 |
Not because we know what we want, but because Congress told us to do it......
Author: BOB2
Date: 08-02-2017 - 17:56
It will be interesting to see what develops. I can think of several potential markets, that might make sense, remembering the you are still operating under Amtrak's right to operate over the host RR.
This could be done with a pretty much an "above the rail" operator, even using Amtrak operating crews, and with certain operating proposals probably even Amtrak leased equipment. I also see the possibility of States or consortia of States to takeover certain long distance corridors, as "multi-state" operating authorities, which I also believe the act allows.
This is already being done, with "public sector" "operators" with some of the regional agencies on short distance routes (LOSSAN, San Joaquin's, and Capitols), which are now operated by the locals, even using Amtrak operating crews.
This legislative requirement is real, and also terribly "lucy goosey", as such legislative direction goes. leaving wide interpretation to FRA to define WTF this really means, in terms of how this is to be actually carried out, or even if it is feasible. This is an example of go try this theory and see if someone bites...... Which isn't much to guide the bureaucrats in how to determine if, when, and where this might make sense, and provide a responsible, reliable, and sustainable alternative service provider.....
The "imprecise" nature of this legislative requirement and solicitation, may conversely induce some to offers interesting long distance service "proposals". There are several companies that come to mind that could potentially bid on these. So, I would not be surprised to find possible interest from potential operators which have shown interest in service to places like Las Vegas, and/or on some corridors, with common final destinations in Florida.
Defining what FRA "wants" may be part of this bizarre solicitation process, by seeing what they "get", and who, if anyone, might be interested in bidding on possible routes or route "segments", and under what kind of terms and conditions that FRA/DOT will be wanting, or looking for.
This could be done with a pretty much an "above the rail" operator, even using Amtrak operating crews, and with certain operating proposals probably even Amtrak leased equipment. I also see the possibility of States or consortia of States to takeover certain long distance corridors, as "multi-state" operating authorities, which I also believe the act allows.
This is already being done, with "public sector" "operators" with some of the regional agencies on short distance routes (LOSSAN, San Joaquin's, and Capitols), which are now operated by the locals, even using Amtrak operating crews.
This legislative requirement is real, and also terribly "lucy goosey", as such legislative direction goes. leaving wide interpretation to FRA to define WTF this really means, in terms of how this is to be actually carried out, or even if it is feasible. This is an example of go try this theory and see if someone bites...... Which isn't much to guide the bureaucrats in how to determine if, when, and where this might make sense, and provide a responsible, reliable, and sustainable alternative service provider.....
The "imprecise" nature of this legislative requirement and solicitation, may conversely induce some to offers interesting long distance service "proposals". There are several companies that come to mind that could potentially bid on these. So, I would not be surprised to find possible interest from potential operators which have shown interest in service to places like Las Vegas, and/or on some corridors, with common final destinations in Florida.
Defining what FRA "wants" may be part of this bizarre solicitation process, by seeing what they "get", and who, if anyone, might be interested in bidding on possible routes or route "segments", and under what kind of terms and conditions that FRA/DOT will be wanting, or looking for.
