 |
Re: Very topical comment on "Buy American" from hsr blog site
Author: mook
Date: 12-18-2010 - 11:51
Agree that the main issue is lack of market to support even one full-time manufacturer. Since rail transit is mainly supported by fed money it's at the mercy of the usual politix and regulations. When Amtrak took over I'm sure the passenger equipment business became a lot like real estate right now: vast surplus of stuff out there so no real market for new. And Amtrak of course is in the market only occasionally and not predictably because much of their money comes from annual appropriations.
San Diego's startup line was done with non-Federal funds, which did let them dodge some Fed-related inefficiencies. Unfortunately, prices have gone up and the state money used for the initial line is no longer available, so the rest of their lines and equipment buys have been done with Fed $$ like everybody else -- which makes it somewhat amazing that they've been able to stick with Siemens for all of their cars. I'm sure that having a common parts base and support relations for all their equipment helps keep operating costs down at least a bit.
For rail transit these days, the assumed life of the equipment is 30-50 years (with occasional rebuilds). I think I've seen where 30 is the minimum, and if you junk it before that FRA has to be paid back to some degree. So even ignoring "innovative financing" it might be difficult to replace true junk "before it's time" so to speak. SF & Boston did manage to get rid of the Boeing LRVs early, somehow, but those were so notorious that forcing them to stay around would have been politically damaging to somebody. That mandated lifespan might contribute to the lack of market.
What do RRs do when they get something that really doesn't work as planned -- say, locomotives that just don't stay together? Given the common use of leases and the like, is there a clause that lets the problems be fixed (i.e. get junked or returned or otherwise off the books) early? Or do they just have to park the junk on a weedy track until the lease runs out while buying something else that works (perhaps OK for a private RR but usually impossible for a tax-supported thing like transit)?
San Diego's startup line was done with non-Federal funds, which did let them dodge some Fed-related inefficiencies. Unfortunately, prices have gone up and the state money used for the initial line is no longer available, so the rest of their lines and equipment buys have been done with Fed $$ like everybody else -- which makes it somewhat amazing that they've been able to stick with Siemens for all of their cars. I'm sure that having a common parts base and support relations for all their equipment helps keep operating costs down at least a bit.
For rail transit these days, the assumed life of the equipment is 30-50 years (with occasional rebuilds). I think I've seen where 30 is the minimum, and if you junk it before that FRA has to be paid back to some degree. So even ignoring "innovative financing" it might be difficult to replace true junk "before it's time" so to speak. SF & Boston did manage to get rid of the Boeing LRVs early, somehow, but those were so notorious that forcing them to stay around would have been politically damaging to somebody. That mandated lifespan might contribute to the lack of market.
What do RRs do when they get something that really doesn't work as planned -- say, locomotives that just don't stay together? Given the common use of leases and the like, is there a clause that lets the problems be fixed (i.e. get junked or returned or otherwise off the books) early? Or do they just have to park the junk on a weedy track until the lease runs out while buying something else that works (perhaps OK for a private RR but usually impossible for a tax-supported thing like transit)?
