^If Amtrak's management says "screw it", they get fired and replaced by new management.

With the cuts to Amtrak within hours of the crash. What if Amtrak says screw it I give up. Who would take it's place?

 

This is a normal situation for Amtrak. Actually, Amtrak is more stable now than it has ever been. Since its inception in 1971 until the mid-2000s, Amtrak was under constant threat of either major cutbacks if not total shutdown. Even in the 1970s under Carter, as the nation was undergoing a major energy crisis, Carter's administration implemented massive system-wide cuts that included the last passenger rail service to serve Columbus and Dayton. And in the 1990s under Clinton, he did little to provide new funding and instead sat on the sidelines while Congressional budget cutters pushed for service cuts via the Mercer Report. Bush II urged major budget cuts during his two terms even as Amtrak broke new ridership records every year. At the end of GWB's second term, after a major commuter train collision in California that could have been prevented by installing Positive Train Control signaling (as could the derailment in Philly), he signed a 5-year funding program that gave Amtrak stability and which Obama poured funding into.

 

So these last seven years have been the most stable in Amtrak's history. Amtrak is trying to become more self-sufficient, going from covering only 40-50% of costs from revenues in the 1980s vs. 93% today. But it's not there yet. Running more trains to produce more revenues to cover its massive fixed costs would help, as would seeking more public-private partnerships on the trains and at/near stations.

What the opposing viewpoint is saying:

 

http://conservativetribune.com/11-things-about-amtrak/

What the opposing viewpoint is saying:

 

http://conservativetribune.com/11-things-about-amtrak/

 

Sometimes my people get so focused on ideology they miss key points, though if their comments about pay rates are true that's telling.

 

My understanding is the NE corridor stuff is profitable.  It's the "Railroad Unification Plan" mindset in the rest of the nation that is the problem.

 

I'm not sure why they are talking about commuter rail either, does Amtrak do that?

Though I cannot vouch for how efficiently managed Amtrak is, I think it is important to use the same criteria and standards to measure Inter-city bus and air transportation, as well.  Though the companies that do the flying are not, in fact, operated by the federal government, they do benefit from government largesse.  If we think for a moment that Greyhound pays enough in federal road fuel taxes to support the Interstate highway system, we are sorely mistaken.  Additionally, the airlines do, in fact operate at a profit as private companies but if they had to shoulder the burden of maintaining their own terminals, runways and Air Traffic Control, there is no way they would be able to turn a profit.  I am afraid that Amtrak's enemies are too quick to overlook the huge amount of indirect subsidy upon which private transportation companies of other modes rely.

What few people understand and appreciate, even with railroad circles, is how different the public-private partnership of each mode is addressed by public and corporate policy. Railroads and their shareholders traditionally owned or are otherwise responsible for everything from right of way property (only 7% of the nation's route miles were provided to the railroads by federal land grant), to the tracks, to the trains, to property security, the insurance, financing, to the dispatching/traffic control systems, to the communication systems. All are privately owned and financed through private debt markets that charge higher rates and profit margins on their debt than does government debt. Given these ownership constraints, you can't just go out and get an engineer's license and show up with a train to use a railroad line (even today where a small percentage of railroad corridors are publicly owned). Until the 1970s, the public sector owned virtually no rail infrastructure, so when there was an economic downtown, we ended up with many miles of track getting ripped up, never to return.

 

Highways, aviation and waterways all have their rights of way publicly provided by government agencies and financed through government held-trust funds which substantially reduces risk and interest costs. They pay no property taxes on their rights of way, nor liability insurance on the infrastructure. Security on the roads is provided by local or state enforcement. Until a decade ago, the Ohio State Patrol was funded out of the gas tax but no more. Airport security is funded mostly by general funds, not user fees. Air traffic control is funded 80% by  general taxpayers.  Road/air/water fixed costs of infrastructure are externalized on to taxpayers so they are far less for users of road/air/water than for the railroads. The barriers to entry for competitors is much less than railroads. All you need is an operator's license and a vehicle to use those rights of way which enhances innovation and price competition, but can cause safety issues. And when there are economic downturns, taxpayers bear the risk burden of sustaining or otherwise mothballing those facilities until good times return. That helps them gain market share from railroads whenever a recession ends. Taxpayers provide direct subsidies for all modes. The highway trust fund has been bailed out countless times by the general treasury since 2008 with more than $50 billion. We don't increase the cost of using roads at peak travel times and instead provide an extra lane or two to busy highways which isn't economically justified the other 20 hours of the day. And don't anyone tell me that any road across Wyoming or Montana pays its own way.

 

For road/air/water, its public-private partnership is the infrastructure is publicly owned and financed and the vehicles/operations are privately owned.

 

Today in the passenger rail world, its public-private partnership is the infrastructure is privately owned and the vehicles/operations are publicly owned.

 

The reason for the difference, even double-standard, is that railroads grew up in the era of Laissez-faire. Roads and aviation grew up in the New Deal/Great Society eras. Yet too many don't recognize the public-private paradigm for each today. Either apply the Laissez-faire policy to all modes or recognize that the every mode is subsidized albeit in different ways and that if we want a First World passenger rail system, we're actually going to have to pay for it. There is no train fairy waiting to leave a Shinkansen or TGV under all of our pillows.

 

 

Sometimes my people get so focused on ideology they miss key points, though if their comments about pay rates are true that's telling.

 

My understanding is the NE corridor stuff is profitable.  It's the "Railroad Unification Plan" mindset in the rest of the nation that is the problem.

 

I'm not sure why they are talking about commuter rail either, does Amtrak do that?

 

Amtrak does provide contract management of a few commuter rail operations but cannot take the lead in owning, funding or initiating commuter rail services. In fact, Amtrak is prohibited by a 1997 federal law from adding trains anywhere unless they are funded by non-federal sources.

 

BTW, I turned my prior post into an article which any of you may share:

 

Amtrak is a public-private partnership, but at the inverse of its competition

http://allaboardohio.org/2015/05/17/amtrak-is-a-public-private-partnership-but-at-the-inverse-of-its-competition/

The reason for the difference, even double-standard, is that railroads grew up in the era of Laissez-faire. Roads and aviation grew up in the New Deal/Great Society eras.

 

Thank you again Democratic Party.

 

The reason for the difference, even double-standard, is that railroads grew up in the era of Laissez-faire. Roads and aviation grew up in the New Deal/Great Society eras.

 

Thank you again Democratic Party.

 

 

It may have grown up under the Democrats, but it was fully matured and blown into obesity under the GOP.  The Interstate system wasn't named for Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy or Johnson.....

The reason for the difference, even double-standard, is that railroads grew up in the era of Laissez-faire. Roads and aviation grew up in the New Deal/Great Society eras.

 

Thank you again Democratic Party.

 

 

It may have grown up under the Democrats, but it was fully matured and blown into obesity under the GOP.  The Interstate system wasn't named for Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy or Johnson.....

 

GOP President, but Democratic Congress. 

 

The truth is the interstate highway system was about as bipartisan as it gets.  Bring the nation closer together, while putting returning veterans to work building freeways and new suburbs?  Try voting against that.

 

It was a key part of the postwar perfect storm that created suburbia.

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR

Our Trouble With Trains

By RICHARD WHITE

MAY 18, 2015

 

EIGHT train passengers died last week in Philadelphia. Their deaths are particularly alarming because they were doing nothing more dangerous than traveling along Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor. The news about the train accident has focused on technological fixes that might have prevented the disaster. The deaths are, however, also rooted in our long love-hate relationship with the railroads. It is this particular history that has served to render our railroad problems so intractable.

 

Amtrak is a public-private corporation, but the government’s involvement in rail began long before Amtrak. It has taken various forms: public subsidies, public stock subscriptions, the leasing of convict labor, partial public ownership of private railroad corporations, and regulation. Government funds were the lifeblood of many 19th-century American railroads. The partnership structure meant that the public absorbed the risk. Those who controlled the corporations, if not the corporations themselves, reaped the benefits. (The Europeans, who have maintained their state-owned companies and close government supervision, have done much better at passenger travel.)

 

MORE:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/05/18/opinion/our-trouble-with-trains.html?emc=edit_th_20150518&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=27187300&_r=0&referrer=

The truth is the interstate highway system was about as bipartisan as it gets.  Bring the nation closer together, while putting returning veterans to work building freeways and new suburbs?  Try voting against that.

 

You'd think that maintaining the interstate highways system -- and the rest of our transportation infrastructure -- would be about as bipartisan as it gets. Bring the nation together, while putting returning veterans and and others to work maintaining freeways and bridges and rails? Yet most of Congress votes against that.

The truth is the interstate highway system was about as bipartisan as it gets.  Bring the nation closer together, while putting returning veterans to work building freeways and new suburbs?  Try voting against that.

 

You'd think that maintaining the interstate highways system -- and the rest of our transportation infrastructure -- would be about as bipartisan as it gets. Bring the nation together, while putting returning veterans and and others to work maintaining freeways and bridges and rails? Yet most of Congress votes against that.

 

Looking back is that exactly what happened.  Were returning vets those who built the highways?

The truth is the interstate highway system was about as bipartisan as it gets.  Bring the nation closer together, while putting returning veterans to work building freeways and new suburbs?  Try voting against that.

 

You'd think that maintaining the interstate highways system -- and the rest of our transportation infrastructure -- would be about as bipartisan as it gets. Bring the nation together, while putting returning veterans and and others to work maintaining freeways and bridges and rails? Yet most of Congress votes against that.

 

As I’ve said in other contexts, government does closed end projects nearly as well as the private sector.  It’s open ended stuff, like maintenance, where it falls short.

 

Also, it’s a lot easier for a politician to take credit for a new freeway or bridge than the repair of an old one.  Example:  the opening of the last stretch of 480 was delayed several weeks to fit Dick Celeste’s schedule.

Opinion: The conservative case for strengthening Amtrak

Ryan Cooper

May 18, 2015

 

The Amtrak crash in Pennsylvania killed eight people and injured dozens more. It has sparked much hand-wringing in the media, though its death toll is surpassed every few hours on American highways.

 

Still, Republicans have not hesitated in their plan to sharply cut Amtrak subsidies, recently voting on legislation to do just that. One GOP congressman called Amtrak a "Soviet-style operation," which presumably means he would prefer abolishing Amtrak altogether.

 

But Republicans, as the ostensible party of conservatism, have an obligation to consider the extant fact of Amtrak, which is a critical institution for millions of Americans. By supposed conservative principles, it is not appropriate to sacrifice the current needs of existing people in pursuit of an ideological utopia.

 

MORE:

http://theweek.com/articles/555400/conservative-case-strengthening-amtrak

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  24s24 seconds ago

Invest in infrastructure, safety and a #rail future for America. An enlightened staff editorial FYI @dispatcheditor http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/editorials/article21739179.html

Did you know that the distance from Lisbon, Portugal to Moscow, Russia is the same as from San Francisco, CA to Washington DC? So much for "tiny Europe"....

 

And while Congress tries to kill "money-losing long-distance passenger trains" (as if roads across Wyoming make money).....

 

http://news.yahoo.com/see-why-amtraks-losses-mount-hop-empire-builder-130709804.html

As the Empire Builder snakes along 2,230 miles (3,590 km) on a 46-hour journey, it offers insights into the financial problems plaguing America's passenger railroad at a time of intensifying scrutiny over its aging infrastructure and safety record. ...Its supporters include both Republican and Democrat politicians, illustrating how the often-vicious partisan rancor over Amtrak in Washington evaporates in sparsely populated areas of the country that need it most. And like many of Amtrak's long-distance routes, it's growing.

________

 

...France (and Germany, as noted in this article) are trying to expand long-distance passenger trains and restore a national rail network. Good thing Europe is a bunch of socialists and America is so exceptional:

 

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/main-line/french-intercity-commission-publishes-initial-report.html

A commission set up by the French government to draw up proposals for the development of loss-making Intercity services published its initial report on May 26, recommending significant changes to the organisation and operation of the network. The commission, which is chaired by member of parliament for Calvados Mr Philippe Duron, is tasked with developing a strategy for the so-called balance of territory (TET) trains, a network of 40 loss-making long-distance services which serves 355 towns and cities across 21 regions.

In fairness, though, the topography between Lisbon and Moscow looks very different than the topography between SanFran and D.C.  Including Russia in that stat really skews the map.  It's a much smaller map if you just stop at Poland (or even allow for a spur from Poland up through Riga).

 

It's closer from Paris to Berlin than it is from Chicago to NYC.  Berlin to Warsaw isn't that much farther than Cleveland to Cincinnati.  A lot of Europe's population is clustered in the middle of the continent: France, BeNeLux, Germany, Italy.  They don't have the setup we have with a lot of population on two coasts a continent apart.

East of the Mississippi and especially the northeast quarter of the country, there's a metro area of 1-2 million or more people every 100-150 miles. That's doesn't mean we should have Euro-style rail service with 140+ mph trains every hour running between them (plus half-hourly conventional-speed regional trains, plus intercity and local buses). But it also doesn't mean we should be satisfied with just 2-4 daily Greyhounds and a single daily Amtrak train if we're lucky.

Agreed on that point.  I was more focused, as was the article, I think, on the super-long-distance routes like the Empire Builder and our rough analogues to the TET lines that you mentioned in your previous post.  The Great Lakes region east of Chicago and the Mid-Atlantic/New England region are very different, developmentally, than the Great Plains, Southwest, and Rockies (or even the Upper Midwest).

On the other side of the coin, the true long-distance trains may run from Chicago to the West Coast, but their doors aren't locked throughout. Instead, they make some 50 station stops, linking towns and cities that are pretty remote and otherwise have limited or no air or bus service. The city-pair combinations are quite remarkable, so much so that something like only 10 percent of riders travel the entire distance from Chicago to the West Coast. Given that amount of passenger turnover, it's no surprise that the Chicago-Seattle Empire Builder is the nation's most heavily used passenger rail route with only one daily departure in each direction. The second-most heavily used is the Coast Starlight that travels 2,000+ miles from Los Angeles to Seattle. I think the third is the Chicago-Bay Area California Zephyr and the fourth...? It's the Chicago-New York City/Boston Lake Shore Limited which makes stops in the Ohio cities of Bryan, Toledo, Sandusky, Elyria and Cleveland.

 

Each of these single-daily-departure long-distance routes carry 1,000 to 1,500 passengers every day which shows the amount of turnover throughout each run, considering there's only 200-400 people on each train at any given time.

 

Also, consider how many planes or buses it would take to carry this same number of passengers. A typical Greyhound bus or an Embraer RJ145 jet each can carry 50 passengers. So it would take 20-30 fully loaded intercity buses or regional jets to carry what two of these Amtrak trains (one eastbound, one westbound) carries each day.

Also, consider how many planes or buses it would take to carry this same number of passengers. A typical Greyhound bus or an Embraer RJ145 jet each can carry 50 passengers. So it would take 20-30 fully loaded intercity buses or regional jets to carry what two of these Amtrak trains (one eastbound, one westbound) carries each day.

 

It would likely be more than that as you couldn't evenly fill the planes to serve the city pair combinations passengers are actually travelling to and from.

It would likely be more than that as you couldn't evenly fill the planes to serve the city pair combinations passengers are actually travelling to and from.

 

True, I'm just using some pure, raw math.

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  2m2 minutes ago

US House cuts @Amtrak by $251 million, rejects entire $825 million for "Positive Train Control" to prevent future Philly-type train wrecks.

Another great editorial from the Toledo Blade staff!

 

Published: Tuesday, 6/16/2015

EDITORIAL

Invest in Amtrak

 

Despite the need for critical investment in railway infrastructure, the Republican-controlled U.S. House passed legislation last week that would slash Amtrak’s budget. The ongoing schism between Congress and the national passenger rail system must end.

 

Last month, an Amtrak train traveling from Washington to New York derailed in Philadelphia, killing eight people and injuring about 200. The train was traveling at more than 100 miles per hour in a 50 mph zone when it jumped the tracks at a sharp turn. Investigators have found no mechanical problems with the train, but it was not equipped with an automatic braking system.

 

Even after that tragedy, Congress would rather play politics than respond to the clear need for rail safety and infrastructure upgrades. Lawmakers seek to allot about $1.3 billion for Amtrak in the next fiscal year, down from the $1.4 billion approved last year. President Obama requested $2.5 billion for Amtrak in his budget proposal.

 

Amtrak trains continue to need modern safety features, including the automatic braking system. Shortchanging Amtrak’s funding for infrastructure and staffing will only lead to continued — and preventable — accidents.

 

Read more at http://www.toledoblade.com/Editorials/2015/06/16/Invest-in-Amtrak-1.html#cbQJudLu8E7DyJLr.99

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  2m2 minutes ago

US House cuts @Amtrak by $251 million, rejects entire $825 million for "Positive Train Control" to prevent future Philly-type train wrecks.

 

Did they ever figure out for sure what caused the Philly wreck?  I ask because even though Amtrak cars and locomotives may be older, they have pretty extensive useful lives (one of the arguments in favor of trains) and wrecks like Philly are actually very rare.  It may well be a fair point that we don't need $825 million for "Positive Train Control."  The existing control systems really don't appear to be that bad, unless you're telling me that there have been a lot of near-misses for other incidents like Philly.

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  2m2 minutes ago

US House cuts @Amtrak by $251 million, rejects entire $825 million for "Positive Train Control" to prevent future Philly-type train wrecks.

 

Did they ever figure out for sure what caused the Philly wreck?  I ask because even though Amtrak cars and locomotives may be older, they have pretty extensive useful lives (one of the arguments in favor of trains) and wrecks like Philly are actually very rare.  It may well be a fair point that we don't need $825 million for "Positive Train Control."  The existing control systems really don't appear to be that bad, unless you're telling me that there have been a lot of near-misses for other incidents like Philly.

 

Even if this only happened once every 10 years, that would mean it has the potential to save about a life per year for $825 million.  I'm not an actuary because I could never put a price tag on things like that, but for comparison we spend $7 billion a year on TSA alone, and I'm not sure if that is saving 10+ (or any) lives per year.

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  2m2 minutes ago

US House cuts @Amtrak by $251 million, rejects entire $825 million for "Positive Train Control" to prevent future Philly-type train wrecks.

 

Did they ever figure out for sure what caused the Philly wreck?  I ask because even though Amtrak cars and locomotives may be older, they have pretty extensive useful lives (one of the arguments in favor of trains) and wrecks like Philly are actually very rare.  It may well be a fair point that we don't need $825 million for "Positive Train Control."  The existing control systems really don't appear to be that bad, unless you're telling me that there have been a lot of near-misses for other incidents like Philly.

 

Even if this only happened once every 10 years, that would mean it has the potential to save about a life per year for $825 million.  I'm not an actuary because I could never put a price tag on things like that, but for comparison we spend $7 billion a year on TSA alone, and I'm not sure if that is saving 10+ (or any) lives per year.

 

They use similar arguments ("how can you put a price on human life?") to justify TSA just based on the possibility that it might at some point save a life.  That's about the best they can do for it.  But saying that "well TSA is even worse!" is only a valid critique if you're talking to someone who defends TSA while wanting to cut Amtrak (or at least "Positive Train Control" for Amtrak).  I'd be happy to see the TSA ditched--it's America's most expensive and least enjoyable theater troupe.  That would still leave this talk about Amtrak and PTC unresolved.

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  2m2 minutes ago

US House cuts @Amtrak by $251 million, rejects entire $825 million for "Positive Train Control" to prevent future Philly-type train wrecks.

 

Did they ever figure out for sure what caused the Philly wreck?  I ask because even though Amtrak cars and locomotives may be older, they have pretty extensive useful lives (one of the arguments in favor of trains) and wrecks like Philly are actually very rare.  It may well be a fair point that we don't need $825 million for "Positive Train Control."  The existing control systems really don't appear to be that bad, unless you're telling me that there have been a lot of near-misses for other incidents like Philly.

 

Even if this only happened once every 10 years, that would mean it has the potential to save about a life per year for $825 million.  I'm not an actuary because I could never put a price tag on things like that, but for comparison we spend $7 billion a year on TSA alone, and I'm not sure if that is saving 10+ (or any) lives per year.

 

They use similar arguments ("how can you put a price on human life?") to justify TSA just based on the possibility that it might at some point save a life.  That's about the best they can do for it.  But saying that "well TSA is even worse!" is only a valid critique if you're talking to someone who defends TSA while wanting to cut Amtrak (or at least "Positive Train Control" for Amtrak).  I'd be happy to see the TSA ditched--it's America's most expensive and least enjoyable theater troupe.  That would still leave this talk about Amtrak and PTC unresolved.

 

I wasn't arguing for or against PTC or TSA, I was just giving a perspective on how we spend money for safety for other modes of transportation.

 

As far as people wanting to fund TSA and not fund Amtrak...well there's enough of them out there that TSA has gotten 13 years of funding (among many other air travel safety measures) and Amtrak is constantly fighting for pennies.

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  now

US Senate passenger rail bill: A huge leap forward http://www.narprail.org/news/blog/narp-applauds-most-provisions-in-the-senates-railroad-reform-enhancement-and-efficiency-act-of-2015/ … Would provide daily or daytime service where it doesn't exist!

 

...LIKE OHIO!

Embedded links at the original, source blog posting:

 

http://allaboardohio.org/2015/06/19/us-senate-rail-bill-a-huge-leap-forward/

 

US Senate rail bill: A huge leap forward!

kjprendergast on June 19, 2015

 

One of the most innovative passenger rail bills seen in a long time was introduced this week in the U.S. Senate. It is a companion to the already passed U.S. House of Representatives bill that would reauthorize the Passenger Rail Investment & Improvement Act of 2008.

 

While the House bill does little damage to passenger rail (except for keeping it on a survival-only budget), the Senate bill offers some innovative elements and recognizes the need for service expansion. Specifically, the bipartisan Railroad Reform, Enhancement, and Efficiency Act of 2015 (RREEA 2015), released this week by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, could help Ohio in a couple of notable ways:

 

  + The bill would give local and regional governments a stronger voice in rail planning and development decisions. This is important in a state like Ohio that has an anti-rail state government but pro-rail local and regional governments;

 

  + The bill includes a provision called Section 301 that, for the first time in the 21st century, provides federal operating funding for passenger rail service to expand. Among the criteria for expansion are restoring service over former Amtrak routes and providing daily or daytime service where such service does not previously exist. All of these conditions exist in abundance in Ohio.

 

For further detail and analysis on this exciting bill, please CLICK HERE. To read accurate media coverage of the bill, please CLICK HERE.

 

All Aboard Ohio strongly encourages you to contact your two US Senators (Sherrod Brown and Rob Portman) in Ohio to let them know your personal feelings on this bill. Since the Senate bill is markedly different from its House counterpart, there would have to be a conference committee to resolve differences. If you support more and better passenger train services in Ohio, kindly urge your U.S. Representative to replace the House version with the Senate version.

 

Thank you!

 

###

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  3s4 seconds ago

Mayor #FrankJackson of #Cleveland among those who convinced a GOP Senator from a state without @Amtrak to support it! http://narprail.org/news/blog/an-unlikely-amtrak-champion/ …

Edit

Embedded links are in the blog posting at:

http://allaboardohio.org/2015/08/13/ohio-to-be-part-of-midwest-rail-plan/

 

Ohio to be part of Midwest rail plan

August 13, 2015

 

Ohio will be part of a multi-state planning initiative for the Midwest led by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) according to a recent announcement to Congress. While more details will be announced soon, the timing of this planning work (which is required by law before federal funding can be awarded to service expansions and capital improvements) could not be better.

 

The news comes as Congress is wrapping up work on a reauthorization of a six-year surface transportation law that includes passenger rail provisions under Senate bill 1626. That legislation includes 100% percent federal operating funding for new or expanded routes of 750 miles or more. All of Ohio's existing routes fall into that category, as might future expansions such as those in Amtrak's Performance Improvement Plans for its Chicago-Cincinnati-Washington DC-New York City Cardinal or the Chicago-Toledo-Cleveland-Washington DC/New York City Capitol Limited/Pennsylvanian. More significant expansions may be considered.

 

A more detailed, formal announcement of the grant award will soon be made by the FRA who notified Congress recently about the multi-state planning. The funding, totaling $2.78 million, is being used for FRA-led planning in the Midwest and Southeast. For the Midwest, the FRA approved an application submitted in November 2014. This planning will be similar to that which was recently conducted for the Southwest.

 

"The Midwest is the second-largest megaregion in the United States (trailing only the Northeast) and seventh largest in the world in terms of population and economic output," said Ken Prendergast, executive director of All Aboard Ohio. "While the Northeast has an extensive and growing network of fast trains to enhance that region's economy, the Midwest system is lacking especially in populous Ohio. Fast trains linking transportation hubs in small, medium and large cities will create jobs and regional connectivity, support educational institutions, and enhance productivity and Midwest competitiveness."

 

Here is the FRA's notice to Congress:

 

“The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is utilizing authority provided under Section 192 of the FY 2015 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 113-76) to retain $2,780,651 in funding made available to the agency to facilitate multi-state rail planning. Due to the complexities in coordinating among multiple states and other stakeholders, FRA is retaining these funds and leading the planning effort at the Federal level, rather than awarding funds to entities through a grant or cooperative agreement. In October 2015, FRA solicited statements of interest from states for participating in this FRA-led multi-state planning process. FRA is using these funds to engage stakeholders in both the Southeast and Midwest regions in forming more comprehensive regional governance organizations to sustain current planning work and develop a long-term passenger rail vision for their respective regions. Funding will also be utilized to enhance FRA’s passenger rail network planning tool with updated cost and trip table data, as well as new mapping and benefit-cost analysis features. These efforts will build off the pilot Southwest Passenger Rail Study that was funded under similar authority in FY 2010 and released in October 2014.”

 

There are several takeaways from this:

 

+ The multi-state plan will include Ohio plus Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wisconsin and Kentucky. All Aboard Ohio encouraged the Ohio Association of Regional Councils to join the Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission to retain Ohio's voice in Midwest rail planning after the Ohio Department of Transportation withdrew its membership in 2012.

 

+ Planning will be federally led rather than awarded to states, thus the FRA would conduct passenger rail planning in Ohio and other states.

 

+ For Ohio's short-distance corridor planning (ie: Columbus-Chicago, Cincinnati-Chicago, Cleveland-Toledo, etc), it means regional planning agencies no longer need to take the lead on sponsoring planning and instead take on a more traditional role of supporting the FRA planning work, notifying stakeholders of developments, and being conduits of stakeholder input.

 

+ If S.1626 passes, there will be a framework for 100% federal operating funding of long-distance (750+ miles) rail components of the FRA plan. The total amount of available funding will be determined through Congress' annual appropriations process.

 

Thus it is even more imperative that All Aboard Ohio and our friends make our long-distance service expansion preferences known and to get buy-in from stakeholders along routes. Check back here at allaboardohio.org for occasional updates and for an upcoming release of our long-distance expansion preferences. We will share more information about this Midwest rail planning work as we receive it.

 

###

:wtf:

What about Cleveland-Pitt?  Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinatti?

:wtf:

What about Cleveland-Pitt?  Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinatti?

 

If you want those in the plan, then keep an eye out for public input meetings, public input website, etc. in about 6-12 months.

I was coming home from work Saturday night about 3:45am and saw an Amtrak train heading south at the Bedford-Walton Hills line.  It must have been the Capitol Limited, if it was it was running about 2 hours late.

 

Is that typical?

Amtrak's website shows that eastbound train (#30) departed Cleveland 1 hour, 36 minutes late.

 

On Aug. 17, #30 dp dp CLE 2:47 late (westbound #29 dp CLE 0:01 early)

On Aug. 16, #30 dp CLE 1:28 late (#29 dp CLE 1:02 late)

On Aug. 15, #30 dp CLE 1:36 late (#29 dp CLE 0:16 late)

On Aug. 14, #30 dp CLE 0:52 late (#29 dp CLE 1:59 late)

On Aug. 13, #30 dp CLE 0:42 late (#29 dp CLE 0:48 late)

On Aug. 12, #30 dp CLE 1:44 late (#29 dp CLE 0:55 late)

 

So yes, I'd say that's in the average for this time of year. Only two eastbounds left Chicago on time in the past five days. Most were about an hour late leaving, which tells me they were waiting for western connections.

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  now

Toledo's rail terminal reviving as it hits 65th year, adding Greyhound http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2015/09/21/Terminal-reviving-as-it-hits-65th-year.html … Celebrate with us 5-8pm Tuesday at MLK Plaza!

 

New report: restore passenger rail to Columbus, Dayton, Youngstown; expand service to other Ohio cities

September 22, 2015

 

http://allaboardohio.org/2015/09/22/new-report-restore-passenger-rail/

 

For Immediate Release

Contact: Ken Prendergast, All Aboard Ohio Executive Director, 844-GO4-RAIL (toll free)

 

What if Ohioans in small towns and big cities could access more frequent, faster, reliable and conveniently scheduled passenger rail services?

 

What if those trains offered low fares and on-board amenities like WiFi, conference space, cafe service, comfortable reclining seats, and a safe, smooth ride at 90 mph?

 

What if Ohio’s seven existing cities and towns with stations served by intercity passenger trains grew to 23?

 

What if the total number of passenger trains serving Ohio grew from 5 per day to 14?

 

What if if the State of Ohio didn’t have the responsibility to create (or chance to prevent) the new trains and instead there was a federally-driven and -funded planning process to identify the feasibility of these and other possibilities as well as a federal grant program to pay for new train services to and through Ohio?

 

Finally, what if there was a report that proposed new/expanded train services (six of them, actually) that would achieve a higher level, interconnected transportation system for Ohio, producing $4 billion in benefits over the 30-year lifetime of the infrastructure investments to create them?

 

Such a report was released today (DOWNLOAD REPORT HERE: http://freepdfhosting.com/38886f65ec.pdf) by All Aboard Ohio, a nonprofit educational association of citizens and rail/transit users. All Aboard Ohio’s report was prompted by two important, emerging developments that could soon improve the prospects for passenger rail service expansions and improvements in Ohio:

 

1. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) announced to Congress in August that it will lead multi-state feasibility studies of expanded short-distance (less than 750 miles) and long-distance passenger rail service expansions in the Southeast states and in the Midwest states, including Ohio.

 

2. With bipartisan support, the U.S. Senate has passed a Surface Transportation Program reauthorization that includes a rail title that would for the first time since 1997 allow federal funds to be used for long-distance passenger rail expansion without a host state having to sponsor it. The rail title includes language originally introduced as S.1626, the bipartisan Railroad Reform, Enhancement, and Efficiency Act of 2015 (RREEA). The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to consider its own version of the transportation reauthorization bill in the coming weeks.

 

“With these ingredients coming together, the time is right for All Aboard Ohio to consider how best to utilize these opportunities for rail expansion in Ohio,” said All Aboard Ohio Executive Director Ken Prendergast. “All Aboard Ohio wants the rail passengers’ voice in our state to be heard as the FRA’s multistate plans for expansion are formed and Amtrak or other applicants seek federal grants to offer more transportation choices.”

 

Expansion funds would support longer routes (750+ miles) that were omitted from the national system or discontinued due to factors other than passenger usage, such as political factors or the neglect and abandonment of private railroad infrastructure. Except for Florida, no state has lost more Amtrak service since 2000 than Ohio. The FRA’s Midwest plan and the Senate’s RREEA legislation offer opportunities to right past wrongs.

 

Recently, All Aboard Ohio’s board of directors unanimously recommended six service expansions on routes 750+ miles long, therefore making them a federal responsibility. These proposed routes would connect communities with limited transportation choices, that have high ridership potential rail and that might entail lower capital and operating costs. The report includes ridership projections based on average per route-mile usage of all existing long-distance trains nationwide:

 

1. Expand to daily service Amtrak’s Cardinal (Chicago-Indianapolis-Cincinnati-Charleston-Washington DC-Philadelphia-New York City). This train currently operates thrice-weekly. Ridership is projected to grow 96 percent to 215,000 passengers per year (the equivalent passenger load of four full 737 jets or 10 full long-distance buses every day).

 

2. Extend Amtrak’s Pennsylvanian service (New York City-Philadelphia-Harrisburg-Pittsburgh) to Chicago via Youngstown, Cleveland, Toledo and Dearborn, MI. Ridership is projected to increase 56 percent to 360,000 passengers per year (the equivalent passenger load of seven full 737 jets or 16½ full long-distance buses every day).

 

3. Inaugurate Cincinnati section of Amtrak’s Lake Shore Limited (Cincinnati-Dayton-Columbus-Cleveland-Buffalo-Rochester-Albany-New York City). This new service is projected to carry 195,000 passengers per year (the equivalent passenger load of four full 737 jets or nine full long-distance buses every day).

 

4. Restore Amtrak’s Three Rivers via Dearborn, MI (Chicago-Dearborn-Toledo-Cleveland-Youngstown-Pittsburgh-Philadelphia-New York City). This new service on a roughly 12-hour counter-schedule would provide daytime service where the Pennsylvanian extension provides overnight service. Ridership is projected at 200,000 passengers per year (the equivalent passenger load of four full 737 jets or nine full long-distance buses every day).

 

5. Restore the best remaining route segments of Amtrak’s Broadway/National Limited (Chicago-Fort Wayne-Columbus-Pittsburgh-Philadelphia-New York City/Washington DC). This new service is projected to carry 220,000 passengers per year (the equivalent passenger load of four full 737 jets or 10 full long-distance buses each day).

 

6. Restore direct Midwest-Southeast Florida passenger rail (Detroit-Toledo-Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati-Lexington-Chattanooga-Atlanta-Macon-Jacksonville-Orlando). This new service is projected to carry 350,000 passengers per year (the equivalent passenger load of seven full 737 jets or 16 full long-distance buses every day).

 

All Aboard Ohio urges Ohioans to reach out to your U.S. Congressperson in the coming days and request their support for the rail title (S.1626) in the Senate’s surface transportation reauthorization bill to provide more and better transportation choices in Ohio. We also urge you to share this report with business and tourism officials in your community, as well as your local, state and federal elected leaders in the coming months to encourage their participation in the FRA’s Midwest rail planning next year. Join All Aboard Ohio today to make sure you’re kept informed on where and how best to give input to this planning process!

 

###

^W/r to no. 2, I'm thinking "restore" might be the better term.  IIRC there was such a service (the extended Pennsylvanian) in the late 1990s till 2000, until the Bush Administration dismantled it.

^W/r to no. 2, I'm thinking "restore" might be the better term.  IIRC there was such a service (the extended Pennsylvanian) in the late 1990s till 2000, until the Bush Administration dismantled it.

 

The Pennsylvanian extension ran from 1998-2003 but Bush didn't kill it. Amtrak and the post-Conrail split traffic meltdown killed it. Amtrak extended the train to carry mail/express and didn't advertise to prospective passengers. So the ridership stunk. When Amtrak pulled the mail/express biz, this was one of trains cut.

^I stand corrected on that one even though I certainly didn't find Bush to be Amtrak-friendly, either.  I do recall Amtrak pulling out of the mail biz.  It seemed like, at one point around 2000, Cleveland had about 4 or 5 Amtrak runs including, amazingly, at least 1 daytime train ... @ around 4 or 5 in the afternoon.

See the Pittsburgh - Cleveland - Chicago timetable from 2000 in the report, including a train that almost ran but never did.

Rail users meeting in Cleveland look to expand routes, improve passenger experience

By Alison Grant, The Plain Dealer

on September 24, 2015 at 10:00 AM, updated September 24, 2015 at 10:01 AM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The Rail Users Network, a voice for both Amtrak and city transit passengers, is looking for your ideas on how to expand rail service and improve the experience of riding long-distance and urban trains.

 

The non-profit national group is holding its annual meeting Saturday at the downtown headquarters of the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority. Before an afternoon session, the public is invited to a tour of RTA facilities. If you're interested, head to the Tower City Rapid Station lobby, where participants will gather at 7:30 a.m.

 

...All Aboard Ohio's directors recently recommended six rail expansions for the state, including extending Amtrak's Pennsylvania service (New York City-Philadelphia-Harrisburg-Pittsburgh) to Chicago by way of Youngstown, Cleveland, Toledo and Dearborn, Mich. Ridership is projected to increase 56 percent to 360,000 passengers a year. Prendergast said that's equivalent to seven full 737 jets or 16½ full long-distance buses per day.

 

MORE:

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/09/rail_users_meeting_in_cleveland_look_to_expand_routes_improve_passenger_experience.html#incart_river

Rail Users of America sounds like a good group and this could be a great opportunity for RTA's train/transit needs to gain a national voice.  This looks to be a win-win Saturday... I would think discussion priority would be on things like the NCTC and what to do about the freight delays for Amtrak in/out of Cleveland.  For the NCTC I hope a push is made to get it located East of 9th Street, if that possibility is still on the table.  But last I recall was that a Muny Lot location is preferable based on cost which would be too bad imho

Freight delays and their impacts on Amtrak have been significantly reduced, although not eliminated. Come to think of it, I can't remember a time in my 30-year rail advocacy life when freight-induced delays weren't an issue.

 

I will mention the multimodal hub in Cleveland but also Toledo and Elyria. We're trying to encourage these statewide.

Schumer: Southern Tier Company Expected To Build New Trains

Tue, 09/22/2015 - 9:54am

The Associated Press

 

A manufacturer in the Southern Tier is expected to be chosen to build the next generation of high-speed trains for the Northeast as part of a $2.5 billion program, U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer said Monday.

 

Amtrak's board of directors at its meeting Tuesday is expected to authorize contract negotiations with Alstom in Steuben County, the New York Democrat said. That contract would create an estimated 400 jobs at Alstom in Hornell and potentially more across upstate New York.

 

Schumer was visiting Hornell Monday to talk about the anticipated Amtrak board decision. He noted that final contract details haven't been settled.

 

MORE:

http://www.manufacturing.net/news/2015/09/schumer-southern-tier-company-expected-to-build-new-trains-0

____

 

EDIT: more detail (FYI: Alstom built France's TGV's trains)....

http://www.schumer.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/schumer-urges-feds-to-green-light-amtrak-to-buy-new-safer-more-modern-acela-trains-that-could-help-companies-across-the-country-including-alstom-in-hornell-new-3-billion-train-project-could-jump-start-local-manufacturing-and-create-hundreds-of-good-paying-middle-class-jobs

Rendering of the ONCF duplex train now being delivered to Morocco for frequent, 300 km/h (186 mph) service between Rabat and Casablanca. These trains were built by Alstom in France. Alstom’s American plant in Hornell, NY will build high-speed trains for Amtrak to replace the 150 mph Acelas in the Northeast. Other corridors in the USA, including in the Midwest (the world’s seventh largest economy) warrant high-speed rail too (NOTE: also see graphic at bottom of this APTA press release).

 

http://allaboardohio.org/2015/10/05/survey-2-of-3-of-americans-likely-to-use-high-speed-rail-in-usa%E2%80%8B/

 

Survey: two out of three of Americans likely to use High-Speed Rail in USA​

kjprendergast on October 5, 2015

 

Contact: Mantill Williams  of APTA as 202-496-4869

 

Washington, D.C. — If you build high-speed rail in America, they will come. According to a 2015 survey released by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), if high-speed rail were available today, two-thirds (63 percent) of Americans are likely to use high-speed trains and this jumps to nearly seventy (67) percent when respondents were informed of the costs and time saving benefits of high-speed rail service.

 

“People want high-speed rail in America and we are seeing support among various ages and in different regions of the country regardless of political party,” said APTA President and CEO Michael Melaniphy. “In addition, the millennial generation and younger adults will lead the way with their preferences to have a multi-modal transportation system that supports their lifestyle. It is critical that we include implementation of high-speed rail as we look to plan for the nation’s future transportation needs.”

 

In the survey “High-Speed Rail in America 2015”, conducted by TechnoMetrica for APTA, the likelihood of respondents using high-speed rail for their work and leisure travel increases as they were informed that it will be less expensive than flying and that it will take less time than driving to their destination. When told of these cost and time saving benefits, Millennials and young people (18-44) strong likelihood of use at 71 percent jumps to 76 percent. Those respondents who identify as Republican represent the largest growth of intended use, their likelihood of using high-speed rail increases from 58 to 65 percent, followed by Independents, 61 to 67 percent, and Democrats’ already strong likelihood of use goes from 73 to 75 percent when informed of the savings of time and costs.

 

“A high-speed rail network will have a tremendous benefit to our entire transportation system,” said Melaniphy. “It will enable America’s air, rail, bus, ferry and highway systems to each function effectively and efficiently as we face a dramatic population growth that adds more travelers than our current capacity can accommodate.”

 

The survey also revealed that Americans overwhelmingly support efforts to streamline government regulations that will promote real-estate development near high-speed rail. This development could include amenities such as popular retail shops, walkable neighborhoods, and unique dining experiences. Overall, nearly three quarters of respondents (71 percent) support reducing regulations so that amenities can be built near high-speed rail stations.

 

“High-speed rail not only provides a great transportation option, but the public’s interest in amenities near high-speed rail stations is another way to create economic growth and jobs in local communities across the country,” said Melaniphy. “If we have strong investment in high-speed rail, it will be an opportunity to generate real-estate and land use income for the private sector as well as local tax revenue for communities for decades to come.”

 

High-Speed Rail in America 2015​ survey was conducted by Techno Metrica for APTA. The survey includes 1,005 interviews using random digit dial sample of both landline and cell phone numbers. At the 95 percent confidence level, the margin of error for the respondents’ overall sample is +/-3.2 percentage points. To see a copy of this data in an infographic format, click here​.

 

​# # #

 

Chicago Gateway Initiative Blue Ribbon Panel Suggests Solutions

Amtrak Panel Recommends Co-Located Dispatchers, Improved Operating Practices and Projects to Prevent $800 Billion in Impacts from Rail Gridlock in Chicago

 

Bringing together rail traffic control dispatchers now separated by thousands of miles, improved operating practices by Amtrak and other railroads and funding for priority projects already identified in Northern Illinois and Indiana are top recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Panel appointed by Amtrak to address massive "Chicago Gateway" delays to passenger and freight traffic.

 

Here's an overview of the report:

http://www.amtrak.com/chicagogateway