 |
Should The Long Distance Trains Be Taken Away From Amtrak?
Author: Credit to T.O.
Date: 05-09-2019 - 23:48
Credit goes to GenePoon for posting this on T.O.
https://ntbraymer.wordpress.com/2019/05/09/should-the-long-distance-trains-be-taken-away-from-amtrak/
Should The Long Distance Trains Be Taken Away From Amtrak?
By Noel T. Braymer
Amtrak still claim that they are losing money with their Long
Distance Trains. At the same time Amtrak uses an accounting system
which doesn't meet Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Also
most of the costs for Amtrak is on the East Coast and Midwest. Just
on Amtrak's Northeast Corridor there is a $28 billion dollars backlog
of deferred maintenance. Most Long Distance Trains are run on the
tracks of the freight railroads in this country. By law Amtrak gets a
discounted price for using the overhead of the freight railroads. The
freight railroads resent this because they don't make much money
allowing Amtrak trains to use their tracks. Another factor is the
Long Distance Trains generate much more revenue per train than
shorter distance trains. This is because passenger miles (the number
of passengers plus the miles each passenger traveled) is a common
measure of productivity of travel services. And its not like Amtrak
doesn't know this. I was at a public meeting a few years ago at which
a senior Amtrak Vice President bragged about what little money Amtrak
paid to operate their trains using the freight railroads. Basically
he was pitching that let Amtrak operate your trains and you'll save
money.
As I write this, Senator Moran of Kansas will soon be having a
meeting with Amtrak President Anderson about the future of Amtrak's
Long Distance Rail Passenger service. Anderson still has not said if
Amtrak will continue to operate the Southwest Chief between Kansas
and New Mexico. Amtrak is planning to sell some of its Superliner
Long Distance equipment with no plans to buy replacement cars, let
alone buying additional Long Distance Trainsets. Amtrak has in the
past increased its revenue generation running more trains with more
equipment to carry more paying passengers. When Amtrak has expanded
Long Distance service, its revenues increased more than the added
costs of running these trains. This caused Amtrak to recover a
greater percentage of costs from the farebox. But when Amtrak
eliminates or cutback Long Distance services "to save money", their
revenues go down, but not their costs. Amtrak's shorter distance
trains recover less money from the farebox and need more subsidizing
compared to most of its Long Distance services.
Amtrak under Anderson is seeking to expand service between major
cities of distances under 750 miles. Amtrak already charges States to
subsidize short distance services. A recent example of this was the
operation of the 196 mile route of the "Hoosier State" which Amtrak
charged the State of Indiana $3 million dollars a year for a train
that ran 4 days a week with a very slow schedule on poor quality
tracks between Indianapolis and Chicago. The other 3 days of the week
Amtrak's Cardinal ran on the same route and on to Washington and New
York. The "Hoosier State" was largely used by Amtrak to carry their
equipment needing repairs to their maintenance base at Beech Grove in
Indiana. There are several other State Supported trains, many of them
terminating in Chicago. But many of these trains only run one or two
times a day and often don't have connections to other Amtrak trains
at Chicago. Amtrak appears to be more interested in charging States
money to have them subsidize their services than attempting to run
profitable trains.
The most successful short distance State Supported train Amtrak
operates are the Pacific Surfliners. Much of this success is due to
local initiatives to expand service. This started in the late 1970's
when the trains ran as the "San Diegan" between San Diego and Los
Angeles. Starting in the mid 1970's with 3 round trips a day, by 1978
the State paid Amtrak to run up to 6 daily trains. The result was
ridership more than tripled and farebox recovery greatly improved.
Today the Pacific Surfliners run 12 round trips a day between San
Diego and Los Angeles. Currently 5 of these trains are extended to
Santa Barbara and 2 of those trains run as far as San Luis Obispo
which is roughly halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco. As
track improvements are completed the plan is to be running 14 round
trips daily between San Diego and Los Angeles with 6 round trips
extended to Santa Barbara and 3 round trips to San Luis Obispo in two
to three years.
It is ironic that the markets Amtrak President Anderson wants to
expand on, are the same being sought by Virgin Trains USA. While
Virgin Trains plan to be profitable, much of its success will depend
on revenue created by increased property values on land owned by
Virgin Trains USA at and around its stations. Also Virgin is planning
much faster service with trains capable of running up to 125 miles
per hour between major cities on tracks they control with right of
way often leased from friendly government agencies or existing rail
lines. Amtrak on the other hand for most new routes will have to
depend on gaining track access from the freight railroads. Good luck
with that. The railroads are increasingly interested in what is
called "Precision Railroading". What this boils down to is running
fewer, longer, faster freight trains on a tight schedule with less
need to have or maintain extra sidings and double tracking. This will
also lead to fewer jobs in the rail industry. The freight railroads
planning to run Precision Railroading will not welcome more Amtrak
passenger trains. Plus the fact Amtrak is likely counting on being
subsidized by States to operate these new corridor trains while not
having to pay more to gain track access.
What could all this mean for the Long Distance passenger trains?
Increasingly in California local governments work with the freight
railroads to upgrade tracks to allow better rail passenger service
that doesn't interfere with freight service. Also in California, many
miles of railroads are publicly owned and shared by the freight
railroads. If we were to create a new Long Distance Passenger train
service in this country, we would need funding to upgrade the
railroads which will allow more and faster passenger and freight rail
service. In many cases the railroads need improvements across the
county. Such investments would likely also stimulate economic growth
both in much of the rural areas of the country as well as in many
cities across the country. By using some of the money now given to
Amtrak, a new Long Distance National Passenger Rail System could be
created. Some of this funding would be used as seed money to buy new
equipment and to expand rail passenger service. This new income would
make it possible for the Long Distance Trains to pay the railroads
more to use their tracks. Also Government funding could be used for
more grade separations and additional tracks and track upgrades to
allow faster, more reliable rail service with less passenger train
interference to freight service. Also improved passenger service will
help stimulate the local economies of many of the towns with train
stations.
One advantage of Long Distance rail passenger service is they serve
many markets. Long Distance trains stop at major cities and small
towns and can run 24 hours a day for days at a time generating
income. Running two or three Long Distance Trains on a route gives
passengers more options and markets to ride the train. Despite what
Amtrak claims, long distance travel markets are generally the most
profitable services because ticket prices are higher if passengers go
a thousand miles, than if they go 20 miles. This is why most
passenger services use their passenger miles to measure their
productivity. Amtrak loves to talk about passenger counts. But many
of their passengers travel short distances which doesn't produce much
money.
https://ntbraymer.wordpress.com/2019/05/09/should-the-long-distance-trains-be-taken-away-from-amtrak/
Should The Long Distance Trains Be Taken Away From Amtrak?
By Noel T. Braymer
Amtrak still claim that they are losing money with their Long
Distance Trains. At the same time Amtrak uses an accounting system
which doesn't meet Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Also
most of the costs for Amtrak is on the East Coast and Midwest. Just
on Amtrak's Northeast Corridor there is a $28 billion dollars backlog
of deferred maintenance. Most Long Distance Trains are run on the
tracks of the freight railroads in this country. By law Amtrak gets a
discounted price for using the overhead of the freight railroads. The
freight railroads resent this because they don't make much money
allowing Amtrak trains to use their tracks. Another factor is the
Long Distance Trains generate much more revenue per train than
shorter distance trains. This is because passenger miles (the number
of passengers plus the miles each passenger traveled) is a common
measure of productivity of travel services. And its not like Amtrak
doesn't know this. I was at a public meeting a few years ago at which
a senior Amtrak Vice President bragged about what little money Amtrak
paid to operate their trains using the freight railroads. Basically
he was pitching that let Amtrak operate your trains and you'll save
money.
As I write this, Senator Moran of Kansas will soon be having a
meeting with Amtrak President Anderson about the future of Amtrak's
Long Distance Rail Passenger service. Anderson still has not said if
Amtrak will continue to operate the Southwest Chief between Kansas
and New Mexico. Amtrak is planning to sell some of its Superliner
Long Distance equipment with no plans to buy replacement cars, let
alone buying additional Long Distance Trainsets. Amtrak has in the
past increased its revenue generation running more trains with more
equipment to carry more paying passengers. When Amtrak has expanded
Long Distance service, its revenues increased more than the added
costs of running these trains. This caused Amtrak to recover a
greater percentage of costs from the farebox. But when Amtrak
eliminates or cutback Long Distance services "to save money", their
revenues go down, but not their costs. Amtrak's shorter distance
trains recover less money from the farebox and need more subsidizing
compared to most of its Long Distance services.
Amtrak under Anderson is seeking to expand service between major
cities of distances under 750 miles. Amtrak already charges States to
subsidize short distance services. A recent example of this was the
operation of the 196 mile route of the "Hoosier State" which Amtrak
charged the State of Indiana $3 million dollars a year for a train
that ran 4 days a week with a very slow schedule on poor quality
tracks between Indianapolis and Chicago. The other 3 days of the week
Amtrak's Cardinal ran on the same route and on to Washington and New
York. The "Hoosier State" was largely used by Amtrak to carry their
equipment needing repairs to their maintenance base at Beech Grove in
Indiana. There are several other State Supported trains, many of them
terminating in Chicago. But many of these trains only run one or two
times a day and often don't have connections to other Amtrak trains
at Chicago. Amtrak appears to be more interested in charging States
money to have them subsidize their services than attempting to run
profitable trains.
The most successful short distance State Supported train Amtrak
operates are the Pacific Surfliners. Much of this success is due to
local initiatives to expand service. This started in the late 1970's
when the trains ran as the "San Diegan" between San Diego and Los
Angeles. Starting in the mid 1970's with 3 round trips a day, by 1978
the State paid Amtrak to run up to 6 daily trains. The result was
ridership more than tripled and farebox recovery greatly improved.
Today the Pacific Surfliners run 12 round trips a day between San
Diego and Los Angeles. Currently 5 of these trains are extended to
Santa Barbara and 2 of those trains run as far as San Luis Obispo
which is roughly halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco. As
track improvements are completed the plan is to be running 14 round
trips daily between San Diego and Los Angeles with 6 round trips
extended to Santa Barbara and 3 round trips to San Luis Obispo in two
to three years.
It is ironic that the markets Amtrak President Anderson wants to
expand on, are the same being sought by Virgin Trains USA. While
Virgin Trains plan to be profitable, much of its success will depend
on revenue created by increased property values on land owned by
Virgin Trains USA at and around its stations. Also Virgin is planning
much faster service with trains capable of running up to 125 miles
per hour between major cities on tracks they control with right of
way often leased from friendly government agencies or existing rail
lines. Amtrak on the other hand for most new routes will have to
depend on gaining track access from the freight railroads. Good luck
with that. The railroads are increasingly interested in what is
called "Precision Railroading". What this boils down to is running
fewer, longer, faster freight trains on a tight schedule with less
need to have or maintain extra sidings and double tracking. This will
also lead to fewer jobs in the rail industry. The freight railroads
planning to run Precision Railroading will not welcome more Amtrak
passenger trains. Plus the fact Amtrak is likely counting on being
subsidized by States to operate these new corridor trains while not
having to pay more to gain track access.
What could all this mean for the Long Distance passenger trains?
Increasingly in California local governments work with the freight
railroads to upgrade tracks to allow better rail passenger service
that doesn't interfere with freight service. Also in California, many
miles of railroads are publicly owned and shared by the freight
railroads. If we were to create a new Long Distance Passenger train
service in this country, we would need funding to upgrade the
railroads which will allow more and faster passenger and freight rail
service. In many cases the railroads need improvements across the
county. Such investments would likely also stimulate economic growth
both in much of the rural areas of the country as well as in many
cities across the country. By using some of the money now given to
Amtrak, a new Long Distance National Passenger Rail System could be
created. Some of this funding would be used as seed money to buy new
equipment and to expand rail passenger service. This new income would
make it possible for the Long Distance Trains to pay the railroads
more to use their tracks. Also Government funding could be used for
more grade separations and additional tracks and track upgrades to
allow faster, more reliable rail service with less passenger train
interference to freight service. Also improved passenger service will
help stimulate the local economies of many of the towns with train
stations.
One advantage of Long Distance rail passenger service is they serve
many markets. Long Distance trains stop at major cities and small
towns and can run 24 hours a day for days at a time generating
income. Running two or three Long Distance Trains on a route gives
passengers more options and markets to ride the train. Despite what
Amtrak claims, long distance travel markets are generally the most
profitable services because ticket prices are higher if passengers go
a thousand miles, than if they go 20 miles. This is why most
passenger services use their passenger miles to measure their
productivity. Amtrak loves to talk about passenger counts. But many
of their passengers travel short distances which doesn't produce much
money.
Should The Long Distance Trains Be Taken Away From Amtrak?