Ernest H. Robl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> An important point to understand is that Amtrak
> can obtain commercial financing (loans) for equipment
> that has general market value. Therefore, it is
> simpler for Amtrak to obtain financing for engines
> than it is for passenger cars. Why? Because engines
> are engines, and aside from the HEP generators and
> the gearing, these engines can be used in general
> revenue service by other railroads. So,
> theoretically, if something happened to Amtrak, this
> equipment could be sold off and much of the value
> recovered.

Engines are not engines. Amtrak's P42DC fleet has little to no value to other railroads unless you're talking scrap prices. These units with their monocoque carbodies would NOT be suitable for freight service. They weigh less than a GP50 or GP60 and would be extremely slippery trying to pull a freight train. They're unsuitable for switching duties and the non-standard truck design, among other things, makes them undesirable to freight railroads. Make that extremely undesirable.

Same goes for the electric units on the NEC. What freight railroad would ever want an AEM7 or HHP-8?

> The same was probably true when Amtrak was trying to
> make money with carrying express goods. The
> equipment -- boxcars and RoadRailer units -- all had
> commercial value. I doubt if Amtrak bought all of
> the equipment outright with cash. Rather, it probably
> was able to obtaining financing or leases to get
> the equipment. When Amtrak got out of the head-end
> express business, that equipment could be sold off or
> returned to the leasing entity.

When Amtrak left the express business, we hauled hundreds of express boxcars and reefers to the Santa Maria Valley Railroad for storage. That happened over five years ago. The cars are STILL STORED THERE rusting away in the ocean air. I'm told Amtrak is footing the bill for the storage costs.