery mode.

Had the legislation called for "$8B for the NEC", that would be one thing; but it didn't and in fact specifically called for the allocations to be AWAY from the NEC.

Time to get rid of this before passenger railroad transportation simply is lumped in with "Bridge to Nowhere".

Wisconsin Talgo Equipment Order - Thoughts

2009-08-21T13:49:00.002-04:00

The Talgo equipment used in Amtrak Cascade service between Vancouver BC and Eugene OR appears to be a commercial success with strong public acceptance, and acquisition of such by the sponsoring agency appears to have been a smart move. Indicative of such is that the "four a day' (+the Seattle-LA Coast Starlight) cover the route in 3'30' while the "three a day" prevalent during 1969 needed 4'00'.

Where I do have a problem, however, is that local agencies seem be be hearing the "siren' of Talgo's "hell on wheels' business model. That model is simply if you buy 'em from us, we'll build 'em wherever you want. Wisconsin recently ordered two Talgo train sets for Chicago-Milwaukee service, with an option for a third for use on a proposed Chicago-Milw-Madison route. Talgo has agreed that the assembly work will be done at a Wisconsin facility and that 80 some jobs will be created resulting from the project. To ensure that the jobs are held by Wisconsin residents, the facility will likely be located in Central Wisconsin as distinct from "border towns" such as, say, Beloit or Kenosha.

My problem is that absent a permanent assembly facility, Talgo will simply set up shop anywhere someone will buy their equipment resulting in increased costs (as well as possibly 'relaxed" quality control) from reduced operational efficiency. While not the case in the Northwest, I would dare say that Wisconsin will end up with equipment unsuitable for the essentially tangent Chi-Milw run. Bi-Levels modeled after the California cars are the most suitable equipment for any Midwest Corridor initiative, but watch Talgo try and peddle their product and business model, say, here in neighboring Illinois.

Those 80 Wisconsin jobs are going to be the most expensive jobs a locality ever "bought".

$8B For HSR

2009-08-17T15:15:00.003-04:00

$8B for HSR? Well that is shorthand for the $8 Billion appropriation included within the ARRA '09, or Stimulus legislation, for the development of High Speed passenger rail service throughout the land. The enacted legislation provides that the funds will be allocated to the States in a "revenue sharing" model so that no region, especially the Northeast, will have a disproportionate share of the funding.

Many a state has submitted applications and to such extent that the funding will likely yield little benefit beyond throwing some "consultant feed" into the troughs at which they "chow down". That is the unfortunate thing.

While it is my firm conviction that there is a need for rail passenger service in the 21st century, that need is where there are people traveling "en masse', i.e. mass transportation, and in which addition to other facilities such as another four lanes to the NJ Turnpike or Garden State and a "twin span' for the George Washington Bridge, would be far more costly to both pocketbooks and society. Development of these Corridors need not be limited to the Northeast and Southern California, but being pragmatic, that is where the people are and where there is greater likelihood of passenger rail transport development obviating, or at least slowing down, the need for other more costly highway and airway infrastructure.

Projects such as Kansas has applied for to provide track improvements for a proposed Kansas City-Oklahoma City route (a continuation of the existing OKC-Ft Worth Heartland Flyer) have to be questioned. But then, volks, this is how the game is played - spread the largess about the land!!!

While that $8B could make meaningful improvements to the Northeast Corridor, and even to Southern California services, it appears that the $8B is going to end up a 'Bridge to Nowhere"; sorry such will likely be the case.

VIA Strike Over - Issues Unresolved

2009-07-26T09:30:00.003-04:00

At least so far as the public is concerned, "It's over":

www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090726/via_rail_090726/20090726?hub=TopStories

Having been a Labor Relations Officer on a US Class I (I left end of 1981 to enter practice as a Chartered Accountant - CPA down here), I'm of course most interested in the issues that remain unresolved. It would appear that VIA Locomotive Engineers have assigned runs, the issue appears that the men would like a little more time off AT HOME, as distinct from a hotel room that I presume up there also must meet standards of suitable lodging. But any hotel room, be it at the Dive Inn or the Four Seasons, has a way of getting old - fast.

The funny thing is that the media is reporting that VIA Engineers operate in unassigned service, such as (applicable terms down here) pool or "chain gang". Here is applicable brief passage to Canadian Business July 22 material:

"Some of the outstanding issues are linked to VIA's implementation of an antiquated crew utilization procedure designed for freight service which creates uncertainty as to when a locomotive engineer will be required for work'," said Shewchuk. He also acknowledged that wages and benefits remain a major concern but the requests are not outside of the norm in the industry".

Oh well, guess media up there and ours down here have one thing in common - they get it wrong. Of course, if Ellis were still an active journalist, as distinct from holding an administrative position within the Higher Education community in which journalistic skills are a necessity, that statement would be made with less credibility.

However, as I noted above, the carrier has not set forth publicly their position in this dispute; their only 'face' seems to be their PR gal (note I did not refer to her as 'Spin Lady") who has used her airtime (rightly I think) addressing passenger inconvenience issues.

But I do think that VIA Engineers in service anywhere outside the Quebec-Windsor Corridor must accept that VIA is a tri-weekly operation, and such will result in long layovers away from home. There is simply no way to avoid it, and it must further be accepted that operational efficiency, if even possible with tri-weekly frequency, results with establishing runs for as long as you can lawfully run. Sure, passenger service gives you predictability with your life, i.e. you know more or less when you are going to go, but it comes at the cost of the long layovers. Hopefully, any Engineer desiring to hire on (presume VIA recruits amongst Rules Qualified Engineers with CN) is aware of this unavoidable operating practice.

I sincerely hope that both parties will come together in good faith and work for a resolution! Good Luck to all concerned.

Possible VIA Strike July 24

2009-07-23T09:31:00.001-04:00

There is some possibly that VIA Locomotive Engineers will strike systemwide at 24JUL1700 GMT, or high noon in Toronto tomorrow. There does not appear to be any reportage regarding the issues, but the following outlines the possible impact on the Canadian tourism industry (lest we forget, such comprises a far greater portion of their GNP than it does ours).
Here is a link to the material that was prepared by the Canadian Press:

http://money.canoe.ca/News/Other/2009/07/22/10225266-cp.html

As of a few moments ago Amtrak 63 (24) Maple Leaf, which is interchanged with VIA at Niagra Falls for continuation to Toronto will operate NY-Niagra Falls, but has been embargoed for interchange with VIA. #69 (24) Adirondack will operate as scheduled NY-Montreal.

However 510 (24) Pacific International shows "sold out" Seattle to Vancouver, but that seats are available Seattle to Bellingham. Possibly the Superliner equipment is handled (wyed) at Vancouver by a VIA Engineer (the Amtrak T&E must be afforded a respite if they are to make it home under Hours of Service) and it is not practical to assemble a bi-directional consist, i.e. Talgo equipment.

Now it is a case of "the jury's still out'; but be it noted there is a long history of having labor disputes, rail and others, resolved during the Eleventh Hour. After all, neither party wants to appear to their constituencies as having backed down and a timely and orderly settlement would lay either open to criticism of having done just that.

Inevitable - Proposed Michigan Cuts

2009-07-06T07:56:00.000-04:00

"Conveniently" released to the media during the Holiday weekend, as well as during the 'all Michael all the time" deluge, is an Associated Press report that Michigan is proposing "cuts' with nature and scope not specifically identified to the State funded Chicago-Port Huron Blue Water and Chicago-Grand Rapids Pere Marquette trains. The 'three a day' Chicago-Detroit-Pontiac Wolverines are 100% Federally funded and not affected.

This was inevitable; Michigan is "broke": on that same note, I am astounded that there have been no other service cuts proposed in "nearly as broke' California and Illinois.

Transit Can't Afford This

2009-06-26T22:50:00.006-04:00

Two stories reflect the quandry facing transit operating agencies. One talks about how this week's Washington Metro (WMATA) crash, which killed nine, highlights the financial problems agencies face in maintaining their infrastructures and how they could increase safety risks.

Yet at the same time, they need to do a better job of managing their expenses, particularly labor. E.J. McMahon, in his NY Fiscal Watch blog, reports that more than 10 percent of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's workforce of 78,393 employees took home more than $100,000 last year in total pay (base salary and overtime). The figure includes 654 whose compensation exceeded $150,000.

Eleven of the 654 employees who earned more than $150,000 in 2008 were Long Island Railroad car repairmen who earned an average of $206,000—which was $143,000 over their average base pay rate of $63,000.

Nice work if you can get it, but something is amiss when an agency that just foisted a 10 percent fare hike on its riders and forced New York State residents to pay higher taxes to support it, allows this to go on. Clearly, the Long Island Rail Road needs to do a better job of managing its payroll and both the MTA and state legislature need to do a better job of monitoring what's going on there.

LA Crash a Black Eye for Privatization

2009-06-26T22:37:00.004-04:00

Last year's Metrolink crash, which claimed 25 lives near Chatsworth, seems to have another casualty, privatization. The Los Angeles Times report that the agency has approved a plan for a one-year transition from the current operator, Connex. Unless it opts to give the contract to Amtrak, Metrolink may soon be hiring its own operating crews.

Metrolink officials essentially had no choice but to act, in part because Connex -- which had been accused of lax oversight of engineers and conductors -- no longer wanted the job and other rail service companies balked at accepting the potential liability for any Metrolink accidents.

Running Down the Wrong Track

2009-06-26T22:20:00.003-04:00

Even though I haven't been writing about trains of late, I've followed with interest the plight of Tri-Rail, the Florida regional rail line running from West Palm Beach to Miami. The line, which carried four million passengers last year, is in a financial bind because the counties it serves - Palm Beach, Broward and Dade - and the state of Florida reduced operating aid.

Consequently, it raised fares 25 percent and threatened to severely cut back on service. That would cause even more trouble for Tri-Rail since it would have violated the agreement with Uncle Sam to fund the recently completed double-tracking of the railroad's mainline. Uncle Sam could demand our (U.S. taxpayers) money be paid back if the railroad, which faces the possibility of shutting down altogether in 2011, reduced service.

Today comes word from the South Florida Business Journal that the railroad found a way to avoid the service cuts. But is it worth the price? To keep all of its trains running, Tri-Rail will move $18 million from its capital budget to cover its operating expenses.

Hopefully, this will be a one-time solution for dealing with a crisis and by next year the railroad will have a dedicated source of state funding so it can manage its cash flow. Deferred maintenance is a dangerous route to follow. People forget what happened to Penn Central and the New York City subways in the 1970s. And with recent deadly crashes in Washington and Los Angeles we have tragic examples of what happens when operating agencies cut corners.

Meanwhile, I am happy that Tri-Rail will keep its trains running, even if the ride gets a litte bumpier.

I'm Back

2009-06-26T22:18:00.001-04:00

Took an unannounced and unplanned vacation from doing this blog. Time to get writing again. See you soon.

The Rockford, Illinois Derailment Incident

2009-06-22T08:01:00.004-04:00

Today, I would like to address a topic that could only at best be considered tangential to passenger trains, but nevertheless impacts the entire railroad industry, freight AND passenger, and for that matter society as a whole.

While obviously no conclusions can be drawn until the NTSB completes their investigation and their report is released next year, it will be interesting to learn if the provision under the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 - RSIA '08 - calling for installation of Positive Train Control (PTC) on any line over which HAZMAT (HAZardous MATerial) is handled, would have avoided or minimized the Friday June 19 incident occurring at Rockford, IL (and for that matter within 500 yards of a home in which friends of mine once resided). One thing I do know is that PTC would have had no impact whatever at the June 1996 Weyauwega, WI derailment involving HAZMAT. It would appear there are now two major HAZMAT incidents occurring in the Midwest (and both involving the Canadian National whether in actuality or by succession) and for which PTC would not have done anything to prevent them.

But the fact remains that RSIA '08, which mandated that PTC be installed not only on lines over which passenger trains are operated but also where trains handling HAZMAT are operated as well, was born from when, at Chatsworth, CA this past September, a passenger train collided with a freight train resulting in fatalities. Investigations have clearly established Passenger Engineer negligence. Congress in knee jerk fashion passed legislation and with about four months left in office, President Bush signed it. While it is one thing to have a PTC system where passenger trains are operated in any volume (there is always the public trough to pay for that), it is something else to place upon the investor owned Class I rail system the burden of equipping all lines handling HAZMAT with PTC when two incidents can be cited in which no benefit from PTC would arise. Legislative bodies do have their way of the knee jerk reaction; I wonder what they will come up with as a result of Rockford (escape lanes at highway X-ings)?

Having spent eleven years of my "post-college" working life in the railroad industry, I know all too well of injustices (some of my railroad career was in Labor Relations) that can occur from speculation as to the cause of an incident prior to release of information by the NTSB or a complete investigation "on the property". Accordingly, I will not be party to any speculations that seem to have a way of moving forth on the internet, and I sincerely hope others here will hold same. However, as one can readily surmise, I am quite skeptical with regards to any benefit the Class I railroad industry will receive from installation of Positive Train Control over lines that handle HAZMAT. The two incidents noted here would not have been mitigated in any manner had PTC been active.

While the personal injury and physical damage costs of Rockford, as well as of course in the case with Weyauwega, will be severe (the uninsured portion of Weyauwega claims may have contributed to Wisconsin Central's demise, but that IS speculation on my part), but so will the costs of PTC as mandated by RSIA '08. Who will pay for the latter; all shippers (higher freight rates) or only those shipping HAZMAT. If the latter, which classes (not all of them go boom with equal ferocity)? But on the other hand, shippers will also pay the higher insurance premiums that surely will result.

In that there was a fatality involving an innocent motorist, i.e. one who was obeying all applicable traffic laws, Rockford can only be considered tragic. While steps within and without the railroad industry must be taken to avoid a reoccurrence, I'm not certain that legislating a costly train control system is an effective solution. May wise heads prevail.

Amtrak Major Passenger Car Order - Thoughts

2009-06-06T11:00:00.002-04:00

A major car order would certainly establish that Amtrak is in the game to play and it is here to stay. While I am not dismissing the projects that Amtrak has allocated its ARRA '09 Stimulus appropriations as meaningless "make work", many are comparatively invisible to John Q. Such an order would certainly signal to John Q that Amtrak is "for real", and are not just putting forth meaningless rhetoric and photo ops such as the Inauguration Special.

At this time Amtrak is "discussing" an order of single-level Long Distance (LD) cars comprising 25 Diners and Sleepers each, and 75 Baggage Dormitory cars. Also under discussion are 130 bi-level Coaches which obviously would be assigned away from the Northeast Corridor.

Whatever builder, domestic or foreign, is to be awarded the prime contract to build any such equipment, all can be assured that it will have substantial US content. In all likelihood, that US content will include final assembly with the attendant "photo-ops'. After all, how many photo-ops arose from Amtrak's first passenger carrying equipment order when the two ANF Turbo trains were unceremoniously off loaded by crane from a vessel docked at the Port of Baltimore?

Regarding the single-level cars for the LD's I guess it is a case of if you are going to continue to have 'em and I believe, right or wrong notwithstanding, such will be the case, you had best have roadworthy equipment for such. Having to set out a, say, bad ordered Diner en-route has a way of tying up a Class I's 'bread and butter', let alone passenger inconvenience and the spate of letters of the "Congressman, my Amtrak had no food and I got hungry...." varietal.

Regarding the 130 bi-level cars, what concerns me is every time I hear the "Perils of Pauline" tales regarding state fiscal woes, I have to ask how long can those with major programs such as California continue to fund trains? Somehow I think the health and welfare of a child comes first. Same of course applies to states with more limited programs such as Illinois. If local jurisdictions are serious about continued funding of intercity trains, best they seek grants from the Federal Transit Administration for needed equipment and not from Amtrak's appropriations. If Amtrak acquires additional cars for Locally funded services, then the local sponsors are in a position to blackmail the Federal legislative majority (aptly noted as 218 Representatives + 51 Senators + 1 President, or simply 218+51+1) into funding their services saying "you got the cars but we haven't got the $$$$ for the trains; what are you going to do, Feddies"?

All told, I would hold that a more suitable allocation of Amtrak appropriations would be cars for the Federally funded services. In addition to the 125 LD cars noted, 200 standard class (presently branded Northeast Regional) and 40 Acela cars added to the existing 20 sets would represent the best allocation of funds. Should local services live on being fed hand to mouth by their sponsors, that's what displaced Amfleet-I's will be for.

Finally, The New York Times recently editorialized with regards to the "Buy American" language included within enacted ARRA '09 "Stimulus" legislation pointing out that in Today's globalized economy, such a policy can be the double edged sword.

New Routes For Auto Train Service

2009-05-21T19:34:00.000-04:00

At the two passenger rail discussion forums at which I regularly participate, both are now having active discussion regarding additional Amtrak Auto Trains. The thoughts range from the “reasonable” such as extension of the existing Lorton-Sanford service to the New York area to the absurd such as Sanford to LA “taking a route around the Appalachians to save fuel”. It appears the most “popular‘ suggestion is Chicago-Sanford.

As a veteran of eighteen Auto Train journeys made over the years, including one on the private AT, I can only hold that there is no route out there that would enjoy the same success as does the existing Lorton-Sanford, although I have several in mind that could possibly support “Auto Train Service” with an auto carrier or two added to an existing train with the passengers being accommodated in line space. The routes I would have in mind would be:

Galesburg IL-Irondale CO
Galesburg IL-La Junta CO
Albuquerque NM-San Bernardino CA

Galesburg is selected as the Eastern terminal in that it is 150 miles West of Chicago yet roundly at the junction of two Interstate highways. It is in a location to draw traffic not only from Chicago, but also Indianapolis, St Louis, and even Minneapolis. The ground facilities such as auto ramps could provide service for two trains enabling greater operational efficiency. Additionally the BNSF Railroad has substation operational and maintenance facilities and would hopefully enter into agreement with Amtrak to provide switching and maintenance.

Locating the Western terminal at Irondale some ten miles to the East of Denver enables passengers with destinations such as the Rocky Mountains to avoid having to drive into/out of Denver. Also, with the redevelopment of Denver Union Station into a mass transit hub (busses, light rail), space for handling auto carriers and passenger autos will be quite limited. Amtrak may even have to find a new home before the project is complete.

La Junta provides access to the Pike’s Peak region and Santa Fe; also a “back up” for traffic to Denver, albeit such is 200 miles away.

Albuquerque-San Bernardino would enable service to a fast growing region, including visits to Santa Fe. A terminus at San Bernardino instead of in Downtown LA would provide more expedient access to any destination within the LA Basin.

Now why have I only considered “one night out’ segments rather than “all the way Chicago-LA”. This is simply based on my observations of passengers during my eighteen journeys and that is one night is enough. Auto Train passengers are no more railfans than is the average NECorridor passenger. I’m reminded of a book ex libris “The Only Way to Cross” by John Maxtone-Graham. Here the author describes life aboard a Trans-Atlantic ocean liner. While of course some passengers were seafarers, most were not; they wanted the voyage over and done and preferably without becoming seasick. No wonder the decline is “Trans-At” ocean travel was far more precipitous than any experienced by the railroads during the 1960’s. From personal experience, “arewethereyetitis” becomes quite endemic if Auto Train is not at destination by, say, Noon.

Amtrak Long Distance Access "Issues"

2009-05-18T17:36:00.001-04:00

I’ve been following the frustrations of a member at a discussion forum who resides in the UK and wishes to travel during May 2010 to attend The Players golf tournament at TPC Sawgrass Club, Ponte Vedra Florida. He wishes to use Amtrak from NY to Jacksonville; however owing to health reasons, he does not wish to rent an automobile and wishes to get about from a hotel near the course using public transportation. He is willing to take a taxicab from Amtrak to the hotel.

This dilemma certainly suggests how the entire commercial travel market is oriented around "fly and rent'. After noting the limited options members have set forth, it is certainly evident that access to Amtrak trains away from Corridor cities is a real problem; even taxicabs have a way of being scarce at stations.

But then to have an auto rental concern located at a station is simply a matter of volume - and the percentage of rail travelers that rent an auto at destination is minuscule. Most Amtrak Long Distance Coach passengers simply cannot consider renting an auto at destination, and are being “picked up’ by the friends or family they will be visiting. Amongst the small universe of Sleeper passengers, many fall into the “can’t/won’t/best not drive’ category. Even in leisure travel capitol Florida, there is only one station that has an on-premises auto rental outlet with both staff and autos at train times; that is Hertz at Orlando.

But another member participating in the discussion said I was all too quick to perceive a need for a rental auto at destinations to which I travel. Basically, if I’m traveling be air or rail, I will “automatically’ rent an auto at destination. If my comments suggested a perceived need for an auto when traveling, and going without saying in Daily life, I admit it - of course 95% of the US adult population holds same view.

Of the three 'away from home overnight' trips comprising fourteen nights I have made this year, one was air and the other two were using my auto (including Auto Train on one). Two others are planned with mode yet to be determined (Amtrak LD is not off the table BTW).

However, for the air trip to Florida last Feb and a meet up with my Sister, who resides in NY area, I simply booked “knee-jerk” the rental auto with Hertz along with my air transportation. On the journey, owing to a recurring ear problem, my Sister could not fly when scheduled, and had to stay over an additional two days until she could. Her first words to me after setting forth she was not presently fit to fly were “can you help me get a car before you leave?“ The last I saw of her was at a Hertz facility in Boca Raton so she could get her own auto 'for the duration".

Allies of the Earth

2009-05-03T19:48:00.002-04:00

I recently learned of this book Allies of the Earth by Albert Runte ISBN 1931112525, in which the case of to save the environment, railroads should have been required to operate the same system of passenger trains existing say fifty years ago. There is a fairly substantive Google excerpt of this work presently available, as well as several web retailers offering discounts from the cover price.

However, from one who has been following railroad industry affairs for close to sixty years (including eleven "on the inside'), there is no way in a world with numerous alternate freight and passenger resources, then and now, that continuation of the industry as a regulated public utility could be justified. The industry should have been deregulated long before 1980; had it been so, I'm certain the 1970's 'Dark Ages", during which I was employed within, could have been minimized if not outright avoided.

But now to turn to the microcosm of passenger service (and how else could a line of business contributing maybe 10% of the revenue fifty years ago and maybe 2% today be viewed - Amtrak and all commuter agencies each about 1%). Again the only position the industry held from likely 1960 onward was OUT. By the mid-50's, the North Eastern and North Central roads had "had it', by 1965, even the most "stalwart" Western roads, such as the Santa Fe, were also ready to throw in the towel.

I'm not certain if the initiative that resulted in RPSA '70 and, under such, Amtrak arose primarily from the "can't drive/won't fly' or any of the other constituencies noted by Mr. Runte in his work, but rail passenger service was regulated and hence, the industry was not free to do as GM did to the Pontiac brand last week. Quite simply, the total discontinuance of all service would have been too much of a "cold water shower'.

While most of the roads operating passenger trains signed up (those that did not did so because the terms were unfavorable account individual reasons relating only to their property), had the offer been 'you have the choice to sign up and enjoy some benefits from doing so or you can get out NOW, I guarantee you Amtrak would have been stillborn" (possible "benefits - dubious indeed; cash flow as Amtrak pays up front, cash flow from overrides arising from assumption of liability- same as an insurance company enjoys - as well as management fees, employee transportation, and a means to move Office Cars -"PV"'s- about their systems).

However, to the extent the water cooler in my office proved to be a reliable source about anything, the industry was given assurances that "live with it for five years and at that time it will at least be going, going'. It could be held that the Carter Cuts, coming some eight years into the Amtrak era, represented the first step towards that understanding. Only problem, that understanding shall we say died after the 1996 Mercer Cuts - and those cuts only addressed services that had been added, largely by political fiat, subsequent to A-Day.

All told, I'm certain contemporary railroad management considers signing up with Amtrak to be a "bad deal' and just one more case of "if you let government in, how do you get rid of 'em?" (I'm fearful of what the auto and banking industries are about to find out). Had the railroads simply stayed out, I'm certain there would be Northeast Corridor service operating over 'ward of the State" Penn Central (instead of RRR '73 providing "no passenger service' , the legislation would simply said "and passenger' - how else do things work in the Potomac Wonderland?). Regarding other services, I'm certain many would have been gone during 1976 when the five year moratorium under RPSA '70 expired - and ALL would have been gone when Staggers (dereg) was implemented.

In view of being 'duped' by RPSA '70 into joining Amtrak, it is simply no wonder that when two US roads, the KCS and the UP, made substantial investment in the State owned Mexican railway system, they simply laid down the condition precedent of NO passenger trains. Those existing, would be gone - and "don't even THINK of a Mextrak'.

Finally, even though I find little if any justification for continuing passenger trains outside of regions with sufficient population to support commuter and intercity Corridors operating over publicly owned rights of way, I do enjoy an occasional Long Distance ride; in fact, when it appeared, that during 2008, I was not going to use Auto Train for my (almost) annual Florida journey, I took a Chicago to Denver joyride, which affirmed my "more positives than negatives" overall assessment of Amtrak service.

Central Florida Sun Rail "In Trouble"

2009-04-28T19:25:00.002-04:00

A Railroad Net member who resides in Ocala (Marion County) FL brought this Op-Ed piece to the attention of that community. I believe it deserves review over here at Ellis' site:

Staff reportage - Ocala Star Banner:

http://www.ocala.com/article/20090428/ARTICLES/904281010

Brief passage:
------------------------
In all, the SunRail system would cost state, local and federal taxpayers more than $2 billion over 30 years. But CSX officials have insisted that they be held harmless from any legal damages, beyond their own employees and equipment, arising from any accidents on the line that would be shared by SunRail and CSX.

CSX and DOT officials say the "no fault" agreement is necessary because the company would not be facing the risk of increased legal damages unless it allowed the commuter train system to operate.

Sen. Lee Constantine, R-Altamonte Springs, is the chief backer of SB 1212. "Why would you sell something to someone at the appraised value and open yourself potentially to more liability?" Constantine said of the need to give CSX the "no fault" protection.

But the plan's primary opponent - Sen. Paula Dockery, R-Lakeland - said taxpayers should not be on the hook for damages caused by CSX employees. And she said the current deal would leave the state liable for accidents involving trespassers and traffic that is not related to the SunRail system.
-----------------------
Opinion:

http://www.ocala.com/article/20090428/OPINION/904281011/1008/OPINION?Title=Opposing-SunRail-is-an-easy-call

Brief passage:
------------------------
SunRail cheerleader Sen. Lee Cosntantine, R-Altamonte Springs, has begun touting the job creation potential of SunRail, claiming the project would create 13,000 jobs early on. What he fails to add is that SunRail, if built, if taxpayers pony up $2 billion-plus, will only serve about 14,500 riders a day in 2030. That is in 20 years. That is 14,500 in a metropolitan area projected to have 3.5 million people.

Cost per rider: $180,000.

Like we said, opposing the CSX-SunRail project is an easy call. It's a bad deal for Floridians and it's an even worse deal for Marion Countians.
--------------------------------
As noted in both the news article and Opinion piece , the CSX requirement to be held harmless for anything that happens on lines to be acquired by a public agency for this rail system simply seems unreasonable, if not unconscionable.

"Heads you win, Tails I loose" seems more like it.

Cuba

2009-04-17T08:31:00.003-04:00

At this time who knows if the reported "Fidel sightings' are in fact "the man" or if they are simply a 'double'. If he's gone sooner or later, the Cuban government will have to own up, lest they be 'exposed" to the world on You Tube or Twitter. The "Cuba libre' South Florida constituency is dying off......their children, and especially grandchildren, are all comfortably assimilated into American society; if they even know Spanish, they have learned it as a second language.

Now there are reports that President Obama, after having relaxed both currency and travel controls imposed by the Bush administration, clearly wants to open doors with Cuban government - that they are "Communist' is notwithstanding. After all, Rush, Glenn, Sean, and now again Sarah, all need something about which to rant.

Prediction; if Obama is re-elected to a second term, there will be normal trade and diplomatic relations with Cuba before he leaves office.

If one wants an excellently prepared, well photographed, article on contemporary Cuban railroading, be sure to dig out your copy of Volume 66 Number 3 NRHS National Railway Bulletin issued during 2003. The author went on a then-legal rail study tour. With a 700 mile line haul from Havana to Santiago and a paucity of other transportation available, such represents likely the only place in the Western Hemisphere in which Long Distance rail travel provides a meaningful transportation resource. To say the least a rail travel experience there sounds 'gritty', but to the adventuresome, I'm sure a "bumper to bumper' journey in hand me down French or Mexican Coaches (no Sleepers or Diners anymore; too bourgeois) would be quite "sport'. Local services, according to the article, are provided in Coaches made from scrapped bus bodies mounted atop Flat Cars.

However, when US investment again is made in the Cuban economy, what will happen to the railroads? Will a dictum of no passenger trains be handed down such as was by the KCS and UP in Mexico, or will there be a "Cubatrak', in recognition that it will be many, many years before domestic air transport is available to the average Cuban.

When would a system of controlled access highways (Interstates) be built? Possibly never, as someone in the Central Government, freely elected or otherwise, may look at the emerging Eastern European and Asian economies and say "we don't need this".

Maybe, just maybe, I'll set foot on Cuban soil in this lifetime.

An Auto Train Voyage

2009-04-10T19:05:00.003-04:00

I have recently completed my "Voyage #18" aboard Auto Train. Such was aboard #53 (24MAR).

Tuesday March 24 began with a drive from the hotel in Pittsburgh (Airport Marriott; Aten Rd, Coraopolis) that was comparatively without incident. I’ve “been there don’t that’ enough in the past to know that caution must be the watchword when traveling due East on US 220 looking straight iinto the sun and entering the Fort Pitt Tunnel. Wouldn’t it be nice if everyone did?

After a fuel stop in Bedford PA, arrival at Lorton was a comfortable 135P, or 85 minutes prior to the 3PM closing for autos (it’s 2PM for SUV’s Vans and Motorcycles). One thing I noted on this journey is the absence of signage once leaving I-95 at Lorton. While there is a good sign on I-95, once at the intersection, there is no signage whatever. One, and considering the average Auto Train passenger is not a fan, could easily head West when they should head East. There is no sign at the entrance to the Auto Train facility. I would hope that Amtrak and the Jurisdiction could properly coordinate on this matter.

There I was met by a fellow I’ve known since college who was at one time a mid-level Amtrak manager (he will retire shortly from the health care sector), also noted that Bltizie was “on duty” along with her handler (I presume she is also a sworn peace officer - many Police Dogs are such). The check-in was handled by the same Amtrak employee who gave me a two minute pass (I showed at 302P) during March 2007 on Voyage #16; with a quick prompt, she remembered me. From the absence of activity, as well as that I had a Bedroom at a rate I have customarily paid for a Roomette, I knew this trip was not going to make Amtrak any $$$. The 5PM Dinner seating was available . While waiting to board, Blitzie (a Black Labrador who if not a service animal, would have gotten a big hug from me) gave the terminal a good sniffing - I guess ’Security Theatre” also is a “now playing” in Lorton .

230P and its time to board; the sixteen car passenger consist, even if as good as empty, is still the most impressive thing Amtrak has on the rails. Line number 5341 was again Palm Harbor and located immediately to the rear of the Lounge. My Bedroom E was of course center car and forward riding. What more could one ask for.

Attendant Mike was willing to allow my friend to board (he did 15 years with the outfit); from there we went to the Lounge where the ‘comp” (tips accepted, and judging from some of the cheapos many of us have met on Amtrak journeys had best not be expected) wine tasting was Naked Mountain varietals.

At about 305P, the first cut of auto carriers was pulled. We both agreed that “party’s over’ when the first coupling was made. While Mike would likely have preferred my friend Roger did not board to begin with, he was confident that we both knew the drill.(more on knowing the drill later).

At 320P, #53(24) highballed.

First I could not help but note that Amtrak and XM Satellite Radio still do business with one another. Even if I personally see no need for the noise, apparently others do. While I would prefer WETA 90.9 leaving Lorton and WMFE 90.7 arriving Sanford, the XM Channel 24 Classic Rock was ‘tolerable’ and with the door to my room closed inaudible. At least it wasn’t some God-awful Lite Rock I was bombarded with in the lobby of a Boca Raton Holiday Inn last month (and unfortunately bombarded again on this trip at a Marriott Courtyard in Maitland FL).

The Welcome Aboard announcement noted there were 95 passengers and 62 Autos aboard - the lightest loading I have ever noted on any of my eighteen AT voyages.

Time for Dinner; AT offers a choice of three entrees (beef chicken fish). The 12oz Sirloin was “good’ (not Morton’s but hardly Denny’s) and cooked to order. The Dinner plates and Salad bowls are ceramic, the flatware is metal, wineware in which comp Williamsburg (all you can responsibly drink0 was served is glass. Napkins are cloth and coffee cups ceramic. Dessert, however was served on plastic ware. Save the last, I doubt if an AT passenger, and most have never used any other Amtrak LD, would even know what Simplified dining Service was. Service attentive and courteous - and well worth my $5 tip (the other three gents at the table also followed suit).

Back to the room; since the Bedrooms were Fireman side, there were the pleasant vistas of the Potomac and the various rivers X’d en route to Fredericksburg. I've often noted at the several Forums at which I participate, the scenery of an Atlantic Coast journey can best be described as “if you’ve seen one Pine Tree, you’ve seen ;em all’ . However, in all fairness, there are pleasant vistas of the Potomac and the several rivers crossed North of Fredericksburg. Also I guess to any Randolph Macon alums around here, I should also note the “down Main Street” in Ashland.

Now it’s “time for The Times” (Journal as well); lights out at about 830P.

I awoke for the Florence service stop, but was too somnolent to open the curtains. My next cognizance was Jacksonville; it appeared we were “more or less” on time, but such was not to be for much longer. Time for the morning announcement where it was noted that account CSX track work, there would be delays with 10A estimated for Sanford.

Time for the cold Continental Breakfast; its never changed from my Voyage #1 a Dec 1972 journey of the private AT. Cereal, muffins, coffee, juice.

Now again back to the “know the drill‘ comment. I noticed a rather “top heavy‘ gentleman walking through the Diner. One lateral lurch on CSX‘s stellar track, and this fellow was “plopped“ into an unoccupied booth. Fortunately, he did not hit the table; his head hit nothing. Other than a Waiter asking “are you OK?” “Yes”, there was no calling the Conductor and Service Director to investigate, and I would presume the incident closed. Now to “know the drill’. I’m leaving the car and this attractive young Waitress, who save about 6” of height was a dead ringer for Michelle O, notes me.. As I’m walking into the Lounge, she says to me “you must be with Amtrak’. I assured her I was a retired CPA that had once been with a railroad and asked her why she thought so. “You’re just about the only passenger who seems to know how to walk on a train. I..don’t need any more of that fellow falling down at my station”. A nice girl; hope she has a satisfying career with Amtrak (dollars to donuts says she has spouse/family who is).

At about 10AM as promised the “magic milepost 759" (at the North end of the Sanford facility) was visible. Owing to the light loading, I had my auto back (safe and sound) and I was on my way to Maitland with first a stop at Bill’s Car Wash; 2418 S. French Av (US 92) in Sanford (any of us Florida hands know there is no such a thing as a dirty auto "down below").

All told, Auto Train continues to be, along with Acela, Amtrak’s best foot forward. While I have always held it be unwise to quote fares for a future Amtrak journey on the web (that's Amtrak's job), but now that the journey is over, the total fare I paid was $526.00. That breaks down to Auto $152, Rail $93, Bedroom $281. All components of the fare are supply and demand. I have paid as much as $700 for a journey - and that was in a Roomette.

Auto Train continues to get my high marks. Looking forward to Voyage #19, whenever such may be.

Atlanta Keeps Beltline Free From HSR

2009-03-24T23:27:00.002-04:00

High-speed passenger trains will not enter Atlanta via a segment of the old Beltline that planners want to use as a recreation corridor. The Atlanta City Council Monday signed an agreement with the Georgia Department of Transportation to protect the corridor, which was once used so freight trains could bypass downtown Atlanta.

Instead, passenger trains in the future would reach downtown Atlanta via the Western trunkline. However, that decision does not sit well with residents in the Marietta Street Corridor.

Greetings from the Dysfunctional State of New York

2009-03-24T21:12:00.004-04:00

Tomorrow, New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority Board of Directors is expected to approve a budget containing fares hikes average 23 percent as well as massive service cuts on its bus, subway and commuter rail lines. There is plenty of blame to be shared among Gov. David Paterson, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith and Senate Minority Leader Dean Skelos for their failure to work out a rescue plan.

Although there is always the possible that these "leaders" could cobble a deal together in the weeks ahead, the clock will soon strike midnight. There is nothing more to say at this time. The details of the fare plan have been known for some time. It's a sad day for New York.

Extension Proposed for Saved Vermont Passenger Train

2009-03-24T20:41:00.003-04:00

First, passenger rail advocates in Vermont persuaded their governor to continue to fund Amtrak's New York - Burlington Ethan Allen Express. Now they are looking to extend the run north to Burlington, the Green Mountain State's largest city.

"There is a groundswell and momentum building around this issue," Tom Torti, the director of the Lake Champlain Regional Chamber of Commerce, told WCAX-TV. Torti says the move would promote tourism and decrease pollution.

The idea has the support of an important state legislator, Sen. Dick Mazza, the chair of the senate transportation committee, who led the fight to save the train. "If you ever want passenger rail in Vermont, this is going to be the successful passenger rail. People have been waiting for it. The infrastructure is here."

"Mazza points out that the rails have already been upgraded for a failed commuter service from Burlington to Charlotte. Extending passenger service to Burlington will still need rail upgrades from Vergennes to Rutland costing $30 million, but the federal funding is already approved."

Don't look for a start-up anytime soon. If all goes according to plan, it could be three years before the first run to Burlington.

New Virginia Services

2009-03-20T20:16:00.002-04:00

Several on-line newspapers have reported that locally funded services between Linchburg VA and Wash and Wash-Richmond are as good as a done deal. Here is reporting of such from the Richmond Times Dispatch:

http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/business/transportation/article/CTBO20_20090319-221103/236377/

Brief passage:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
While firm schedules and fares have yet to be worked out, the Richmond train will tentatively pull out of Staples Mill about 7 a.m. daily and arrive at Washington's Union Station about 9:30 a.m., then leave Union Station about 4 p.m. and arrive back at Staples Mill at 6-6:30 p.m., according to the Rail and Public Transportation Department. It would be the ninth daily round trip between Richmond and Washington. Northbound trains currently leave Richmond at 6 a.m. and 8 a.m., among other times.
The Lynchburg train will leave the Kemper Street Station about 7:45 a.m. and reach Union Station at 11:20-11:30 a.m., the department said. It will depart Washington about 5 p.m. and return to Lynchburg at about 8:30 p.m.
Each train will consist of up to eight passenger coaches, a business-class coach and a café car, Page said
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The consist noted appears to be quite consistent with that of the typical NE Regional train, and in the interest of operational efficiency, Amtrak should want such to be continuing trains. So would the sponsoring agency as a better 'draw for itineraries such as Stamford-Charlottesville would be available.

Given the normal station time allowed at Wash, it would appear the NB Lynchburg train would continue to Boston as 176; the Richmond train as 174. SB things are somewhat "muddier'. There already is a 93 departing Wash for Richmond from Wash at 550P AND an 85 departing 7PM. Possibly 171 arriving Wash 410P could be the continuation but the next available Regional presently terminating at Wash is 173 arriving 645P. However since the Lynchburg train has greater distance; it should be a continuation of 93 and the Richmond of 173.

Trust everyone is clear; hope you all were taking notes as it is now time for a pop quiz (LOL)

Sun to Shine on Sunset Limited?

2009-03-20T00:05:00.004-04:00

The Sunset Limited, a perennial whipping boy for Amtrak critics because of its high losses and low ridership, may be getting an overhaul. Trains for America has a report that the train will be upgraded as part of Amtrak's RPI project. It cites a report in Amtrak Ink, the company's employee newsletter, which points out that ridership and revenue were up 20 percent and that a management team has created a punch list with 200 items for change or improvement.

Understanding the MTA Train Wreck

2009-03-19T23:55:00.004-04:00

Newsday reporter Dan Janison offers an insightful analysis into how nine years ago the late investment banking firm of Bear Stearns and the administration of Gov. George Pataki sent New York's Metropolitan Transportation Agency down a track that would put the agency in its current financial pickle.

"Lee Sander, the MTA's executive director, said: "In 2000, Albany put our entire capital program on a credit card."

New Haven Deja Vu?

2009-03-19T23:31:00.003-04:00

In the 1960s, service on the bankrupt New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad, one of the largest commuter lines serving metropolitan New York, had deteriorated for the point where it had replaced the Long Island Rail Road as the region's poster child for sick railroad syndrome.

The railroad's fortunes continued to wane after it was merged into the ill-fated Penn Central and later became a part of Conrail. However, things started to improve with the formation of Metro-North, which invested heavily in improving the infrastructure. On-time percentages reached levels high enough to get your kid into an Ivy League college, and ridership soared, partly due to a burgeoning reverse commute from New York to employment centers in Stamford and Greenwich.

Now service seems to have taken a serious turn for the worse, according to the blog Station Stops:

"...in the past few months, its gotten MUCH worse.
2009 Metro-North New Haven Line service has just been third-worldly. Breakdowns, delays, dirty, stinky cars, short trains with no available seats - day after day I hear about it, from friends - on Twitter (follow us @stationstops ) but with a frequency like never before."

Blogger Chris maintains the problem is the result of rolling stock reaching the end of its useful life. While passenger cars purchased circa 1970 have been removed from service on the Long Island and Metro North's Hudson and Harlem lines, they still soldier on on the New Haven line. That's because Connecticut hasn't been willing to purchase new rolling stock. Perhaps Fairfield County commuters will keep that in mind the next time their governor is up for election.

Bureaucrats Hold Up Transit Security Funds

2009-03-16T22:25:00.002-04:00

Since September 11, 2001, Congress has appropriated $1.5 billion to pay for security and safety improvements in the nation's transit systems. To date just $200 million of that figure had been paid out, according to the Newark Star-Ledger.

The revelation has angered Congressmen on both sides of the aisle. Hal Rogers, a Kentucky Republican charged "the taxpayers are getting screwed." Steven Rothman, a New Jersey Democrat, demanded the dismissals of the heads of the Transportation Security Administration and Federal Emergency Management Administration.

Florida Snoozes on Regional Rail

2009-03-16T22:00:00.005-04:00

Florida is the nation's fourth largest state. It has sizable metropolitan areas in the north (Jacksonville), south (Miami - Fort Lauderdale - West Palm Beach), central region (Orlando) and west coast (Tampa - St. Petersburg). Yet it is considered a laggard in developing regional rail, and some officials fear its tardiness could cost it opportunities to tap federal aid, according to the Sarasota Times-Herald.

Although 30 years ago state lawmakers promised to build a network of commuter lines, only one, Tri-Rail, which runs from Miami to West Palm Beach, is in operation. A second line, SunRail, which would serve the Orlando area, has been waiting for the legislature to sign off on the project for two years.

“What’s amazing to me is the federal government just looks at Florida and they just shake their heads,” said Jeff Koons is a Palm Beach County commissioner and longtime member of the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority that runs Tri-Rail. “You need leadership and we just don’t have it."

The problem is a mix of money issues and parochialism. State legislatures are loathe to ask their constituents to pay for a commuter rail system on the other side of the state.

“The bottom line is that people in my district, if ever one or two of them use Tri-Rail, it’ll be few and far between,” said Sen. Mike Fasano, the chairman of the Senate Transportation Appropriations committee who is from New Port Richey north of Tampa. “Why would the people in my district or the Panhandle or Jacksonville have to pay for a train system they’ll never use and that’s in the red?”

Meanwhile, as Florida sleeps the federal money that could have gotten more regional rail lines off the ground is going to Utah, North Carolina and New Mexico.

South Shore to Reduce Weekend Service

2009-03-15T20:42:00.004-04:00

In times of recession, it is not surprising to see operating agencies reduce service on account of fiscal woes, usually caused by declining subsidies. However, the explanation given by the CEO of the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICDT), which operates the South Shore line from South Bend to Chicago, strikes us as odd.

According to WSBT-TV, the rail line wants to reduce weekend service to improve the reliability of its operations. This begs the question: if they can't run the trains on time during the weekend, when trains run every two hours, what must weekday operations be like, given that so many more trains are scheduled. Somebody isn't shooting straight.

Group Fights for Gun Rights on MARTA

2009-03-15T20:26:00.003-04:00

As a veteran New York commuter, the thought of allowing passengers to carry guns on trains is terrifying. [Think Bernie Goetz, Colin Ferguson.] Yet down in Atlanta a pro-gun group is trying to secure the right to bear arms aboard MARTA trains. WAGA-TV reports the group, known as GeorgiaCarry.org, contends one of its members was illegally stopped by transit police when they realized he was carrying a gun in a train station.

The same group recently tried, unsucessfully, to force Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport to allow guns in unsecured areas.

"The legal feud erupted when a new state law took effect in July that allows people with gun permits to carry guns into restaurants and state parks and on public transportation.

Atlanta officials quickly declared the airport a "gun-free zone" and warned that anyone carrying a gun there would be arrested. GeorgiaCarry.org sued the city and the airport, claiming the airport qualifies as public transportation under the new state law."

In all likelihood this case, too, will wind up in the courts. If it does, it is not clear who would prevail. Nevertheless, the fact that the Georgia legislature enacted such a law tells us a lot about Georgia. But, knowing the state's history and prevailing political philosophy, it should come as no surprise.

NJ Transit River Line Gets Money to Grow

2009-03-15T19:51:00.005-04:00

When NJ Transit's River Line, a diesel light rail line that connects Trenton and Camden, was being planned, cynics charged that it would be a white elephant; that it would generate minimal usage and that it was being built for political expediency, i.e. to win the support of southern New Jersey legislators for light rail and other transit projects in the north.

Five years after its opening, it has become the little rail line that could, handling 9,000 riders a day and reaching the limits of its capacity. That's something I know about from personal experience, having been left at the Trenton station once because there was no more room on the train. Now, two capital projects, funded with economic stimulus money, are in the works to increase that capacity and expand connectivity, the Philadelphia Inquirer reports.

"Ridership on the River Line has grown significantly, and we've really maxed out the infrastructure," NJ Transit spokesman Dan Stessel said.

NJ Transit is spending $24 million to upgrade the line's signal system. According to Stessel, this will allow the single-track line to operate an additional express train from Florence to Trenton. The signal upgrade would be a step toward "positive train control" in the future.

Positive train control, which would automatically apply the brakes if an engineer misses a stop signal, must be in use by 2015. That ruling was an outcome of last year's fatal collision between a Metrolink commuter train and Union Pacific freight in Chatsworth, CA. Having positive train control would allow River Line trains to run past 10 p.m., when it now has to cede to the line to Conrail freight trains.

In addition, NJ Transit will spend $40 million on a new station in Pennsauken, where NJ Transit's Atlantic City Line crosses over the River Line. The two level station, which should take 2 1/2 - 3 years to complete, would provide River Line passengers with connections to Atlantic City and Philadelphia's 30th Street Station, a major hub for Amtrak and SEPTA.

Court Ruling Could Revive Dumbarton Caltrain Plan

2009-03-15T17:42:00.007-04:00

The Dumbarton Rail Corridor is a planned project to extend Caltrain service from Redwood Junction to Union City, CA, via a freight branch abandoned by the Southern Pacific Railroad that crossed the lower reached on San Francisco Bay via a trestle and swing bridge known as the Dumbarton Bridge. The terminal for the new branch would be a "union" station where passengers could transfer to Amtrak's Capitol Corridor, Altamont Commuter Express and BART, as well as East Bay bus routes. The line's purpose is to improve connecticity and give East Bay residents a new alternative for commuting to jobs in Silicon Valley.

The San Mateo County Transportation Authority website says the service will commence in 2012. However, in January the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), a regional planning organization, transferred $91 million earmarked for the Dumbarton line to a project to extend a BART route from Fremont to Warm Springs, "which put the Dumbarton plan on hold indefinitely."

That decision didn't sit well with the Transportation Solutions Defense and Education Fund (Transdef), which file suit to block the transfer of funds. A judge is expected to rule on the case this week.

Transdef contends MTC's action was illegal since the BART extension was not among the projects funded by Regional Measure 2, a 2004 voter-approved $1 toll increase to Bay Area bridges to fund local transportation projects. "The Dumbarton Rail project meets the regional connection needs outlined in Measure 2, whereas the "dead-end" Warm Springs project does not, the suit says."

MTC responding brief contends "the Warm Springs project is "shovel ready" and has a much smaller funding gap than the Dumbarton Rail project." According to the San Jose Mercurcy News, the agency has no plans to fund Dumbarton until 2019.

Amtrak Stimulus Money to Support Rolling Stock and Infrastructure Repairs

2009-03-14T16:42:00.004-04:00

Delaware had plenty to smile about when its favorite son came calling at the Amtrak depot in Wilmington. Vice President "Amtrak" Joe Biden, who for over three decades commuted by train from the same station to his desk in The Capitol, Friday unveiled the $1.3 billion to be given to Amtrak from the economic stimulus package: approximately $100 million of that figure is to be spent in Delaware, according to the Wilmington News-Journal.

"The stimulus package outlay announced by Vice President Joe Biden includes $21 million to restore Amtrak's historic Wilmington station, along with $58.5 million for railroad car restorations and repairs in Amtrak's Bear maintenance facility and other spending on improvements to tracks, power supplies and other rail facilities."

Additional cars will be built repaired at Amtrak's Beech Grove, Ind., shops. The largest project funded through the economic stimulus will be the $102 million replacement of a drawbridge overthe Niantic River in Connecticut on the Northeast Corridor.

Other elements of the spending include a new Auto Train station in Sanford, FL, rebuildings a critical power supply facility in Chester, PA, and signal system upgrades on the Northeast Corridor between New York and Washington and in Michigan.

Amtrak is a major employer in Delaware, with 450 persons on the payroll at the Bear car repair shops and 500 at the Wilmington locomotive repair facility. According to Sen. Tom Carper, D-DEL, the project will put 59 passenger cars back into service.

Amtrak Communications Director Cliff Black said the funds could create up to 6,000 new jobs.

"Today's announcement is about jobs -- both for Delaware's Amtrak shops and those businesses associated with refurbishing the Wilmington train station," said Carper, who served on Amtrak's board and commutes daily by train to Washington.

"In the short term, this money will put a lot of Delawareans to work. In the long run, these upgrades will help reduce traffic, oil consumption, greenhouse-gas emissions, and household transportation costs," Carper said.

Rebuilding the passenger cars will enable Amtrak enter new markets and increase frequencies on some existing routes. Previously these cars were sitting idle because the railroad lacked the funds to repair them. Thus, the economic stimulus will not only create jobs by enabling Amtrak to hire people to fix the cars, but also generate revenue by providing increased service, which, in turn, will create jobs in train operations, e.g. engineers, conductors and service attendants.

In Pennsylvania, rolling stock shortages have been an obstacle to increased service between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, according to Eric Bugaile, executive director of the state House Transportation Committee.

"Amtrak is ''kind of maxed out'' on its service schedule because of equipment limitations, he said, adding that the current one train a day each way past Altoona is ''dismal.''
''We would like four or five round trips,'' he said. ''At least one more.''

The funding is roughly double what Amtrak receives from Congress for capital projects, and Vice President Biden had strong words for Amtrak critics, mainly conservative Republicans, who have pointed company's failure to turn a profit and its inefficient operations

"It is "a necessity for a great nation to have a great [rail] passenger system," Biden said. "I'm tired of apologizing for help for Amtrak. ... It's an absolute national treasure and necessity."
In his remarks Friday, Biden argued that every modern passenger rail service in the world depends on subsidies. He also claimed that U.S. highways and airports are actually subsidized more than the railway system.
"So let's get something straight here. Amtrak has not been at the trough. Amtrak has been left out," he said."

Amtrak Cascades Line Marks 10th Anniversary

2009-03-12T21:26:00.003-04:00

Ridership on Amtrak's Cascades line, which is funded by the states of Washington and Oregon, has risen by 71 percent since the service began 10 years ago, according to a Washington Department of Transportation news release. Last year, the line served a record 775,000 passengers.

Amtrak introduced the service 10 years using five Talgo trainsets, three of which are owned by Washington and the others by Amtrak. In addition, the Washington Department of Transportation has invested $137 million in rail infrastructue and other improvements. The service has grown to four daily roundtrips between Seattle and Portland, with two continuing south to Eugene and one continuing north to Bellingham. In addition, the line offers a daily roundtrip between Seattle and Vancouver, BC, with plans in the works for a second daily train to Vancouver.

A special event to commemorate the anniversal will be held May 9 at Seattle's King Street Station. The dates also marks the second annual National Train Day.

Major Fare Hikes Loom for Big City Transit Riders

2009-03-12T20:22:00.007-04:00

Massive fare hikes are facing transit customers in major cities around the country. Higher fares could impact ridership trends, which set 50-year records last year.

In New York, where the Metropolitan Transportation Authority has proposed raising fares on subways, buses and commuter railroads by as much as 30 percent, a proposal to mitigate that fare hike by imposing new bridge tolls and a payroll tax has hit roadblocks in the state legislature. According to the New York Daily News:

"Albany sources said Gov. Paterson and other backers of the revenue-raising package, crafted by former MTA Chairman Richard Ravitch, are increasingly frustrated and concerned that time is running out for more than 8.5 million daily bus, subway and commuter train riders."

While Sheldon Silver, speaker of the state Assembly, says he has the votes needed to pass the Ravitch plan in that house, in the state Senate several Democratic members are joining with Republicans in opposing tolls on bridges across the East and Harlem Rivers that are now free. They have proposed higher vehicle registration fees, selling MTA-owned land and a commuter income tax to avoid raising tolls. U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner, who until a few days ago was running for Mayor of New York, proposed cutting MTA administrative spending by 10 percent and transferring control of the agency from the state to the city.

The legislature's failure to act prompted an emergency MTA board meeting tomorrow to discuss the problem.

If the Ravitch plan is approved, it would also impose a payroll tax on counties in the MTA service region. Fares would still rise, but by eight percent rather than 23 percent or more. The legislature has until March 25 to act. On that day the MTA board is expected to vote to approve new fares, which would take effect June 1.

State legislature action will also determine what happens to fares on Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority subways, buses, ferries and commuter rail lines. The Boston Globe reports that the "T' preliminary budget "will include an "other revenues" line entry for $160 million, the size of the agency's budget deficit." The agency's board is required to approve the first draft by March 15.

The agency is counting on the legislature to help fill the money gap, but without state assistance the board will have to "reduce service and hike fares to make up the difference." Fares could rise by 25 percent, and off-peak and weekend service face substantial reductions that would take effect July 1.

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick has proposed a 19 cents per gallon gasoline tax to keep MBTA fares low, reduce a recently imposed toll hike on the Massachusetts Turnpike and support transportation projects around the state. However, the plan is getting a cool reception in the legislature, according to the Globe.

In the Windy City, the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) board will probably impose higher fares and cost-cutting measures next month to help close a $155 million budget gap, The Chicago Tribune reports. Paul Fish, the CTA’s vice-president of budget and capital finance told the board earlier this week the agency could probably reduce expenses by $80 million but would still face a $75 million shortfall that would, most likely, have to be made up at the farebox.

One problem facing the agency is the reliability of sales tax revenue projections provided by its parent agency, the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA). In mid February the RTA told CTA sales tax revenue was running $58 million below projections. CTA had estaimted the shortfall at $87 million. The RTA board meets April 2; the CTA board April 7.

Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) is considering its second fare hike in two years because of a $45 million shortfall in sales tax revenue. The hike would take effect on some services in September and on others, including Trinity Railway Express, as late as December 2010, according to the Dallas Morning News. A day pass for local bus and light rail service would rise by $1 to $4.

New York Unveils 20-Year Rail Plan

2009-03-09T21:52:00.004-04:00

At a press conference today held at the Albany-Rensselaer Amtrak station, New York Gov. David Paterson unveiled the Empire State's first statewide rail plan in 22 years. It calls for spending $10.7 billion over 20 years to upgrade intercity passenger and freight service, with $3 billion targeted for the so-called Third Track Initiative, which would reduce trip times and increase frequency and reliability along the Empire Corridor between Albany-Rensselaer and Buffalo.

"The Third Track Initiative aims to establish a dedicated third track for high speed passenger rail service across Upstate from Niagara Falls to Albany with a potential for reducing the travel time by 2 hours or more."

Other goals of the plan include:

Doubling train frequencies between New York and Albany-Rensselaer, Albany-Rensselaer and Niagara Falls and Albany-Rensselaer and Montreal.
Achieving on-time performance of at least 95 percent between Albany and New York City.
Shortening the travel time between Albany-Rensselaer and Montreal to 6 1/2 hours from eight hours.
Establishing new passenger service, where viable, such as between Saratoga and Albany, Niagara Falls and Buffalo, and Binghamton and New York City

California High-Speed Rail Agency Faces Cash Crunch

2009-03-09T21:37:00.004-04:00

Despite passage of a $9.9 billion bond initiative last November and $8 billion for high-speed rail in President Obama's economic stimulus package, the California High-Speed Rail Authority could come to a crashing halt. The agency is facing a cash crunch, according to a Fresno Bee editorial, because state spending on infrastructure projects has been frozen.

It has pegged its hopes on a $29.1 million bridge loan to sustain its operations through June in hope that it can access some of the federal funds and bond sale proceeds. If the agency is forced to shut down and suspend its planning activities, California could lose out on tapping the federal high-speed rail money pool: it needs federal funds to build its rail line, which has a $30 billion pricetag just for the Los Angeles - San Francisco mainline.

"California is currently ahead of the rest of the states in planning its high-speed system. We're the only state whose voters have approved spending our own money on such a project, and the environmental and engineering studies required for the massive project are already well begun.
"But that lead could evaporate quickly if California's efforts are stalled by money woes. Not a day passes without news of the enthusiasm that's rising in other states and regions to build high-speed systems -- the Midwest, the Northeast corridor, Texas, Florida."

MARTA Ridership Gains Gone With the Wind

2009-03-09T21:07:00.004-04:00

MARTA, the Metropolitan Atlanta public transit agency, reported an 8.6 gain in ridership on its subway system for 2008, the third highest among the nation's subway operators, according to American Public Transportation Association figures. But the Atlanta Journal Constitution reports a reversal of fortune for the agency this year, with ridership off four percent, year over year, in January. That's the start of MARTA's troubles:

"Despite getting about $65 million from the federal economic stimulus package for repairs, renovations and equipment replacements, MARTA is projected to have a $65 million to $67 million operating budget shortfall this year because its share of public sales tax revenues has declined dramatically along with the economy.

"And with lower gasoline prices and fewer people now commuting to work because they no longer have jobs, ridership is falling once again, too."

MARTA CEO Beverly Scott says the drop in sales tax revenue could mean service reductions of 10 to 30 percent, depending on what the Georgia legislature does to come to the agency's aid. Also a 25-cent fare hike to $2 for a single ride is in store for riders.

New Mexico Tribes Declare Shutter-Free Zones on Rail Runner

2009-03-09T20:52:00.002-04:00

Officials of the Santo Domingo and San Felipe pueblos have asked conductors on New Mexico Rail Runner trains to request that their passengers refrain from taking photos while crossing their territories, Associated Press reports. A 12-mile stretch of the Albuquerque - Santa Fe rail route just north of Bernalillo crosses Native American lands, and the residents want to maintain their privacy.

“We know that we probably can’t enforce it legally,” said Lawrence Rael, director of the Mid-Region Council of Governments. “It’s just a matter of agreement to say we would respect their request. I think it’s pretty reasonable. Those of us who were raised in New Mexico know that when you drive into a pueblo there are signs posted that say ‘no picture taking.’ ... This is just an extension of that.’’

Transit Ridership Sets 52-Year High

2009-03-09T20:33:00.004-04:00

Is America's love affair with the automobile coming to an end? Americans took 10.7 billion rides on public transit in 2008, according to the American Public Transportation Association (APTA). That is the most in 52 years and a four percent gain over 2007. The increase came despite a falloff in gasoline prices and rising unemployment, a critical factor for transit, since 60 percent of transit usage is work related.

"The APTA survey found that ridership increased last year on all modes of transit all across the country. Ridership rose on 14 of the nation's subway systems (3.5 percent), 20 of 21 commuter rail systems (4.7 percent) and 20 of 26 light-rail systems (8.3 percent). Some of the big increases were in places such as South Florida, Dallas and Salt Lake City, not necessarily among the largest communities served by transit, officials said."

Transit advocates say the gains provide a rationale for increased investment in public travel modes. The spending would not only help the economy but address environmental and energy issues. APTA President William W. Millar told The Washington Post:

"Now, more than ever, the value of public transportation is evident, and the public has clearly demonstrated that they want and need more public transit services. These are investments that pay off for decades and decades to come. Boston opened the nation's first subway in 1897. More than a century later I can still ride it today."

Economic Stimulus Projects in New Jersey, Massachusetts

2009-03-06T01:02:00.004-05:00

Several NJ Transit projects will receive $423 million in economic stimulus money, with the biggest chunk, $130 million, going toward the $9 billion Access to the Region's Cor project to construct a new tunnel under the Hudson River and new passenger rail terminal in Midtown Manhattan. Other funded projects include a $40 million transfer station in Pennsauken connecting the Atlantic City Line and River Line (light rail), signal improvements for the River Line ($24 million) and bidirectional operation on the Morris & Essex line ($25 million.)

Economic stimulus money will fund a $37 million project to restore a second track to a former Boston & Maine line through Andover and Haverhill, Mass., now used by MBTA's Haverhill and Fitchburg Lines as well as Amtrak's Downeaster. According to the Andover Townsman, the project "would allow more commuter rail trips through Andover, especially during peak commuter hours."

California Rail Plan Report Premature

2009-03-06T00:51:00.003-05:00

A published report that the first leg of California's high-speed rail network would operate between Bakersfield and Merced may have been premature. Check out this notice published by the Los Angeles Times.

New York Central Legacy Gives Empire State a Leg Up in High-Speed Money Chase

2009-03-06T00:30:00.004-05:00

In a cost-cutting move in the 1960s, the erstwhile New York Central System reduced its mainline across Upstate New York from two tracks to four. Nearly 50 years later, that decision could give New York State an advantage in competing for high-speed rail money contained in the recently enacted economic stimulus package.

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood told The Buffalo News his department is giving serious consideration to funding a high-speed rail project from Buffalo to Albany.

“This is a very bipartisan effort that includes a project that represents 60 percent of the state,” LaHood said after a meeting with the state’s upstate congressional delegation. “This part of the state is hurting, and obviously this would be an economic engine, and we obviously will take all of that into consideration.”

The Empire Corridor, which extends to New York City, is one of 11 routes declared eligible for high-speed rail money by Uncle Sam. A proposal to upgrade the line using diesel-powered trains running at speeds in the 110 m.p.h. - 150 m.p.h. range would cut Buffalo - Albany trip times to three hours from the current five - six hours.

According to an aide to U.S. Rep. Louise Slaughter, part of the project is shovel-ready since it would follow use the unused portion of the four-track right-of-way now used by CSX's Chicago Line. With its own track, passenger trains, which in all likelihood would be operated by Amtrak, would not be subject to delay from CSX freight traffic.

The upstate New York corridor has one huge advantage, said Rep. Eric Massa, D-Corning.
“We have the right of ways,” Massa said. “Everywhere else in the state, they have to be created."

The Obama administration is required to have criteria for funding high-speed rail projects complete by mid-April.

Amtrak Contemplates More Fare Cuts

2009-03-03T22:41:00.003-05:00

Amtrak. which last month lowered fares for its Acela Express may soon reduce tariffs on other trains, Bloomberg reports. Acela ridership was done 14 percent in January. The Northeast Corridor, both Acela and conventional, saw business fall eight percent in February.

The bright spot in Amtrak's business is long-distance travel, up 6.1 percent so far in the current fiscal year and 3.5 percent. However, Amtrak CEO Joseph Bpardman says it is premature to forecast whether the trend will hold up for the rest of the year.

The long-distance are heartening because, as Trains for America notes: "It is important for Congress and journalists to know that there is an Amtrak out beyond the Northeast Corridor...Amtrak long distance service is proving its worth in tough economic times."

Palo Alto Council Flip-Flops on High-Speed Rail

2009-03-03T22:09:00.005-05:00

Last fall, the Palo Alto, Calif., City Council unanimously endorsed the California High-Speed Rail bond proposition. Monday night it passed a resolution calling for the line to run through its city in a tunnel or consider alternative routes that would not see the trains operate in the San Francisco Peninsula.

The San Jose Mercury News reports residents having issues with the route the trains would take through their city, which is home to Stanford University.

"One possible alignment would put the tracks on a 20-foot-high concrete platform so the trains wouldn't intersect with cross streets. Residents, inflamed by the prospect of a "Berlin Wall" dividing their neighborhoods, have been packing public meetings on the topic."

But it doesn't have to be so bleak. At the California High-Speed Rail Blog, Robert Cruikshank presents examples from Europe of elevated railway structures that actually enhance the character of the surrounding by placing stores and other businesses under the arches that support the rails.

Here on Long Island, where I live, there are many examples of elevated structures that avoid the "Berlin Wall" effect feared in California. In the vicinity of stations the roadbed is supported by concrete or steel piers. Most of the space is used for parking. However, depots are placed under the tracks, as well. Recently, the Long Island Rail Road has upgraded the structures with new brick or stucco facades. In Merrick, a new depot was built and the original building, which dates to the mid-1970s, was converted into a branch library.

I would suggest that Palo Alto officials should heed the advice of California High-Speed Rail Authority Board Member Rod Diridon and "focus on how to make the train work now that it has been approved by the state's voters." There is too much upside to let this project be derailed by a bunch of NIMBYs.

All Aboard the Merced Bullet Train

2009-03-03T21:55:00.004-05:00

In a hurry to get from Bakersfield, Calif., to Merced?

By 2015, bullet trains capable of reaching 220 mph could whisk you there in just 45 minutes, less than one-third the time it takes to drive the 175-mile distance. The Visalia Times-Delta reports the first leg of the California High-Speed Rail system will connect those cities.

The segment, which would be built parallel to state Highway 99, traverses the flat San Joaquin Valley, where mountain passes and urban congestion won't restrict track speeds. But just how many people want to travel from Bakersfield to Merced?

Plans call for the high-speed line to run from San Francisco to Los Angeles with branches to Sacramento and San Diego. However service between California's two largest cities isn't likely to begin before 2018.

Plans Revealed for Metro North Service to Meadowlands

2009-03-03T21:32:00.003-05:00

The Railfan Window Blog has details about Metro North's planned service to New York Giant and Jet football games, which is slated to begin in August. Two trains from New Haven and one from Stamford will run to Secaucus Junction, where passengers will transfer to a shuttle train running from Hoboken Terminal to Giants Stadium. The three return trains will run through to New Haven.

The trains will use NJ Transit rolling stock and locomotives because Metro North equipment is incompatible with the power system used on Amtrak-owned portions of the Northeast Corridor line the NJ Transit operates over. West of Penn Station, the trains will operate as regular NJ Transit schedules, continuing onto Trenton, Dover or Long Branch.

The service is a historic "first" for regional rail in the New York region. It marks the first regional rail trains to operate through New York rather than terminate there. In addition, the football specials will be the first regional rail service over the Hellgate Bridge, which heretofore has been used exclusively for intercity rail and freight.

Overcroded, Malfunctioning Trains Help Fox Blogger Make Case for Transit

2009-03-03T21:16:00.003-05:00

Fox Business News blogger Brian Sullivan provides an interesting look at a calamitous day commuting to New York from Morristown, NJ, aboard NJ Transit. In a manner that can be considered truly Foxian, he says his woes make the case for increased investment in transit: "Consider rail improvements an investment … something we can’t say about much of the other parts of the “stimulus.” However, I disagree with his suggestion to privatize. I'm sure patrons of the MBTA commuter lines serving Boston and Metrolink in Los Angeles, while rely on privatized operators feel the same way.

33rd Street Underground Passageway May Reopen

2009-03-03T20:46:00.004-05:00

The "Gimbels Passageway," an underground corridor along W. 33rd Street linking Penn Station with the Herald Square subway station complex could soon reopen after being closed for more than 20 years, according to Mobilizing the Region, the newsletter of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign.

A real estate developer wants to reopen it after more than 20 years since it was sealed off as part of a project to redevelop the Hotel Pennsylvania and Manhattan Mall, which occupies the site of the former Gimbel's department store for which the corridor was named. The reopening would make it easier for commuters to get to and from the rail lines using Penn Station (Amtrak, Long Island Rail Road, NJ Transit, 7th Avenue subway, 8th Avenue subway) and those at Herald Square (6th Avenue subway, Broadway subway and PATH) since it would obviate the need to climb stairs or use escalators to get to the street. It would reduce pedestrian congestion along W. 32nd and W. 33rd Street and it would most appreciated during the winter months and on rainy days.

The passageway closed not long after Gimbel's went out of business in 1987. By that time it had become overrun with derelicts, junkie and other unsavory characters, making it seem a depressing and threatening. Its reopening would be a powerful symbol of New York's recovery from the bleak times of the 1970s and 1980s.

Tip of the hat to Brian W. at "The Railfan Window Blog." He had the story weeks ahead of the Tri-State Transportation Committee.

Open Drawbridges Blocking Shore Line East Expansion

2009-03-03T20:28:00.005-05:00

Three open drawbridges may be standing in the way of more Shore Line East commuter rail service to New London, CT, from New Haven, the New London Day reports.

The state of Connecticut is willing to fund the service expansion and Amtrak, which owns the Northeast Corridor tracks the trains will run over is willing to give operating slots. But the additional service, which would extend trains that now terminate or begin their runs on Old Saybrook, requires a new agreement between Amtrak and the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) governing operation of three bridges over the Connecticut and Niantic Rivers and Shaw's Cove in New London.

Currently the bridges are left in the open position during recreational boating season (May 15 through October 15) and close when trains are approaching. The current policy limits daily train movements over the bridge to 39 Amtrak trains, two Shore Line East trains and two freight trains. If Amtrak wants to increase the number of trains that cross the bridges and close the bridges more often, it has to request authorization from the state DEP.

Transbay Terminal Design Called Inadequate

2009-03-02T20:25:00.003-05:00

California transportation officials warn the design for a new Transbay Terminal in San Francisco, the so-called Grand Central Terminal of the West, will be inadequate to the planned California High-Speed Rail line, the San Francisco Chronicle reports. In addition, they say there are serious engineering challenges to extend the Caltrain commuter line from its current terminal to Transbay in downtown San Francisco. Officials hope to resolve the problems so they can compete for funds from the recently enacted economic stimulus package.

NY Dems Squabble Over Bridge Tolls to Save MTA Fares

2009-03-02T19:58:00.005-05:00

Leave it to New York State politicians to resort to posturing and obstruction when serious matters need to be resolved; in this case the need to mitigate a proposed 23 percent fare hike for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's various operating agencies.

Daily News political blogger Elizabeth Thompson reports that New York City Comptroller and mayoral candidate Bill Thompson steadfastly opposes putting tolls on the free bridges across the East and Harlem Rivers to raise money for the MTA to reduce the magnitude of proposed fare hikes. Joining his in opposition to the plan were state Assemblymen Adriano Espaillat, Rory Lancman, Jose Peralta and 17 other Democratic state legislators.

That puts them at odds with incumbent Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Gov. David Paterson and Speaker of the Assembly Sheldon Silver, who proposed pegging the tolls to the subway fare, which is currently $2. With the exception of Bloomberg, an independent, all of the story's characters are Democrats.

Mr. Silver says he has enough votes in the State Assembly to pass the proposal, but it's a different situation in the State Senate, where the Democrats have a razor-thin majority. Six Democratic Senators oppose the measure, and Silver says he won't act without a clear sense of where the Senate stands.

A new snag is MTA's willingness to accept a $2 toll on the bridges rather than the $5 originally proposed in Richard Ravitch's bailout plan. Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith wants an audit of the agency before the Senate votes.

Sorry Charlie, This Ain't Pork

2009-03-01T22:55:00.004-05:00

In his Sunday "newsmaker" presser, U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-NY, called for using economic stimulus funds to revive the moribund Moynihan Station project, which would convert the New York General Post Office across Eighth Avenue from Pennsylvania Station into a new station facility.

The project, which has been discussed since the 1990s, would certainly quality as "shovel-ready" and would help create jobs, especially in construction. Also, it would give New York a station with architectural features evocative of the original Penn Station that was demolished in the 1960s.

But, here's the rub. According to The New York Times, Sen. Schumer doesn't want to use New York State's share of the stimulus to pay for the project, a glorified commercial real estate development designed to attract upscale retailers and restaurants. He wants the money to come out of the piece of the pie designated for Amtrak or high-speed rail projects.

To quote a certain governor with great legs and a wardrobe to go bankrupt for, "Thanks, but no thanks." The Moynihan Station will do nothing to reduce travel times. If anything, it will lengthen them since the new facility will be further away from the heart of the Midtown business district and other key Manhattan locations. And, taking the money from Amtrak would essentially be robbing that perennially cash-strapped company, which has said it wants no part of Moynihan Station, preferring to stay put in Penn Station, where it is closer to the action.

So what the Senator, whom I consider a political ally, is doing is attempting to turn the economic stimulus into a porkfest for the sake of a little publicity. For shame. It is tantamount to playing into the hands of Louisana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who used the high-speed rail appropriation to make the case that President Obama's economic stimulus was laden with pork.

Sen. Schumer should have paid more attention in Hebrew School when the rabbi told him pork isn't kosher.

California Media Feed HSR Trolls

2009-03-01T22:49:00.003-05:00

After the state's voters approved a $10 billion bond issue to help finance its new high-speed rail line, media reports are surfacing of rising opposition to the project in the San Francisco Bay Peninsula. California High-Speed Rail blogger Robert Cruikshank takes on the media frenzy this is raising and debunks some of the critics arguments.

What Does $8 Billion Buy?

2009-03-01T21:59:00.004-05:00

The $8 billion included in President Obama's economic stimulus package is the largest figure ever designated by the federal government for high-speed rail. However, rail experts point out the figure won't get a single bullet train built.

So what will it buy? According to The New York Times, it will pay for long-delayed improvements to conventional rail lines and make a down payment on California's high-speed line, which would connect Los Angeles and San Francisco in its first phase.

"In the short term, the money - inserted at the 11th hour by the White House - could put people to work improving tracks, crossings and signal systems.
That could help more trains reach speeds of 90 to 110 miles per hour, which is much faster than they currently go. It is much slower, however, than high-speed trains elsewhere, like the 180 mph of the newest Japanese bullet train."

Some rail advocates think the money will be spread too thinly to accomplish anything significant. Joseph Vranich, a long-time Amtrak critic and author of Supertrains, contends the money should have been put in one basket, upgrading the Northeast Corridor.

"If we really wanted to have high-speed rail in this country, and have it be a great success, then what we would do is concentrate the funds on the New York-Washington corridor, which is the top corridor in the country."

The United States has had a checkered history with respect to high-speed rail. While the federal government got involved in the mid-1960s with the passage of the High-Speed Ground Transportation Act, which funded the original Metroliner from New York to Washington and a turbo train from New York to Boston, proposals for high-speed lines in other parts of the country have met with fits and starts. They have remained stuck in a side track while countries like Japan, France, Germany and China have sped by us.

Even today, the U.S. government defines 90 m.p.h. as high-speed rail. That's less than half what what trains like France's TGV and Germany's ICE do.

This doesn't mean improvements to bring speeds to the 90 - 110 mph range aren't worthwhile. They could give rail a time advantage over highway travel and make rail competitive with air for trips of 250 - 300 miles.

But speeds of that caliber won't cut it on the 450-mile distance separating Los Angeles from San Francisco. Thus, high-speed rail in the U.S. will require a variety of strategies contingent upon the markets being served.

As for Mr. Vranich's suggestion that the entire $8 billion go to the New York-Washington line, how much upside is there for a line that already dominates the air-rail market between the two cities? In the current state of affairs more good can be accomplished by advancing projects in other parts of the country where incremental improvements can yield significant gains, e.g. Chicago - St. Louis, Seattle - Portland.

Successes there will demonstrate that the Northeast Corridor is not an isolated phenomenon and debunk the arguments of skeptics who say this country has a car and air mentality. Our allegiance to those modes has as much to do with the lack of an attractive rail alternative as it has with the convenience of driving and the speed of air. Where multiple rail frequencies are offered at reasonably competitive trip times, Americans have climbed on board. Make the trains go a little faster and make them run on time and even more will ride.

Connecticut Commissioner Supports Rail

2009-03-01T21:00:00.003-05:00

Highway-happy Connecticut has a new sheriff running its state transportation department. Commissioner Joseph Marie is pushing for new regional rail lines, a welcome change from past policies. Read more at The Transport Politic.

Metrolink Ridership Falls with Gas Prices

2009-03-01T20:45:00.002-05:00

In July 2008, when gasoline prices in Southern California were north of $4.50 a gallon, ridership on Metrolink, the Los Angeles regional rail line hit a record 50,152 one-day trips. That figure has fallen back to 47,078, according to the Los Angeles Daily News.

The drop is blamed on a combination of lower gasoline prices and rising unemployment. Also contributed to the decline was the September 2008 crash in Chatsworth that claimed 25 lives. For the first time since 2002, the railroad is conducting a proactive campaign to put more fannies in its seats.

Increased Transit Benefit Seen as Boon to DC Commuter Rail

2009-03-01T20:27:00.004-05:00

Officials of Washington-area commuter rail lines think they may see a bump in ridership from the increased transit benefits that take effect this month, according to The Washington Post.

"I think there is a potential for an uptick in ridership because for anyone who is around rail lines, especially on the Manassas line, it becomes a free trip," said Dale Zehner, chief executive officer of Virginia Railway Express.

The economic stimulus package signed into law last month by President Obama raised the transit benefit from $120 a month to $230. A monthly pass on VRE from Manassas to Washington costs $220. Transit benefits are provided as a direct subsidy from employers, a pre-tax payroll deduction or a combination of both. According to the article in the Post, approximately 65 percent of VRE's 16,000 daily riders are federal employees who receive the transit benefit. Zehner said commuters from points further out on his system will now be more inclined to take the train instead of drive

Tri Rail's Financial Woes Offer Cautionary Tale

2009-03-01T19:08:00.004-05:00

These should be glory days for South Florida's Tri-Rail line. Its route from West Palm Beach to Miami was recently double-tracked and last year it carried a record four million riders. Yet its future is in the air.

The reason is that Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties, which subsidize its operations to the tune of $4 million a year, want to pare that figure to $1.5 million, the minimum required under state law. If that were to happen, Tri-Rail says it would be forced to cut its frequency by 60 percent and eliminate weekend and holiday service. But there's a "Catch 22." If Tri-Rail service levels were to fall below 48 trains a day, the federal government could sue to recoup the $333 million it spent on the double-tracking project.

To avoid having to cut service, Tri-Rail has proposed a $2/day tax on car rentals, which could generate $50 million a year, given the large numbers of tourists who visit the Sunshine State's attractions. I count myself among their numbers since I rent cars during my annual pilgrimage to visit the parents, who live not too far from Tri-Rail's tracks.

Tri-Rail tried to get the rental tax enacted one before, in 2006. But, it was vetoed by then-Gov. Jeb Bush. According to an editorial in the Palm Beach Post, "If it doesn't pass this year, Tri-Rail is basically dead."

There's lesson in Tri-Rail's woes for backers of a commuter line proposed for the Orlando area. The state legislature is prepared to sign off on a $1.2 billion plan to start up that line, known as Sun Rail.

"SunRail boosters in Orlando should know that paying for Tri-Rail has become a perennial crisis...Legislators need to make sure that Tri-Rail has a permanent source of operating money before starting a new rail service with no clear plans on where money will come from to operate it."

Tri-Rail's future might not be as bleak as the Post editorial suggests. Another option it is looking at is raising fares, which have been fixed for 14 years. Tri-Rail's fares are among the lowest in the country. A monthly ticket costs $80 dollar. By comparison. a monthly ticket from New Haven to Grand Central Terminal on Metro North, a distance comparable to West Palm Beach - Miami, costs $386 and could go up by as much as $100 this year.

No passenger rail operation can sustained without a reliable source of operating funds. There is no set formula for how much should come from the farebox versus state and local treasuries, but a reliable formula needs to be put in place. Federal officials should demand accountability from operating authorities that seek Uncle Sam's support for public transit projects. Without a reliable business operating plan, no funds should be spent on new rail projects.

Officials Eye Highway Toll to Restore Rails to Reading

2009-02-22T22:39:00.003-05:00

Among the more shortsighted decisions made in recent years by transit agency's was SEPTA's decision to annul service on its routes from Philadelphia to Reading, Pottsville and Bethlehem in the early 1980s. Shortsighted not only because they eliminated viable routes, but also because plans to restore service have become too expensive. One revival plan, the Schuykill Valley Metro running to Reading, would have cost $2 billion.

Now officials of Berks, Montgomery and Chester Counties plan to study the feasibility of converting U.S. Route 422, a limited access expressway between Pottstown, in the northwest corner of Montgomery County, and the Pennsylvania Turnpike, in King of Prussia, into a toll road that could help pay for extending SEPTA's R6 commuter line to Reading. The $2 toll would also be used to upgrade the highway, which experiences heavy rush hour congestion.

Three rail options are under consideration: extending the R6 as an electrified train to Valley Forge; operating a connecting diesel train from Norristown to Reading, or extending electrification to Reading and providing direct service from Philadelphia.

"A commuter rail line has been discussed for many years as a proposed solution to the increasing traffic volumes on Route 422 in Berks and Montgomery counties, however, funding has always been one of the major roadblocks," said Judy Schwank, President and CEO of 10,000 Friends of Pennsylvania and a former Berks County commissioner. "This study addresses that difficult issue head-on by exploring possible funding mechanisms including public-private partnerships and tolling."

According to Leo Bagley, Montgomery County assistant director for planning, the new rail line would cost around $500 million, around one-fourth the price of the plan that was previously rejected by federal officials in 2002.

Montgomery County represents a potential growth opportunity for SEPTA. According to the Pottstown Mercury, 81 percent of the county's residents travel to work alone each day. A mere 4 percent take mass transit. A modern commuter rail service could change that ratio and help Montgomery County break away from the suburban sprawl mentality. It also could see Pottstown's beautiful limestone depot (above), which now houses a bank, welcoming railroad passengers once again.

Advocacy Group: New MBTA Line Would Cost $800,000 Per Rider

2009-02-19T22:05:00.003-05:00

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), an organization of public sector resource professionals says the MBTA has lowered ridership projections a controversial extension to Fall River and New Bedford while projected costs for the project have risen. In a news release posted on the Common Dreams.org website, it claims the cost of the state's preferred alternative, which would run across the Hockomock Swamp, Massachusetts' largest freshwater wetland, now equals $800,000 per commuter.

According to the release, MBTA now projects 2,500 new round trip riders for the New Bedford line. In 2002, the estimate was 2,953 riders. While the project's cost is estimated at $1.4 billion, that does not include environmental mitigation, which PEER claims could push the total cost over $2 billion.

"For $800,000 we could fly each commuter to New Bedford every day in a helicopter," stated New England PEER Director Kyla Bennett.

Phoenix Light Rail Exceeds Ridership Expectations

2009-02-19T21:55:00.003-05:00

Phoenix' new light rail line exceeded ridership expectations by 5,000 riders per day on weekdays during January, the Arizona Republic reports. However, those positive numbers may not lost. A 50-cent fare hike may be in the works for the new transit line and that could promulgate a falloff in passenger counts.

Boardman Wants Rolling Stock

2009-02-19T21:46:00.003-05:00

Railway Age reports Amtrak CEO Joseph Boardman has written to Vice President Joe Biden and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi advising that the railroad will seek a $1.4 billion appropriation in FY 2010 to purchase new rolling in order to expand service. The request includes "60 electric locomotives for the Northeast Corridor, 25 single-level dining cars, 75 baggage cars, 25 single-level sleeping cars, and 130 bilevel cars for short-distance routes.

Boardman: Amtrak Managers Burnt Out

2009-02-19T21:36:00.003-05:00

A fascinating interview by Don Phillips with Amtrak CEO Joseph Boardman for Trains.com reveals many of Amtrak's managers are burnt out and do not have much confidence in the railroad's future. Boardman suggest that those who cannot make the transition from survival mode to growth mode may no longer have a place with the company. Read the whole piece here.

Stimulus Money Could Help Build Hudson River Tunnel

2009-02-19T21:18:00.002-05:00

The economic stimulus package signed into law earlier this week could provide up to $1.5 billion toward construction of the Access to the Region's Core project, which includes new tunnels under the Hudson River and a new terminal in Midtown Manhattan for NJ Transit, according to New Jersey's two U.S. Senators.

In a joint statement issued last week, Sen. Robert Menendez said:

“This much-needed rail tunnel embodies what we’re trying to do with this recovery package. We’re jumpstarting a ready-to-go project that creates jobs now and lays the groundwork for a more secure economic future.”

“Not only will this package serve as an engine for job creation, but these investments will pay off in the years to come by reducing congestion on our roads and providing new, energy-efficient options for travelers,” added Sen. Frank Lautenberg.

However, even if the full $1.5 billion were to come through, New Jersey would still have a $1.25 billion funding gap for the $8.75 billion project, which has been criticized by some rail advocates for its failure to provide a connection to Pennsylvania Station, NJ Transit's current terminus in New York.

Amtrak Offers Discounted Acela Fares

2009-02-19T20:57:00.004-05:00

Good news for travelers in the Northeast Corridor. Amtrak is lowering fares on its Acela Express by 25 percent. The new rates begin March 3 and are in effect through June 25. A ticket from New York to Washington can be had for as little as $99 and a New York - Boston ticket will be as low as $79. To get the low fares, tickets must be purchased 14 days in advance and are nonrefundable.

The reason for the discount comes down to one word: recession. In January, Amtrak reported a 14 percent decline in Acela ridership despite the traffic surge generated by Barack Obama's inauguration. For the most recent four-month period Acela traffic is off 10 percent, Bloomberg reports. The decline is attributed to a fall-off in business travel. So Amtrak, hopes to recoup some of its losses by pricing the train to appeal to the leisure passenger.

What's not known is whether the business traveler is abandoning Amtrak altogether or downgrading to the recently upgraded Northeast Direct service to save money. For some trips, the time savings on Acela over the conventional Amfleet-equipped trains do not justify the premium paid. On the other hand, Acela other amenities besides speed that can attract the leisure travelers, such as the large windows and better food options.

If Amtrak's strategy does work, expect to see a lot more college students on board headed for weekend jaunts to the Big Apple, Boston, Philadelphia or Washington.

How Amtrak Will Spent Its Piece of Stimulus Pie

2009-02-19T20:41:00.002-05:00

Government Executive provides an interesting breakdown of how Amtrak's economic stimulus money will be spent. The legislation signed into law earlier this week by President Obama gives the railroad $1.3 billion in direct appropriations.

$450 million will go toward security improvements and the rest ($850 million) for capital improvements. Of the latter figure, 60 percent will be spent on the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak's busiest line.

According to the report, Amtrak could see additional money from the $8 billion appropriated for high-speed rail projects. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has the final call on how that pool of money will be allocated. An additional $288 million could be headed toward the Boston - Washington line as the result of a change in the law making Amtrak eligible to issue tax-exempt bonds to finance "high-speed rail facilities" along that route.

Is America Getting Real About High-Speed Rail?

2009-02-19T00:29:00.004-05:00

The United States may at long last be getting serious about high-speed rail. According to Reuters, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said his agency is preparing for President Obama a report on developing high-speed rail in six corridors that include cost and time estimates.

"This is going to be President Obama's, I believe, top transportation priority," LaHood told reporters. "They asked us to give them as much information as we could."

According to the article, LaHood indicated the President is contemplating an investment beyond the $8 billion included in the economic stimulus legislation signed earlier this week. Politico.com reported that the President was a prime mover behind that appropriation, which was added to the legislation in final negotiations.

This would represent a 180 degree turnabout in government thinking on intercitty rail. Former President George W. Bush routinely submitted budget with appropriations well below the levels requested by the railroad. In some years, his budget provided nothing for Amtrak.

Budget Woes Again Threaten Chicago Transit Lines

2009-02-18T23:50:00.004-05:00

New state and local taxes imposed last year won't be enough to balance the books this year for three Chicago region public transportation agencies. The Chicago Tribune reports that tax revenues are running below forecasts due to the weak economy and that a new "doomsday scenario" threatens the Chicago Transit Authority, which operates subways, elevated trains and buses in that city, Metra, which runs the commuter trains, and PACE, the suburban bus line.

"State lawmakers thought they fixed the funding problems, at least for 5 to 10 years, when they voted to increase mass-transit subsidies by boosting the transit portion of the sales tax in the six-county area. Chicago also increased its real estate transfer tax, directing more money to the CTA.

But sales taxes and real estate taxes have plummeted during the economic slowdown, reigniting the budget crisis.

"We all thought that the hard-won . . . legislation would provide sufficient resources to operate our system," RTA Executive Director Steve Schlickman wrote to the heads of the transit agencies. "And while that legislation did increase our funding, as soon as it became law, economic conditions wiped out much of what we gained."

Jim Reilly, chair of the Regional Transportation Authority, the board that oversees finances at the three agencies, told Chicago Public Radio that the agencies shouldn't look to the state legislature for a new bailout. He added his agency hopes to find solutions that don't involve fare hikes or service reductions. CTA raised fares last month.

Bus Competition Concerns Indiana Commuter Line

2009-02-18T23:11:00.004-05:00

The Northwest Indiana Regional Bus Authority, which operates local bus service in that corner of the Hoosier State, is pressing ahead with plans to operate express bus service from Lake County to downtown Chicago, to the chagrin of the operator of the South Shore line, reports the Northwest Indiana Times.

The newspaper reports that the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD) has had a change of heart on the subject. At first, NICTD, which runs the South Shore line, an electrified regional carrier running from South Bend to Chicago, supported the new bus service. It thought it would be a good way to test demand for a proposed line extension.

However, NICTD Marketing and Planning Director John Parsons says the railroad has had second thoughts. "We have expressed concern, especially when it (express bus service) goes into downtown Chicago," Parsons said. "It's literally serving our market."

From a free market perspective, it seems silly to be complaining about competition - intermodal or otherwise. NICTD shouldn't have to worry. Only two buses would operate, and they would leave from Munster, which is not served by the South Shore. Plus, the buses run the risk of getting stuck in traffic, something that is not a concern for trains.

But, this is politics, not business. The expansion is funded by another agency, the Regional Development Authority, and the argument could be made that taxpayer funds are being used to pit one mode against another.

Perhaps the solution is to merge the bus agency into NICTD. This could not only reduce overhead, but put the service in the hands of one authority whose mission would be to utilize the two modes - bus and rail - in a way that maximizes their effectiveness.

Virginia Board Approves Train to Lynchburg

2009-02-13T23:25:00.003-05:00

The Lynchburg News & Advance reports that the Commonwealth Transportation Board has approved funding for a state-supported Amtrak train from Lynchburg to Washington. The service could begin as early as October if agreements are reached with Norfolk Southern and CSX, over whose tracks the train will run.

The new service would supplement Amtrak's Crescent, a New Orleans - New York run, which stops in Lynchburg northbound at 6 am and southbound at 10 pm, and provide more convenient travel times.

Funding for the train is through a $17.2 million three year appropriation to support the Lynchburg train as well as a Washington - Richmond round trip. It is conceived as a demonstration project to test demand for expanded passenger service. During the funded period the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation will seek permanent funding.

MTA Payroll Tax Plan Faces Resistance Upstate

2009-02-13T23:06:00.003-05:00

Business leaders and public officials from the northernmost counties in the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority are voicing opposition to a proposed payroll tax intended to moderate fare increases proposed for the agency's trains and buses. The tax, which would raise $1.5 billion, was a cornerstone of Richard Ravitch's plan to keep the fare hikes at eight percent rather than 23 percent authorized by the MTA board.

Officials fear the tax would be detrimental to area schools and hospitals since all employers - public, private and nonprofit - would be subject to it. That means hospitals would have to raise fees and school taxes would rise to cover the extra cost, pegged at 33 center per $100 in salary.

Middletown school superindent Kenneth W. Eastwood told The New York Times the payroll tax would cost his district about $225,000, roughly equivalent to three and a half teacher salaries. “The thing that irks us is we’re really paying for somebody else’s problem,” he said. Only a small percentage of residents of Orange and Dutchess Counties use MTA's Metro North railroad to get to work.

Added State Sen. Steve Saland, R-Poughkeepsie: "At a time when local taxpayers are at the breaking point trying to pay their ever-increasing property taxes, the governor and the MTA want to increase that burden by instituting a payroll tax. It's ludicrous and blatantly unfair." According to Sen. Saland the tax would add a $3.3 million burden on school districts and governments in Dutchess County that would ultimately be borne by homeowners through property taxes.

HSR: Where the Stimulus Money Will Go

2009-02-13T21:54:00.003-05:00

The surprise last minute of $8 billion to fund high-speed rail projects in the economic stimulus package is leading to all sorts of speculation and posturing over how this pie will get divided up. A statement from Sen. Harry Reid's led some right-wing commentators to opine that this was little more than pork in the form of a maglev from Southern California to Las Vegas. Alas, that isn't even one of the federally designated high-speed corridors, although could always change, and senators from other states, as well as the President and Vice President, pushed for the measure.

In all likelihood the lion's share of the money will go to projects that are already in the pipeline. This is economic stimulus spending, which means the money needs to go toward projects that will create job; "shovel-ready projects" is what President Obama called them. The 11 corridors recognized by the Federal Railroad Administration have been developed to varying degrees ranging from the full-flung operation of the Northeast Corridor to route that exist mainly on paper.

The best best for receiving money are:

Northeast Corridor - While this is the nation's primary high-speed line it has a backlog of projects that the stimulus could fund. They range include replacing bottlenecks like the Baltimore tunnels and Zoo Interlocking in Philaldephia, which could shave minutes off schedules, to installing constant tension catenary between New York and Washington, which would enable the Acela Express to travel at its top speed of 150 m.p.h.
Empire Corridor - Amtrak backed out of a $140 million project to reduce New York - Albany trip times to two hours earlier in the decade when it got into serious financial trouble. The project could be brought back to the front burner with new funds., and upstate representatives are pushing for high-speed all the way to Buffalo or Niagara Falls.
Southeast Corridor - North Carolina has gradually been reducing trip times between Raleigh and Charlotte to three hours. Funding could accelerate the process, including double-tracking more sections of the route, which would allow additional frequencies. The planned high-speed service from Charlotte to Washington via Richmond, VA, is in the midst of a Tier II Environmental Impact Study that is expected to be completed next year.
Pacific Northwest Corridor - The state of Washington has a plan to increase speeds between Vancouver, WA, and Seattle to 110 mph, enabling Portland - Seattle trip time to be cut to three hours. The project involves adding a third track in congested segments, which would enable Amtrak to run more Cascade trains.
Midwest Corridor - The FRA and Federal Highway Administration havea record of decision for initial improvements to erduce trip times on the Chicago - St. Louis line to four hours. A project to increase track speeds to 110 m.p.h. has been approved for the Chicago - Detroit line.
California Corridor - Even though voters approved a $9.9 billion bond issue to help finance the network's core line from Los Angeles to San Francisco, the project still in the environmental approval process.

LIRR Riders: Clean Up Your Act

2009-02-12T21:38:00.005-05:00

Newsday's report on the latest Long Island Rail Road customer satisfaction survey says in its headline "LIRR survey: Passengers slam bathroom cleanliness." Buried below in the story is the fact that riders gave the railroad an overall satisfaction score of 89 (out of 100) grading its on-time performance at 90 and giving conductors a mark of 95 for crew courtesy.

Now maybe Newsday's editors and reporters have an axe to grind against the LIRR, a perennial whipping boy and an institution not regarded favorably these days due to the disability pension scandal and pending 23 percent fare hike. But, Long Islanders, by nature, are a kvetchy bunch, and their antipathy toward the railroad may still be a holdover from 1950, the year more than 100 of their brethern were killed in two disastrous LIRR accidents.

If their beef is over the bathrooms, then what the railroad need to do is install better mirrors in them. That way the jerks complaining about them can see who is responsible for the sorry conditions, themselves. Afterall, it isn't the conductors who go in them, it is the commuters. Enough said.

Amtrak Interferes With Another Photographer

2009-02-12T21:17:00.004-05:00

Motivational speaker Tony Robbins says the definition of insanity is doing the same thing twice and expecting different results.

We ignored the story about the railfan photographer arrested at New York's Penn Station since it really had little to do with the nature or quality of rail service. Yet, it took on a life of its own with Amtrak eventually being ridiculed over it on Comedy Central "Colbert Report." Things like that can public relations practitioners acute agita.

So it was distressing to learn than, like Britney, Amtrak "Oops...did it again," this time at Los Angeles Union Station. I'm disturbed not so much about the PR fallout - by now Cliff Black no doubt has developed a fortitude of steel. What troubles me is the organization's cultural failure to see to its that its employees understand that these actions are wrong, even if they are carried out with good intentions. Do we have to post copies of the Bill of Rights in every Amtrak station?

Feds to Crack Down on Freight-Related Amtrak Delays

2009-02-12T21:02:00.004-05:00

Memo to Freight Railroads:

If you cause too many Amtrak trains running on your tracks to arrive late at their destinations it could cost you. Bloomberg reports that under legislation passed last year the Surface Transportation Board has been given authority to levy fines on railroads that delay Amtrak trains.

Freight railroad-related delays were the number one cause of tardiness for Amtrak last year, according to its chief operating officer, William Crosbie. Federal officials want Amtrak to get its on-time performance rate up to 80 percent.

On the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak considers a train on time if it reaches its final destination within 10 minutes of its scheduled time. Off the corridor, it allows 30 minutes. According to spokesman Clifford Black, so far this year Amtrak has a system-wide 77 percent on-time rate, but outside the Northeast Corridor the rate is below 70 percent.

Conflicted

2009-02-12T20:27:00.004-05:00

Good news! Talking Points Memo reports that the conference committee version of the economic stimulus bill dramatically boosts spending on Amtrak and high-speed rail over earlier versions passed by the House and Senate. When the House and Senate approve differing versions of the same legislation, a conference committee with members of both houses meets to work out the differences before a final vote.

The new bill gives Amtrak receive $1.3 billion in supplemental grants. The House bill gave it $800 million, the Senate $850. The conference bill also contains $8 billion for high-speed rail corridors, bringing the total to $9.3 billion, compared with $1.1 billion and $2.25 billion in the House and Senate versions.

Now the bad news: The conference committee took out $6 billion for higher education. Disclosure: I work in higher education and my school has a "shovel-ready" project valued at close to $500 million. Hopefully it will still go forward.

Assuming passage of the legislation unchanged, this is a watershed development. As The Transport Politic notes:

This represents the largest single expenditure on rail in United States history and promises a new day for train travel. The U.S. Department of Transportation will lead the distribution of these funds; most of the money is likely to go to existing programs such as California High-Speed Rail, Midwest High-Speed Rail, and Southeast High-Speed Rail. States will get no supplementary money for rail programs, which implies that the bill’s writers want states to focus on implementing high-speed rail over standard-speed intercity rail.

However, not everyone is totally pleased. Robert Cruickshank over at the California High-Speed Rail Blog says: "The fact is that America needs more passenger rail period and needs a comprehensive program to implement them that includes high speed and non-high speed trains."

And the right-wing echo chamber sees dirty politics afoot. Citing the roll of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, in pushing for the increase, the American Spectator opines that the money will not go toward the high-speed corridors under development in California (San Francisco - Los Angeles), the Southeast and Midwest, but rather toward development of a maglev train from Southern California to Reid's hometown, gambling mecca Las Vegas.

"Reid's high-speed gambling train not only violates the President's guiding principles for this bill, it also violates American taxpayers."

But the conservative screed ignores other high-speed rail advocates on the Obama team, and I'm not talking solely about Vice President "Amtrak" Joe Biden. Over at The Takeaway, Andrea Bernstein reports that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is a big high-speed rail supporter, as is the President, himself. Also, one of the key players in the economic stimulus negotiations is Sen. Arlen Specter, R-PA, who last year introduced a bill, along with Sen. John Kerry, D-MA, authorizing $8 billion for high-speed rail.

New York Looks to Eliminate Amtrak Bottleneck

2009-02-11T22:55:00.003-05:00

New York State transportation officials have brought a $60 million project to eliminate a bottleneck on Amtrak's Empire Corridor back to the front burner, the Albany Times Union reports. The move doesn't necessarily mean the project will get done, especially in light of the state's bleak fiscal outlook, but it makes it eligible for funding through the economic stimulus plan expected to be signed into law next week by President Obama.

The bottleneck is an 18-mile stretch of single track line between Albany-Rennselaer and Schenectady, where eastbound Amtrak trains often are forced to wait as much as 20 minutes to allow westbound passenger and freight traffic to pass. According to Robert Hansen, DOT regional planning and program manager, the project not only would improve reliability and make the service more attractive but also reduce fuel consumption and carbon emissions.

2nd Vancouver Train Stopped at Border

2009-02-09T23:20:00.002-05:00

Amtrak wants to start a second daily round trip on the Seattle - Vancouver, B.C. segment of its Cascades corridor in time for next year's Winter Olympics held in the Canadian. However, it is being held up by the Canadian Border Services Agency, which wants the passenger railroad to pay $1,500 [Canadian] a day for customs inspections, even though there is no fee for inspections on the existing service. The Seattle Times has more.

FEC Entertains Running Passenger Trains

2009-02-06T20:26:00.004-05:00

First Pan Am Railways, now the Florida East Coast.

FEC, a regional line running along its namesake territory from Miami to Jacksonville, has signaled its willingness to host commuter trains on the Miami - West Palm Beach segment of its route, according to the South Florida Sun Sentinel.

Twenty years ago, Florida transportation officials had eyed the FEC as the preferred route for passenger service on Florida's Gold Coast because it passed through the most populated areas of cities like Fort Lauderdale, Boca Raton and Delray Beach. But FEC said no, and the service, Tri-Rail, was routed over CSX, which runs alongside I-95 most of the way.

Don't look for service to start anytime soon. The Sun Sentinel report says operations won't begin for at least six years, and the cost of upgrading the line, which has 200 grade crossings, could run as much as $6 billion.

Late Trains May Cost Boston's 'T' Riders

2009-02-05T22:32:00.002-05:00

MBTA commuter trains are getting later and, if the trend continues, they may become less crowded, as well. Over the past six months, one in five commuter trains in the Boston area reached its destination five minutes or more behind schedule, the Boston Globe reports.

"The commuter rail system set a modern-day ridership record in November, with more than 76,000 round-trip passengers per day boarding the trains. But transit managers concede those gains are tenuous.
"If we don't deliver on-time performance, then our customers are not going to stick with us," said Daniel A. Grabauskas, general manager of the MBTA.
Grabauskas attributes recent delays to unusually inclement winter, construction on the tracks, and the private consortium that operates the commuter service under contract with the T, the Massachusetts Bay Commuter Railroad Co. The private operator, in turn, says the MBTA's old equipment has hampered its efforts to improve service and it is considering efforts to buy its own used locomotives because the T has not bought new ones."