The Chicago-Detroit line and the Buffalo-NYC line has me a little worried.  Connect the two lines through Ontario and the Chicago-NYC route bypasses Ohio entirely.

 

Although Buffalonians would benefit more from this route than a Chicago-NYC corridor running through Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Philly.

 

Sssshhhhh.... :sleep:

Amtrak outlines infrastructure renewal, fleet and other priorities for 2012

 

Yesterday, Amtrak officials announced what they term an “aggressive” agenda for 2012 that calls for service growth and operational improvements.

 

Among the highlights: manufacturing the first electric locomotives and single-level cars under contracts with Siemens and CAF, respectively; advancing Northeast Corridor (NEC) planning efforts; upgrading NEC infrastructure; and rolling out electronic ticketing to all trains.

 

Following another year of ridership gains in fiscal year 2011, Amtrak will proceed with investments “that yield a more efficient and reliable Amtrak” despite the uncertainty of future federal funding, said Amtrak President and Chief Executive Officer Joseph Boardman during a press conference held yesterday.

 

Read more at: http://www.progressiverailroading.com/passenger_rail/news/Amtrak-outlines-infrastructure-renewal-fleet-and-other-priorities-for-2012--29474

Passenger rail’s modal percentage potential: How high is up?

Written by  Douglas John Bowen

 

What's passenger rail's potential modal split in the U.S.? That's something to ponder as rail transit gathers strength in an auto-dependent nation during the 21st century.

 

Even ardent pro-rail advocates probably hesitate to suggest rail's percentage of passenger trips could ever challenge the mode's glory days of the late 19th century, or even the heightened levels necessitated by World War II.

 

Nor is it a given that the U.S., or even U.S. cities, can quickly attain a rail transit (or auto-alternative) percentage equal to the likes of New York.

 

But flip that picture around: It's borderline preposterous for anti-rail partisans to hold secure to the notion that "auto uber alles" can continue unabated; assuming continued growing demand for energy (conventional or alternative), coupled with other energy needs (heat or cool one's home? Desalinate one's water supply?), can auto-dependence, even aided by electricity or batteries or other fuel options, really resume a growth trend only recently upset after a nearly uninterrupted 90-year ride ever upward?

Read full op-ed at: http://www.railwayage.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=805:passenger-rail’s-modal-percentage-potential-how-high-is-up?

Amtrak requests less federal operating support        

Friday, February 03, 2012 

 

 

Amtrak is requesting $450 million in federal operating support for fiscal year 2013, a lower amount than the $466 million appropriated by Congress for FY 2012. The ability to seek reduced federal operating funding results from ongoing efforts by Amtrak to improve its financial performance, including increased efficiency, cost controls and debt reduction as well as better service, record ridership and anticipated increases in revenue.

 

"Amtrak's request for less federal operating support is a strong statement on just how much this railroad has improved its management and financial health. The fact is, Amtrak now covers 85 percent of its operating costs with non-federal dollars and we will further improve on that number without cutting service," said President and CEO Joe Boardman.

 

Amtrak submitted this request to Congress as part of its FY 2013 Grant and Legislative Request for federal funding to support the operating and capital investment needs of Amtrak. It also contains a detailed discussion of legislative issues, including Amtrak's top five priorities for a new surface transportation bill.

 

Read more at: http://www.rtands.com/newsflash/amtrak-requests-less-federal-operating-support-4998.html

Nice to see the Columbus Dispatch acknowledging Amtrak's existence with a positive article. On the down side, it didn't say a peep about its service to Cincinnati, or that someone from Columbus and southern Ohio can catch the train at several stations just across the Ohio River from out state, at Maysville KY, South Portsmouth KY, Ashland KY, and Huntington WV.....

 

Amtrak train takes in scenery between New York and Chicago

By  Jim Loomis

FOR THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH Sunday February 5, 2012 6:06 AM

 

Amtrak’s Cardinal is not a big train — just one sleeping car, three coaches and a combination dining/lounge car that follow a meandering southerly route between New York and Chicago.

 

But between those frenetic metropolitan centers, the Cardinal covers more than 1,100 miles, makes 31 stops and passes through some of the loveliest rural and wild areas in the East.

 

I boarded the Cardinal in Baltimore — the train’s fifth stop after leaving New York — on a summer morning and settled into my cozy roomette for the overnight trip to Chicago.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/travel/2012/02/05/1-cardinal-migration.html

The lack of discussion about Ohioans actually catching the train w/out a trip to Chicago or D.C. did seem a bit odd.

It was a syndicated article that happened to be picked up by the Dispatch. Jim Loomis is retired, lives in Hawaii, wrote a book "All Aboard! The Complete North American Train Travel Guide" and writes a regular blog at: http://takeatrainride.blogspot.com/  You can reach him at: [email protected]

He slept through Cincinnati, which is easily the urban highlight of the whole trip. Well, I can't speak of the Chicago end, but winding through NKY, across the river, and through the core of Cincy is undeniably epic. Feels like you're entering a great 19th century metropolis. In the 19th century.

will they use amtrak trains to send you guys to the FEMA camps?

 

What does that even mean? 

 

CTownsfinest216, left field is calling.  It wants you back!

 

I agree, Ken.  I hope, for his sake, a brown bottle is to blame.

 

i dont drink alcohol

 

is amtrak replacing the amfleet cars anytime soon?

will they use amtrak trains to send you guys to the FEMA camps?

 

What does that even mean? 

 

CTownsfinest216, left field is calling.  It wants you back!

 

I agree, Ken.  I hope, for his sake, a brown bottle is to blame.

 

i dont drink alcohol

 

is amtrak replacing the amfleet cars anytime soon?

 

No, Amtrak will be using Amfleet for some time to come. They do have a 130 car Viewliner order for sleepers, dining cars, baggage and baggage dorms, with an option for 70 more. There is also a pending order for 120 bi-level Surfliner cars for midwestern and California corridor services. They are also requesting the purchase of 904 long distance cars (type unknown/timeframe unknown) in their FY 2013 request and the Obama Administration has $2.5 billion for equipment and ADA access at stations in its FY 2013 budget, enough to get a good start on Amtrak's request. Even with this equipment, Amtrak will have to order at least 700 cars to replace Amfleet I and Horizonliner cars used in corridor services in the Northeast, midwest and elsewhere. The Lake Shore Limited and other eastern long hauls use Amfleet II cars. Presumably, the 904 car order would replace these.

No, Amtrak will be using Amfleet for some time to come. They do have a 130 car Viewliner order for sleepers, dining cars, baggage and baggage dorms, with an option for 70 more. There is also a pending order for 120 bi-level Surfliner cars for midwestern and California corridor services. They are also requesting the purchase of 904 long distance cars (type unknown/timeframe unknown) in their FY 2013 request and the Obama Administration has $2.5 billion for equipment and ADA access at stations in its FY 2013 budget, enough to get a good start on Amtrak's request. Even with this equipment, Amtrak will have to order at least 700 cars to replace Amfleet I and Horizonliner cars used in corridor services in the Northeast, midwest and elsewhere. The Lake Shore Limited and other eastern long hauls use Amfleet II cars. Presumably, the 904 car order would replace these.

 

"These" meaning the Amfleet I and Horizonliner cars would be replaced by the 904 car order or that the Amfleet II cars would be replaced by the 904 car order?

No, Amtrak will be using Amfleet for some time to come. They do have a 130 car Viewliner order for sleepers, dining cars, baggage and baggage dorms, with an option for 70 more. There is also a pending order for 120 bi-level Surfliner cars for midwestern and California corridor services. They are also requesting the purchase of 904 long distance cars (type unknown/timeframe unknown) in their FY 2013 request and the Obama Administration has $2.5 billion for equipment and ADA access at stations in its FY 2013 budget, enough to get a good start on Amtrak's request. Even with this equipment, Amtrak will have to order at least 700 cars to replace Amfleet I and Horizonliner cars used in corridor services in the Northeast, midwest and elsewhere. The Lake Shore Limited and other eastern long hauls use Amfleet II cars. Presumably, the 904 car order would replace these.

 

"These" meaning the Amfleet I and Horizonliner cars would be replaced by the 904 car order or that the Amfleet II cars would be replaced by the 904 car order?

 

The Amfleet II cars (about 150 cars) would be replaced/augmented by the 904 new long distance car order. Amfleet I's and Horizonliners would be the subject of another order at some point, tho they will be partially replaced/augmented by the 120 bilevels as noted above. The Am II's are what runs on the Lake Shore.

No, Amtrak will be using Amfleet for some time to come. They do have a 130 car Viewliner order for sleepers, dining cars, baggage and baggage dorms, with an option for 70 more. There is also a pending order for 120 bi-level Surfliner cars for midwestern and California corridor services. They are also requesting the purchase of 904 long distance cars (type unknown/timeframe unknown) in their FY 2013 request and the Obama Administration has $2.5 billion for equipment and ADA access at stations in its FY 2013 budget, enough to get a good start on Amtrak's request. Even with this equipment, Amtrak will have to order at least 700 cars to replace Amfleet I and Horizonliner cars used in corridor services in the Northeast, midwest and elsewhere. The Lake Shore Limited and other eastern long hauls use Amfleet II cars. Presumably, the 904 car order would replace these.

 

While Amtrak desperately needs cars of all types, I wish they would design and order some cars that would have an intermediate sleeper accommodation-- like berths, new version of slumbercoach, and/or something like the Nightliners that were on, I think, a Canadian line back in the day (someone can correct me if I'm wrong) which was an upscale coach accommodation that had fully reclining seats.  Amtrak's sleepers are getting too expensive, but when demand exceeds supply, they can get away with the high prices... 

I agree. I loved using the Slumbercoaches back in the 80s. For a trip from Cleveland or Canton to New York City, they cost only $100 more than coach but you got a comfy bed to sleep in and a quiet, private place to sit during the day. And the good thing about demand, they probably produced as much revenue as roomettes because there were more slumbercoaches per car.

I'll second that on a new-generation slumbercoach equivalent. I used the originals often on trips from Fort Wayne eastward prior to our loss of service in 1990; my basic guidline was anyplace Pittsburgh or beyond merited a slumbercoach, and it wasn't all that expensive compared with a roomette. I'm not a big guy, so the small compartment and comparatively narrow bed were completely adequate for me.

 

I haven't taken any long Amtrak trips in several years, and one thing that gives me pause whenever I contemplate one is that meals are bundled in with the price. Whether it makes the deal more marketable, or jacks up the price beyond the value I don't know, but that feature is of no value to me; I have special nutritional needs that can't be met by the on-board meals, and have to carry my own supplies with me. I haven't inquired whether they can exclude meals and discount the price.

 

Just remembering - my first long Amtrak trip was to San Francisco from Fort Wayne via Chicago in 1973, before Amtrak had rehabbed much of their Heritage Fleet equipment. The coach that I rode from Chicago to Oakland was of Santa Fe provenance, and the seats were nearly as comfortable as any home recliner. They were of furniture-quality construcion, with springs, padding, and upholsery fabric and they were widely spaced and would recline way back, with leg rests. They were very comfortable to sleep in, and the only downside was late-night boardings in places like the middle of Nebraska, where boarding passengers bumped their luggage into the seats as they trooped through the car.

Like the slumbercoaches, Amtrak's new Viewliner cars due to come out of Hornell, NY won't have toilets in the roomettes. Instead, passengers booking sleepers will have to go down the hall to the public restroom. Amtrak discovered in surveys that half the passengers liked having toilets in their room and half didn't. Since removing the toilets required less plumbing and lower costs, they went with that option. But I doubt they'll charge slumbercoach prices!!!

No, Amtrak will be using Amfleet for some time to come. They do have a 130 car Viewliner order for sleepers, dining cars, baggage and baggage dorms, with an option for 70 more. There is also a pending order for 120 bi-level Surfliner cars for midwestern and California corridor services. They are also requesting the purchase of 904 long distance cars (type unknown/timeframe unknown) in their FY 2013 request and the Obama Administration has $2.5 billion for equipment and ADA access at stations in its FY 2013 budget, enough to get a good start on Amtrak's request. Even with this equipment, Amtrak will have to order at least 700 cars to replace Amfleet I and Horizonliner cars used in corridor services in the Northeast, midwest and elsewhere. The Lake Shore Limited and other eastern long hauls use Amfleet II cars. Presumably, the 904 car order would replace these.

 

While Amtrak desperately needs cars of all types, I wish they would design and order some cars that would have an intermediate sleeper accommodation-- like berths, new version of slumbercoach, and/or something like the Nightliners that were on, I think, a Canadian line back in the day (someone can correct me if I'm wrong) which was an upscale coach accommodation that had fully reclining seats.  Amtrak's sleepers are getting too expensive, but when demand exceeds supply, they can get away with the high prices... 

 

Gildone, you are actually thinking of the old section sleeper, which dates way, way back. These were two seats that faced each other during the day and folded down into an upper and lower berth. These reached their heyday in the 1920's but railroads found that passengers didn't like upper berths and these frequently went unsold. This, more than anything else...in addition to passengers' desire for privacy...led to their demise.

 

The Canadian National (later VIA) had what they called "Dayniter" coaches, which had huge fully reclining seats. These were a success, but also went by the wayside.

 

For my  money, the Slumbercoach was the way to go: Cheap, with private rooms, and a high revenue yield. they had everything. Amtrak sells out its regular Viewliner sleepers, so I doubt they will want to undercut their own product. Maybe some time down the line...

For my  money, the Slumbercoach was the way to go: Cheap, with private rooms, and a high revenue yield. they had everything. Amtrak sells out its regular Viewliner sleepers, so I doubt they will want to undercut their own product. Maybe some time down the line...

 

I view the popularity of the sleepers as a reason to do the slumbercoaches. They add more capacity and potentially more revenue per car than their existing sleepers.

Facebook message today from my high school classmate..... and take note of the reasons she took the trains.....

 

Sallyanne

 

"I took the train from Quantico, VA to Stamford, Ct. yesterday. Sat in business class so I could work on the computer, just relax, and do some reading. What a great ride ! It certainly beat driving and with gas at over $3.50/gal in VA it was also more cost effective. I think I have solved my future travel issues." :clap:

 

Now let me also point out that my friend is also as conservative of a Republican as you can find..... but for her....as it should be for all of us.... the desire and need for more and better passenger rail was not a partisan political consideration.

 

Just sayin'..... that's a message we need to get across to our state and federal legislators.  The message should be about how greater transportation choice frees us to travel and get things done....and frees us from the grip that the oil companies have on our wallets.

I wonder what possesses a company to think they are so special that only they should be exempt from the rules?

 

Sidetracking Competition in Commuter Rail

POSTED BY CHARLES CHIEPPO | MARCH 26, 2012

 

For decades, commuter-rail systems in most large metropolitan areas either have been operated by the local transit agency itself or have been outsourced to one of a few large railroads. One of those was Amtrak.

 

But as more transit systems have pursued competitive contracting in recent years, Amtrak, the nation's publicly subsidized passenger railroad, has not fared well. The company's response is an amendment to the surface transportation bill currently pending in the U.S. Senate filed by Majority Leader Harry Reid. The amendment would limit competition by requiring passenger-rail operators — both public agencies and private businesses — to be licensed by the Surface Transportation Board, an independent adjudicatory entity within the Department of Transportation made up of partisan appointees.

 

All passenger-rail operators except Amtrak, that is. It would be exempted from the licensing requirement.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.governing.com/blogs/bfc/col-boston-amtrak-competition-commuter-rail-operation-federal-surface-transportation.html

Any news on a daily Cardinal?

I haven't heard any news about Amtrak spending, or seeking funding to add sidings on the long, single track segment in Virginia. That constraint, and acquiring new equipment, keeps Amtrak from making the Cardinal daily. The new rail cars should be delivered by the factory in early 2013. But that's the only thing definitive right now. The rail traffic in Virginia is so constraining that a different, proposed, private passenger service is considering hitching a ride on the back of the Cardinal. BTW, I love this writer's last name....

 

March 1, 2012

Greenbrier train plans move forward

By Rick Steelhammer

 

"A 100-mile section between Gordonsville and Clifton Forge, Va., called the Buckingham Branch, is single-track, making it basically a very busy one-lane road," Rowland said. CSX uses the Buckingham Branch to shuttle its empty coal cars back to the mines from eastern Virginia and coastal offloading ports, while sending loaded cars from the coalfields down its James River line.

 

Amtrak's Cardinal passenger train travels between Washington, White Sulphur Springs and points west three times weekly on the Buckingham Branch. To avoid additional traffic congestion on the already busy single-track section, it may be desirable to attach The Greenbrier Presidential Express to the rear of Cardinal, Rowland said, and follow the Amtrak train's schedule between Union Station and the resort.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://wvgazette.com/News/201203010211

I'll believe the Greenbrier Express after it's completed at least a year of service with economically sustainable revenue. I've heard rumors that the resort is having to pare down, and the explanation for the reduction in workforce rebuilding cars doesn't resonate with me. Even in the best scenario operation of the train will almost certainly have to be underwritten by the resort on the premise that it brings in more money in tourist trade than it costs.

 

Ross Rowland once operated C&O 614 as a test bed for some of the technology being designed for the now-dormant ACE 3000, a proposed high-tech coal-burning locomotive being developed by a consortium of coal and railroad interests in the early 80s when oil prices spiked. When oil prices dropped in the mid-80s, major players in the ACE 3000 project dropped out and the project went up on blocks. From what I heard from people knowledgeable in steam locomotive operation and restoration, C&O 614 had been run hard to the point of abuse and was badly in need of major boiler and mechanical work by the time the project work stopped. Unless someone like Rowland with deep pockets, stepped up, I speculate that the work done on the locomotive before it was placed on display was mainly cosmetic and that it's a long way from being serviceable even if CSX were permit steam.

 

The most recent issue of TRAINS Magazine has a feature article on the Buckingham Branch. Apparently it's one of the outstanding examples of a family-operated short line started on a shoestring that has grown and prospered.

Yes, but my point in posting that was to show they could not even get the OK to run a train separate from the Cardinal because of the lack of passing sidings. That does not bode well for a daily Cardinal unless Amtrak (or someone else on their behalf) adds passing sidings.

Hmm, interesting. Thanks.

"Where's the train when you need it?"

-- Jim Cramer on CNBC's Opening Bell, April 3, 2012, in response to news that Allegiant Airlines will be the second domestic carrier to charge $35 for carry-on luggage (Spirit charges $20-$45).

 

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/post/2012/04/report-allegiant-to-be-2nd-us-airline-to-charge-for-carry-ons/662815/1

A couple of links are imbedded in the source PR at.....

 

http://www.fra.dot.gov/roa/press_releases/fp_FRA%2015-12.shtml

 

Department of Transportation Opens Bidding for Made-in-America Passenger Rail Cars

 

U.S.Department of Transportation

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, D.C.

www.dot.gov/affairs/briefing.htm

News

 

 

FRA 15-12

Friday, April 20, 2012

Contact: Kevin F. Thompson

Tel.: 202-366-1299

 

First Multistate Order for Standardized Rail Cars Will Help Boost American Manufacturers

 

WASHINGTON – Rail car manufacturers across the country will have an opportunity to submit bids to produce the first American-made, standardized passenger rail cars, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced today.

 

The $551 million Request for Proposals (RFP) to manufacture approximately 130 new bi-level passenger rail cars in America comes from a groundbreaking multi-state effort to jointly purchase standardized rail equipment to be used on Amtrak’s intercity routes in California, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, Missouri, and potentially Iowa.  The funding is being provided by the Federal Railroad Administration’s High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Program.

 

“President Obama has called on us to invest in transportation systems that are built to last,” said Secretary LaHood.  “This important opportunity represents a win-win scenario for both workers and the traveling public by helping to create manufacturing jobs and support passenger rail.”

 

In preparation for orders such as this, the U.S. Department of Transportation has partnered with the Department of Commerce National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) to connect large car builders and more than 34,000 domestic suppliers, and help them retool their production capabilities to meet demand.  The MEP connects suppliers with viable business opportunities that may have otherwise gone to foreign suppliers.

 

“We’ve laid a solid foundation in bringing rail equipment manufacturers and suppliers together so we can make these cars in America and create American jobs,” said Federal Railroad Administrator Joseph C. Szabo.  “As part of the Obama Administration’s focus on revitalizing American manufacturing opportunities, building standardized rolling stock will provide an unprecedented opportunity to leverage Buy America requirements, ensuring maximum economic benefit for taxpayer-funded transportation investments.”

 

The Buy America provision of the RFP requires that all components of the new bi-level cars are built by American workers: with American hands, and with American-produced steel, iron and manufactured goods.  The federal government’s investment in passenger rail means more jobs for American workers and domestic companies.

 

The new uniform standards will drive down lifecycle costs and allow more manufacturers and suppliers to compete, fostering a healthy competition while helping re-establish the U.S. domestic supply chain for passenger rail equipment and meet Buy America goals.  The common design also makes it easier to train personnel, stock parts, and perform maintenance and repairs, which also reduces costs and increases equipment reliability.

 

These state-of-the-art cars will be able to operate nationwide, providing a more comfortable travel experience, and are designed with improved crashworthiness and other safety features to ensure passenger safety.  The cars will be fully compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

 

Selection of the manufacturer will occur in the Fall of 2012.  The cars will be delivered starting in 2015.

 

The effort to purchase standardized equipment is led by the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act Section 305 Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee, comprised of representatives of interested states, the Federal Railroad Administration, Amtrak, host freight railroad companies, passenger railroad equipment manufacturers and suppliers, and other passenger railroad operators.  The Committee has also completed specifications for high-performance diesel locomotives that can travel up to 125 miles-per-hour and for single level passenger rail cars. 

 

 

####

Amtrak reorganizes Operations management

Written by  Douglas John Bowen

Railway Age Magazine

 

Amtrak Friday unveiled its long-anticipated reorganization of its Operations management structure, saying it has created "four business lines to establish clear accountability for the financial performance of individual trains and to improve customer service delivery." The Operations reorganization plan will be rolled out in phases during the next 16 months, with full transition to the new structure in October 2013.

 

The railroads first step will be to hire general managers to run each of four business lines being established within Operations: Northeast Corridor Services, Long-Distance Services, State Supported Services, and Commuter Services. The four general managers will report to the vice president of operations, and will be accountable for the profit or loss of their respective train services.

 

Field operations will report up to the general managers through a new integrated management structure so that each one has the ability to control costs. Also, general managers will have an effective relationship with the groups responsible for delivering revenue so they have an ability to manage the overall financial performance of their routes, Amrak said.

 

 

Read more at: http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/operations/amtrak-reorganizes-operations-management.html?channel=

http://www.narprail.org/news/narp-blog/2030-compromise-on-surface-transportation-bill-a-disappointment-to-train-passengers

 

Compromise on surface transportation bill a disappointment to train passengers

Details Published on Thursday, 28 June 2012 20:01 Written By Sean Jeans Gail Category: Blog Hits: 165

 

After months of gridlock and bicameral bickering, House and Senate conferees unveiled a surface transportation bill compromise late on Wednesday night.  And for train passengers, this unveiling will undoubtedly leave them with a resounding sense of disappointment.

 

The compromise bill eliminates the Senate’s rail title entirely.  The only real provision directed at rail is the extension of a Railroad Grade Crossing set aside, which targets funds at improving and upgrading crossings to eliminate collisions between automobiles and trains.

 

While the Railroad Grade Crossing is a fine program, it’s hardly enough for a 27-month extension that will dictate how federal tax dollars are spent through September 2014.  With dramatically increasing congestion and volatile oil prices, America can no longer afford its overreliance on highways.

 

It’s particularly disappointing given the number of good rail provisions included in the Senate’s version.  Specifically:

 

+ Creation of a 100% federal grant program for improvements to or preservation of routes over 750 miles long (which could help preserve existing Southwest Chief service in Kansas, Colorado and New Mexico).

+ Making Amtrak eligible to receive federal grants under PRIIA sections 301 (intercity passenger rail service corridor capital assistance grants) and 302 (congestion grants) and let Amtrak use its own revenues as the 20% match for these grants.

+ Elimination of the three-year limit that has applied when states use CMAQ funds for operating grants for Amtrak routes meeting the CMAQ program’s requirements. This would eliminate the need for a special, legislated exception every three years.  The three-year limit is not in law but is in guidance from the Federal Highway Administration. CMAQ stands for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement, one of the programs in existing surface transportation law.

 

In general, the Senate gave up environmentally-friendly provisions while the House gave up its Keystone XL pipeline and coal ash provisions as well as some Amtrak-related provisions that NARP opposed.

 

+ Gone is the Senate provision that would have restored parity between employer-provided parking fees and transit fares (see box on page 2 of May NARP News).

+ Gone is the Senate provision (which we supported) to reasonably extend the deadline for Positive Train Control, in up to three, one-year,  increments, subject to the DOT secretary’s approval on an individual company basis.

+ Bad news for those fighting to improve railroad/highway grade crossing safety: “At the insistence of House Republicans, the Senate dropped a safety provision that would have required commercial trucks to be equipped with devices that keep track of how many hours drivers spend behind the wheel. The purpose of the devices is to keep drivers who haven’t had enough rest off the road. The provision was supported by large commercial truck companies, safety advocates and labor unions, but opposed by drivers who own their trucks.”

+ “The Senate agreed to effectively reduce money available for bike paths, pedestrian safety projects and other ‘transportation enhancements’ by making them compete with other transportation programs for the same pool of funds. Republicans derided the program as wasting money on planting flowers. Supporters said that while highway landscaping was one project category eligible for funds, more than half the money is used for sidewalks, crosswalks, medians, bike lanes and other safety-related improvements. Cutting funding for biking and pedestrian projects was a high priority for House GOP freshmen, who said the money would be better spent on roads and bridges” (this and previous bullet: Washington Post news report).

 

Particularly because of the last point above, the Transportation Equity Network is outraged. Their e-mail today stated:

 

Gone or gutted are important provisions from the bipartisan, Senate-passed surface transportation bill, MAP-21, that would:

 

+ keep our buses rolling and folks in our communities working during periods of economic crisis

+ make streets safer for the most vulnerable in our communities—especially children, seniors, low income people, and people with disabilities

+ provide consistent requirements ensuring that folks have a say in big transportation projects that affect their communities, their health, and their environment

 

In their place are provisions from HR 7—the House bill that never made it past the majority caucus—that set progressive transportation policy and equity programs back by decades.

 

With the release of this report, the conference committee…has missed important opportunities to create even more jobs through flexible transit operating provisions that cost the federal government nothing and to establish career pathways for low income people, people of color, and women in the transportation construction industry.

 

There may be one unintended upshot from this bill (which looks set to pass both the House and the Senate): because highway needs outstrip what the gas tax is providing, the U.S. Treasury will have to pay general taxpayer dollars into the Highway Account—$6.2 billion in 2013, and $10.4 billion 2014, all in.  The Treasury will also pay $2.2 billion in into the Mass Transit Account 2014.  That will mean that the federal government has poured north of $50 billion non-user tax dollars into highways in the last four years alone.  That’s more government funding than Amtrak has received in its entire history.  It is reported that another major source of funding for the two-year bill is “pension smoothing” – reducing the amount that companies must pay into their pension plans so as to increase the taxes paid by those companies. 

 

So maybe we can finally stop hearing the “roads pay for themselves, abolish taxpayer-dependent-Amtrak”-myth constantly repeated by anti-rail forces, ad nauseum. 

 

(But don't hold your breath.)

If Congressman Chabot's amendment blocking all federal capital and operating funding in 2013 to fixed guideways in the City of Cincinnati is successful, I believe it will block Amtrak from operating its Cardinal service through the city. So how do you get Amtrak's Cardinal trains from Chicago to the East Coast on its current route if it doesn't go through Cincinnati? The answer: you can't. I've spent the last day trying to figure out options and it cannot be done in a way that Amtrak would probably accept.

 

Because Amtrak's Cardinal would be unable to travel through Cincinnati, it also threatens Amtrak's access to its primary locomotive and railcar heavy-overhaul and maintenance facility located in the Indianapolis suburb of Beech Grove. I expect someone to argue that Amtrak could continue to use its Hoosier State trains as an equipment shuttle. These trains run Chicago-Indianapolis on the four days a week the Cardinal does not run through Indianapolis.

 

Starting in 2013, Amtrak will likely discontinue the Hoosier State train because Sec. 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment & Improvement Act of 2008 will go into effect. PRIIA Sec. 209 requires that any train service whose route is  750 miles or less must have its operating costs and a portion of its capital contribution funded by the states through which it passes. The Hoosier State service (a 196-mile route) is not Sec. 209 compliant unless the State of Indiana agrees to fund the portion of the service operating within its borders. The State of Indiana has shown no interest in doing so (nor funding its portion of the Chicago-Detroit route either). If the required amount of funding from the state is not forthcoming, the train will not be in compliance with Sec. 209 and thus will be subject to discontinuance.

 

Amtrak will have to find another low-cost way to shuttle its train equipment to its Beech Grove facility, or it will have to shut down the facility and move it to another location(s).

I can just see this playing out in a very nasty scenario:

 

> Hoosier State discontinued between Indianapolis and Chicago, as KJP suggests

> Cardinal "suspended" west of Catlettsburg KY (between Ashland and Huntington) and becomes a day train to Washington DC and new York

> Cincinnati loses all rail passenger service

> Indianapolis loses all rail passenger service

> Beech Grove shops closed and moved, possibly to the Chicago area or Michigan. The latter dangled the idea in front of Amtrak not long ago.

 

The only rail service would be in northern Ohio and Indiana. Chabot's amendment MUST be defeated.

Assuming Chabot's amendment is killed, that 750-mile business would seem to increase the chances of a daily Cardinal, no? It seems to me it would free up equipment with however many <750-mile routes being suspended, freeing up equipment and maybe revenue for the Cardinal frequency increase.

I can just see this playing out in a very nasty scenario:

 

> Hoosier State discontinued between Indianapolis and Chicago, as KJP suggests

> Cardinal "suspended" west of Catlettsburg KY (between Ashland and Huntington) and becomes a day train to Washington DC and new York

> Cincinnati loses all rail passenger service

> Indianapolis loses all rail passenger service

> Beech Grove shops closed and moved, possibly to the Chicago area or Michigan. The latter dangled the idea in front of Amtrak not long ago.

 

The only rail service would be in northern Ohio and Indiana. Chabot's amendment MUST be defeated.

 

I found a few decent station sites on the Ohio River side of Cincinnati. The best option appears to be in Newport, off SR1120 and I-471, near the second exit south of the Ohio River on I-471. There is a road for an electricity substation across from the entrance to the Newport Pavilion shopping center, and space for a parking lot and small station facility. This would allow for a temporary station until Cincinnati's congressional seat is held by someone more supportive of having transportation choices. There is also a place to turn the train at Latonia (despite the removal of some trackage) and several places for the train to layover between runs, including the old DeCoursey Yards, the TMK IPSCO Tubulars steel plant off Licking Pike in Newport, or Railway Expos' yard in Latonia.

 

Assuming Chabot's amendment is killed, that 750-mile business would seem to increase the chances of a daily Cardinal, no? It seems to me it would free up equipment with however many <750-mile routes being suspended, freeing up equipment and maybe revenue for the Cardinal frequency increase.

 

Amtrak is proposing to make the Cardinal a daily route in part because of the 750-mile requirement. There is sufficient equipment to do this once the Viewliner II equipment order is completed and delivered by the manufacturer. No other routes other than the Hoosier State are proposed to be eliminated because of noncompliance with Sec. 209. All states having such routes have signed off on paying new or additional funding to keep them in compliance. Shows how backward Ohio and Indiana really are -- it seems like you (and probably others) expected other states to be like our vision-less state officials and not to sign on.

^ You're right, I figured there would be some other idiots in the village. Whenabouts do you think the Viewliner II shipment will be completed/delivered?

The first cars are scheduled to be delivered in the first quarter of 2013.

 

There is a photo gallery (that moves from photo to photo rather roughly) available here....

 

http://www.stargazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/gallery?Site=CB&Date=20120127&Category=NEWS01&ArtNo=201270807&Ref=PH

I would really like taking amtrak somewhere because it is something I have never done. But its hard to go through with it for many reasons.

 

I can fly two people, round trip, to New York City for $283.20 total.

To take two people, round trip, on amtrak it costs $296.00 total.

 

So its cheaper to fly.

 

Also a flight to New York City from Cleveland is 1 hr 36 mn

A train ride to New York City from Cleveland is 12 hr, 45 min

 

Way faster to fly. Hell even way faster to drive.

 

Taking a plane I can basically leave for New York, and return to Cleveland anytime time of the day id like.

Taking a train I have to leave for New York City at 5:50 am, and I have to arrive back home at 3:27 am.

 

Those amtrak times are terrible.

 

This is coming from someone who loves trains, and would really like to take one for a trip. It just doesn't make sense on any level. Not on price, time, or convenience.

 

In Switzerland if I want to take get to Geneva from Zurich, its actually faster by train than by car.

To drive it takes 3 hours and 12 mins. To take a train it take 2 hours and 43 mins.

I would really like taking amtrak somewhere because it is something I have never done. But its hard to go through with it for many reasons.

 

I can fly two people, round trip, to New York City for $283.20 total.

To take two people, round trip, on amtrak it costs $296.00 total.

 

So its cheaper to fly.

 

Also a flight to New York City from Cleveland is 1 hr 36 mn

A train ride to New York City from Cleveland is 12 hr, 45 min

 

Way faster to fly. Hell even way faster to drive.

 

Taking a plane I can basically leave for New York, and return to Cleveland anytime time of the day id like.

Taking a train I have to leave for New York City at 5:50 am, and I have to arrive back home at 3:27 am.

 

Those amtrak times are terrible.

 

This is coming from someone who loves trains, and would really like to take one for a trip. It just doesn't make sense on any level. Not on price, time, or convenience.

 

In Switzerland if I want to take get to Geneva from Zurich, its actually faster by train than by car.

To drive it takes 3 hours and 12 mins. To take a train it take 2 hours and 43 mins.

 

Keep in mind that the length of that trip is roughly the same as Cleveland to Buffalo.  Comparing that to going Cleveland to NYC is just way too long.  That is one of the biggest problems Amtrak faces.  The USA is enormous, which has advantages and disadvantages.  Boston to NYC is much more analogous to your international connection and probably closer timewise.

^

One thing to keep in mind is that a long distance train caters to many submarkets, as well as endpoint-to-endpoint. A train might provide the only public transportation to many smaller communities and with airlines retrenching, trains are becoming much more important.

I would really like taking amtrak somewhere because it is something I have never done. But its hard to go through with it for many reasons.

 

I can fly two people, round trip, to New York City for $283.20 total.

To take two people, round trip, on amtrak it costs $296.00 total.

 

So its cheaper to fly.

 

Also a flight to New York City from Cleveland is 1 hr 36 mn

A train ride to New York City from Cleveland is 12 hr, 45 min

 

Way faster to fly. Hell even way faster to drive.

 

Taking a plane I can basically leave for New York, and return to Cleveland anytime time of the day id like.

Taking a train I have to leave for New York City at 5:50 am, and I have to arrive back home at 3:27 am.

 

Those amtrak times are terrible.

 

This is coming from someone who loves trains, and would really like to take one for a trip. It just doesn't make sense on any level. Not on price, time, or convenience.

 

In Switzerland if I want to take get to Geneva from Zurich, its actually faster by train than by car.

To drive it takes 3 hours and 12 mins. To take a train it take 2 hours and 43 mins.

 

I have looked into CLE to NYC on the train as well as CLE to DC, and yes, both take a long time and are not cheap.  The NYC ride especially goes pretty far out of the way (it's actually as far north as BOS and then follows the Hudson down into NYC, which is supposed to be a very scenic ride).

 

However, the CLE to CHI ride makes much more sense.  It's roughly the same amount of time as driving (6 hours, so maybe less if traffic is real bad around CHI) and isn't terribly expensive.  I loved that trip, so it's something to look into if you really want to take the train somewhere.  And you can probably put most of the blame on our crappy departures on our politicians.  Ohio doesn't provide any support to Amtrak, so we're actually lucky to have a stop at all.  Really, it's just because we happen to be between NYC and CHI (as well as DC and CHI).  The times are geared towards making it convenient for people near those endpoints and whenever it passes through Cleveland is what it is.

I did look into that as well and even that isn't the best.

 

Two people round trip to Chicago from Cleveland...

 

Flying - 1 hr 18 min. $283.20

 

Driving - 5 hr 47 min. $75.44 of gas.

 

Train - 7 hr 0 min. $364.00

 

So the train takes the longest and costs the most. And still is extremely inconvenient, while other modes allow you to leave basically anytime you want.

I took Amtrak to NYC from Cincy two years ago and it was a bit much. Keep in mind, the Cardinal winds through the mountains and goes through DC, so it is more circuitous, making the trip 18 hours instead of 12. But the train was delayed both ways, which I hear is typical, so it was more like 20 hours each way. Yeah, you have plenty of leg room and you can get up and walk a bit, but I definitely started to get cabin fever. It was in the winter, so the daylight was short, and when it gets dark it is like the in-flight entertainment is shut down, so summer might not be as bad.

 

If I were to go again, I would have to spring for a sleeper. That would obliterate any cost-competitiveness with flying entirely, though sharing a sleeper with someone obviously cuts the damage in half. It would be really nice to split the sleeper price a few ways and sleep in shifts. All of a sudden the whole adventure would become tolerable. But that's not realistic in most circumstances.

I did look into that as well and even that isn't the best.

 

Two people round trip to Chicago from Cleveland...

 

Flying - 1 hr 18 min. $283.20

 

Driving - 5 hr 47 min. $75.44 of gas.

 

Train - 7 hr 0 min. $364.00

 

So the train takes the longest and costs the most. And still is extremely inconvenient, while other modes allow you to leave basically anytime you want.

 

I just looked at the Amtrak website and I have two people going roundtrip coach for as low as $208, with a month's advance notice. Running time is 6 hr 46 min. So, the train is much cheaper than flying and not much slower than driving. A couple of other factors: If you drive and you are going to downtown Chicago, be prepared to figure in some stiff charges to park your car. I paid $40 a day. Also, on a train you can eat, sleep, read, look out the window, etc, none of which you can do when driving. You don't have to go thru boarding and security hassles to get on a train, either.

 

What works against the train in this part of the country is their slow, infrequent and unmarketable schedules. Ohio does not have any daytime service, except for Toledo (just barely) because Amtrak views overhead traffic from Chicago to the east coast as being more important than service here. Most of our peerless political leaders either don't care about train service or have actively tried to kill the trains, so Amtrak limps along on a starvation budget, with most long distance routes running only once a day. The state of Ohio is also out to lunch, thanks to Gov. Kasich, so no help there, either. A few of our leaders get it, including President Obama, and we have had some successes, but we have a long way to go.

 

The New York-Buffalo-Cleveland-Toledo-Chicago route would show spectacular results if we had 4-6 daily trains running at a 90 mph top speed. In that case, you could go to Chicago at your convenience and get there in about five and a half hours.

Must have been the random dates I chose at first. I did get it down to $208, which makes things a lot better. I would love for an expansion in rail service as well. So for Chicago it does make a little more sense. For long distance, like to New York City, it currently has no real benefits that I can think of.

Looks like the 30 Capitol Limited  (CHI  -  CLE) time is down to 5 hr, 49 min which is very competitive to driving. The time to chicago still ranges from about 6 hr 4 min, to 7 hours.

Must have been the random dates I chose at first. I did get it down to $208, which makes things a lot better. I would love for an expansion in rail service as well. So for Chicago it does make a little more sense. For long distance, like to New York City, it currently has no real benefits that I can think of.

 

We used to have an overnight schedule from Cleveland to New York, but lost that in the '90's when Amtrak gave up the Ohio market. You could ride coach or sleeper, leaving Cleveland about 1130 and getting into New York the next morning. Westbound left NY about 730 pm and was into Cleveland aound 7 am.

 

Current service is aimed at the overnight market between New York and Chicago, so it comes thru in the wee hours westbound. Eastbound, the train leaves Chicago about 9 pm to pick up late connecting passengers from western trains, which means it comes thru at about 5 am. Neither is good for Cleveland.

 

One other thing: Cleveland has relatively low airfares. Most other cities on the Chicago-Toledo-Cleveland-Buffalo-New York route do not and have poor or nonexistant schedules to boot. Airfares can be between $600-$1,000 to go from places like Erie or Toledo to New York or Albany, Syracuse to Chicago and airlines are pulling back from these smaller markets. That leaves driving, whether you want to or not.

The Amtrak fare at Cleveland is high because Amtrak doesn't have the capacity to handle all the reservation requests it gets, so it would rather book a Chicago-New York passenger paying $200 (just to pick a figure) than have a Cleveland passenger who would pay $100 only to block that Chicago-New York passenger from booking that seat/sleeper at a lower price. So Amtrak charges the Cleveland passenger $200. If they book it, fine, Amtrak doesn't lose anything. But the Cleveland passenger does because Amtrak doesn't have the capacity to accommodate everybody. It's why we need more trains.

 

And there is a lot of padding in the eastbound schedule to New York City because Amtrak doesn't want the Lake Shore Limited to arrive Penn Station during rush hour, so it's spends extra time at certain stations and has extra "recovery" prior to arriving major enroute points. That padding is likely to be eliminated this fall or spring with rescheduling of the Lake Shore, saving at least one hour from the schedule.

 

I rarely look at the schedule and take that as gospel. Rather, I look to see what is possible.... 

 

Imagine having a train that leaves Cleveland anytime in the 8-10 p.m. range, arriving Midtown Manhattan at 7-9 a.m. Even at the current fares, including a sleeper eastbound, you save having to get up at the crack of dawn to get the earliest, affordable flight which is a Delta flight arriving LGA at 9 a.m. at $306. That means not getting into Manhattan until 10 a.m. If you need to get into Manhattan earlier than that, this means getting a hotel room at $250+. Add the cost of the travel and now you're at $600 including taxi or shuttle bus from the airport.

 

Amtrak could get you to NY Penn Station with a roomette sleeper at $439 -- if the schedule worked. Which is what we're working on. Please stay tuned.

 

What I would like to see is Amtrak offering a package with an airline so you take a train one way and a return flight home. So you take take Amtrak overnight one way (coach seat at $100 or a sleeper for $250 to $350) and a return flight at $150. The train allows you to multi-task (sleep and travel) and it saves you from having to wake up before dawn to get to the airport, or it saves you money from having to book a hotel in your destination city. The flight gets you back home the same day.

 

Such a package would give you the multi-tasking benefits of the train vs. the speed benefits of the plane.

BTW, Cleveland has some of the highest airfares in the nation. Look at the 1st quarter 2012 data.....

 

http://www.bts.gov/programs/economics_and_finance/air_travel_price_index/html/table_09.html

If you plan ahead you can get a round trip ticket to new york through United Airlines for $142

If you plan ahead you can get a round trip ticket to new york through United Airlines for $142

 

Business travelers usually cannot plan ahead. And they still either have to wake up before dawn or spend for a New York hotel. The only way the plane becomes competitive with the overnight train is if either the flight goes supersonic or the hotel goes for $150 or less.

If you plan ahead you can get a round trip ticket to new york through United Airlines for $142

 

Business travelers usually cannot plan ahead. And they still either have to wake up before dawn or spend for a New York hotel. The only way the plane becomes competitive with the overnight train is if either the flight goes supersonic or the hotel goes for $150 or less.

 

I did an informal look at airfares for the entire Midwest-East Coast region and found that airfares were consistently higher than an Amtrak sleeper, which frequently cost half as a much as flying. So, if the train was available on an overnight schedule and you had a morning appointment you could save half the airfare and the cost of a hotel in your destination city. This is on a couple of UO threads, in cluding this one if you scroll back.