TRAINS Newswire reports that Amtrak has declined to provide its $3M share of a $16M TIGER grant to upgrade the Albuquerque-LA Junta route of the Southwest Chief. This grant makes no provision for PTC, and Amtrak has taken the position they will not operate any train over routes not so equipped.
Absent intervention, it would appear that The Chief will 1) be rerouted via Amarillo, or 2) the Adios drumhead will be hanging "guess where".
Prompted by this development, former CEO Boardman is, reportedly also by Newswire, "less than happy" with the course his successor is taking with at least one LD route.
Posted by MargaretSPfan (Member # 3632) on :
AFAIK, the Southwest Chief's route between Lamy, New Mexico, and Trinidad, Colorado, was supposed to be exempt from being required to have PTC. There are other places where Amtrak operates that are also supposed to be exempt from PTC.
With this news from the Trains Newswire, it looks to many of us as though Richard Anderson and Amtrak top management are continuing to do their "death by a thousand cuts" to destroy Amtrak's long-distance trains.
PTC is just a useful excuse to stop running the Southwest Chief.
The death by a thousand cuts is a very workable way to destroy something, because those who object to any of the small cuts can be derided as overreacting and wasting their energy on small issues when there really are much more important issues they should deal with.
But it is far, far easier to stop a snowball from rolling downhill and killing people if you kick it apart when it is very small.
Anderson was chosen to kill Amtrak's long-distance trains, and he will stay only as long as he has to to get his nice retirement package -- probably 3 years.
And when he is done, the US will be the only technologically advanced nation in the world that has no long-distance passenger trains. We will be like Mexico, which killed all of its passenger trains some years ago. That is not a good example to copy.
I know I am not wrong about Anderson's agenda. But I wish with all my heart that I were.
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
Margaret, I think you hit the nail on the head. This is from the TRAINS report:
WASHINGTON – In its most explicit explanation yet, Amtrak management has revealed the reason why it intends to withhold a $3 million match to a $16 million Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant that was awarded to Colfax County, N. M., in March 2018 to help rehabilitate a portion of the Southwest Chief’s route.
The letter, sent to lawmakers earlier this month by Amtrak Director of Government Affairs Patrick Edmond and obtained by Trains News Wire through multiple sources, demands that the entire cost of remaining capital improvements on the line in New Mexico and Colorado be known before it commits any more funding. It also raises the possibility that, even though positive train control is not required by the Federal Railroad Administration on the portion of the route only traversed by the Chief, Amtrak would require such technology for future operations.
This is a departure from Amtrak’s previous collaboration with communities in those two states plus Kansas and the BNSF Railway. Previous TIGER grants sponsored by Garden City, Kan., and La Junta, Colo., were also supported by Amtrak President Joe Boardman, who worked out an agreement with then-BNSF Railway CEO Matt Rose to maintain the line for 20 years at BNSF’s expense. ********************************
I was wondering.....suppose a long distance Amtrak train route is deleted, due to lack of PTC compliance, by the end of this year. Then, say sometime in 2019 or thereafter, the route does become PTC compliant, would Amtrak then reinstate the LD train on such route?
Richard
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Something has changed from the Boardman days.
The notion held ever since A-Day that 1) there was language in RPSA70 requiring a National System and that 2) maintaining such was the catalyst for Federal funding of a Regional operation, i.e. the Corridor. The first hint of change was Moorman's "weak" endorsement of the System with his "glue".
Somehow, Anderson has received enough "back channel" feedback that National System can be defined as operating regional "corridors" throughout the land. Such corridors do exist Coast to Coast, and likely would not had it not been for Section 403(b) of RPSA70. Apparently those presently holding the Federal purse strings are prepared to fund, as they did "big time" this current FY, without an interconnected national system.
This is a "turning point" for the LD system. Practically all of the equipment, locomotives and cars, is at or nearing the end of its service life. While I would contend that hardly $700M, or whatever, will be saved if all LD's were discontinued, there would be less $$$ "going out of the cookie jar" than if continued. Amtrak's $3M share of the $16M TIGER grant to do needed upgrades to the Lamy-La Junta line solely used by the Chief, will represent an avoidable cost. Even those, whose knowledge of accounting is that of the cookie jar, can readily understand that.
But one thing that is within the control of Amtrak management is the experiental (Mr. Anderson added a word to my vocabulary) reason to ride LD trains. But the level of on-board service amenities is totally with the control of management, and the present management is not looking to satisfy those who merely want to take a joyride.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Originally posted by yukon11: I was wondering.....suppose a long distance Amtrak train route is deleted, due to lack of PTC compliance, by the end of this year. Then, say sometime in 2019 or thereafter, the route does become PTC compliant, would Amtrak then reinstate the LD train on such route?
No. Think Sunset Limited east of New Orleans.
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
I think you're right, George. Not only because of the cost to reinstate New Orleans to Florida but also because it would be a likely money loser, if it is reinstated. I would like to be wrong.
Regarding the rest of the threads, I'm starting to wish Joe Boardman would come out of retirement and resume the Amtrak helm.
Richard
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
You’d think that Anderson would have figured out by now that Amtrak is a political creature and not your normal business. I don’t know how else to explain his apparent arrogance and dismissive attitude to his most loyal supporters. It wouldn’t take much to appease us. He should have taken better lessons from Moorman.
Nevertheless, I think, despite the virtual hysteria by many, that Amtrak will be in better shape when he departts. Many of us won’t like it, myself included, as a few of the LD trains will morph into something far different but arguably more useful.
I certainly don’t think he is doing this for visions of a golden parachute. The former CEO of the airline that many rate as the best in the U.S. is not concerned about the paltry severance or retirement package he will receive. And like Moorman his salary is zero.
But, I do think a deal has been struck with key members of Congress and Sectratary Chao. It provided him with additional funds this year to get Amtrak’s house in order, even if a few LD trains disappear.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
quote:Originally posted by palmland:
But, I do think a deal has been struck with key members of Congress and Sectratary Chao. It provided him with additional funds this year to get Amtrak’s house in order, even if a few LD trains disappear.
Mr. Palmland, painful as it is for some to accept, the current thinking on The Hill, One Mass, and 1600, is that the days of tolerating, let alone promoting, "the joy of trains" is simply over.
They’re "wet nursing kittens" at another site (at which I've found myself "persona non grata" and at which I have likely ceased participation) over these developments, and during the Q&A at the California Summit, Mr. Dyson of RAIL PAC let it be known many in his membership "pay thousands of dollars" for the relaxing experience of a Pacific Parlour and full service Dining.
All well and good, but the taxpayers day of subsidizing it are over. The $1.9B appropriated - the highest ever - is certainly indicative that Congress (the President? who needs him; that appropriation is buried deep in the Spending Bill; and any passenger rail stakeholder best hope it stays right there) holds there is need for intercity passenger rail and, within their own chambers, have moved away from the "you don't fund my train and I won't fund yours" thinking of the past forty seven years.
Finally, the Chief has the nostalgia because it traverses "flyover country back when you did that on the ground". I guess there is mystique to that Clark and Marilyn were ensconced in a "Regal---" but were never seen. The Desert Wind would have provided more online business from Denver, Salt Lake, and Vegas, but alas that's water over the dam.
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
At one point, I believe the 218 and the 51 demanded the NEC states get votes from outside the Corridor.
I believe rather less so now.
Amtrak California brings a lot of House votes, plus 2 Senate votes, to the formula. That's a change from past years.
Ditto Illinois.
Political analysis of what I'll call the "Amtrak Funding Caucus" to follow.
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
Here is what I deem the Amtrak Funding Caucus
53..California _5..Connecticut _1..Delaware 18..Illinois _9..Indiana _9..Massachusetts 14..Michigan 12..New Jersey 27..New York 16..Ohio 18..Pennsylvania 11..Virginia 10..Washington
Bottom line is 203. That means these folk only have to find 15 votes to get a majority for Amtrak.
The Senate is harder, the vote count is only half of the need at 26. That's enough to do some issues horse trading.
So, where I once thought 1/2, 3/4, 5/6, and 7/8 mattered to Amtrak, I say now, as a political reality: So what, who cares? Post the 180 day discontinuance notices on the STB website. That Superliner stock can be used for 2d runs on several of the Chicago-East Coast routes, which fall in the 750 mile limit.
The One a Day runs are no longer part of the political calculus, imnsho.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
This document, circulated by an informed "deep throat" source, suggests Amtrak "has the Chief in the X-hair:
It certainly appears that Amtrak management is bound and determined to show they can whack a Long Distance route. With a good portion of the route, and possibly over the steepest ruling grade on any Amtrak route, used solely by the Chief and yet is included within the PTC mandate, puts it in jeopardy.
Within the document, is a proposed Dodge City-Albuquerque "busteetoot". While overall CHI-LAX trip time can be maintained, access to the Scouts Philmont Ranch will sure take a hit. And at least "back in my day", being active in Scouting was a ticket aspiring railroad managers had to get punched.
Needless to say, the local advocacy groups are vowing to "fight on the beaches, fight in the sand".
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
I still can’t figure out why Anderson is going for the SWC that has some political support rather than the tri weekly Sunset, arguably the worst Amtrak train from a financial standpoint. The politicians don’t really care about the Sunset, after fall, there isn’t much between El Paso and Tucson.
Regardless, it is interesting to note that a carrot mentioned is Amtrak’s interest in working with the affected states for a Newton, KS to Ft. Worth train and a Front range train from Cheyenne to Pueblo.
Also interesting is that the bustitiution could be Albuquerque to LaJuna rather than Dodge City. That would entail almost 200 miles of non PTC line (Dodge City to Las Animas Jct - just west of LaJunta). Guess Anderson figures that might be viable since BNSF still has some freight on that line.
Of course as a railfan, my thought was if you go to LaJunta and are interested in the Front Range service, might as well run KC to Denver.
Posted by MargaretSPfan (Member # 3632) on :
Mr. palmland, sir -- Anderson is trying to kill Amtrak, and is using the very old and very successful "death by a thousand cuts" method. And the SWC is just his latest target, and it is not the first one.
And bustitution as a permanent replacement for one part pf a long-distance train is cruel and ridiculous and completely unnecessary. And Anderson is pitching this bustitution as a "safety" issue, implying that riding those buses will be "safer" than riding a passenger train in an area where PTC is not in use? Ridiculous!
And anyway, that area where the SWC runs the only 2 trains out there has been declared by the FRA to be exempt from being required to have PTC in use.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
[Sen. Martin] Heinrich [D-NM] said the meeting did not go well.
“I think this was one of the most unproductive meetings with an agency level official that I’ve ever experienced,” he said. “To learn that not only are they planning to pull back their commitment to the TIGER grant, but that they're going to abandon the route I think is just outrageous.”
Those documents obtained by KOB detail what Amtrak presented in that meeting.
Because of outdated railroad track and signal systems between Raton Pass and Lamy, upgrades need to be made that would cost more than what is included in that Department of Transportation-provided TIGER grant.
Amtrak officials said they’re not willing to contribute any money without a "comprehensive plan from other stakeholders." That means the company doesn't plan on paying to repair track and signals they don’t own.
As for the passengers, documents outline a plan to divert service at Albuquerque, sending eastbound passengers on charter buses to meet up with the train in Colorado or Kansas.
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
I think the bus and interposed train suggestion for Albuquerque-La Junta-Dodge City-Pueblo (Mr. Norman's link, "Anderson Presentation") makes me believe that the true agenda is the elimination of the SW Chief.
The Rail Runner, from Albuquerque to Santa Fe, from what I can tell, has not been a success. It's has been losing ridership. I think the original idea of a Front Range train, Casper to Albuquerque, may have been much more rational.
Mr. Anderson does make a point with regard to the fact that 83% of the SW Chief passengers travel less than 250 miles. However, passengers on the SWC, traveling > 750 miles, account for 63% of the Chief's revenue.
Maybe the SW Chief should go from LA to Salt Lake City to hook up with the Zephyr. Then CA, AZ, & NM can work on LA to Flagstaff to Albuquerque.
Richard
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
I think it is time to accept that when President Trump leaves office, whenever that may be, there will be an Amtrak, but it will hardly be "Amtrak as we know it".
Simplified Dining on LD trains will only go one way. Should Amtrak be successful in truncating, if not outright discontinuing, the Chief - not that it's a "basket case" so far as public acceptance, but rather because the maintenance of a good portion of its route represents "cash out of the cookie jar" and not simply an assignment of costs - the "basket cases" will follow.
All told, it will be a new day - and Congress has placed it's bets with the record $1.9B appropriation, that new philosophy will result in providing intercity transportation in the markets that demonstrate the need for such - and not rolling pork barrels.
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
Gil, if Mr. Mueller, the IRS, and the NY State Attorney General prevail, the only office Trump will be leaving in Jan., 2025 will be the Warden's.
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
Richard, I think you are probably right, Anderson wants the SWC gone. But, is there a silver lining? With the miles saved by eliminating KS to Albuquerque, could he be planning to make the Sunset daily to still give a one seat ride CHI-LAX?
Maybe not a bad trade off especially since Anderson talks about the Newton, KS - Ft Worth service. Could we see a rebirth of the Texas Chief connecting to the Sunset? That route has always made more sense to me than the Texas Eagle, especially with the CHI-STL corridor service serving the largest cities on that route.
An old Amtrak timetable shows the running time CHI-FTW on the Texas Chief as about 3 hours faster than the Eagle. Consider that the Texas Chief would serve the likes of KC, Topeka, Wichita, and Oklahoma City - like Little Rock, the Capitol of the state. Texas, at some point, will initiate their own intrastate services to take care off towns like Marshall and Longview and of course the Houston-Dallas high speed route now being discussed.
Of course, this is pure railfan speculation. If I had to bet, I’d say that this time next year we’ll stil be talking about the SWC as it lives from month to month on its present route.
Let’s save the discussion on politics for another forum. And, GBN, I quite agree, Anderson has no intention of killing Amtrak. He just wants to transform it - into something many of us may not like but may well be more sucesssful in terms of ridership and financial impact.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Could there be any foundation to this blog report/rumor/musing/whatever?
Amtrak OBS employees have received new menus for November 2018. The elimination of chefs is said to be coming in fall 2018 for some western long distance trains including the Southwest Chief. The new Southwest Chief sleeping car passenger meal menus for November 2018 have cold sandwiches, akin to the June 2018 Lake Shore Limited and Capitol Limited no-chef cold food menus
They’re sure "worked up" about this at another site.
Posted by MargaretSPfan (Member # 3632) on :
Mr.Norman -- wouldn't you, too, be "worked up" about having your only choice for dinner being a cold sandwich? Why is taht acceptable anywhere on any mode of transportation? and sleeping-car passenger pay a lot of money for their accommodations, which include their meals -- and all they will be able to have for dinner is a cold sandwich? Good grief!
This stupid and cruel change -- if it happens -- is yet another way Anderson is trying to get away with making the on-board experience so unpleasant that no one will want to ride Amtrak, so that he can complain to Congress -- his real bosses -- that "no one" is riding Amtrak long-distance trains any more. And, just as with the SP and the ICC in the 1960s, Anderson's tactics are likely to work.
what a shame it is that this country hsa sunk to such a low that the CEO of our national passenger rail system could not only think for one minute about ding this,but actually plan to do it.
This stupid idea is very symbolic -- much like the old advice to check out a restaurant's restrooms if you want to see how good it is, because n business owner that really runs a good business will ever let even one part of his or her business look or be shoddy or unkempt.
Dining car menus matter -- a lot, and no one should ever believe the lie that Amtrak "does not have the money" to provide excellent food and service on any of their trains.
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MargaretSPfan:
This stupid idea is very symbolic -- much like the old advice to check out a restaurant's restrooms if you want to see how good it is, because n business owner that really runs a good business will ever let even one part of his or her business look or be shoddy or unkempt.
********************************* Good advice. Recalling some of the filthy, smelly bathrooms and toilets I've encountered while on Amtrak, I really don't think I want to sample Amtrak's cold yogurt breakfast. Not even if an onboard Harvey Girl hands it out.
Richard
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
In case anyone does not get it, the Amtrak BOD knows political reality. Political reality is Trump is in charge. They hired Anderson fully knowing that fact.
The clock is running on the four transcontinental trains. Eliminating them permits 2 or even 3 a day service LA-Phoenix, New Orleans to Houston, San Antonio and Dallas, Chicago to KC and Chicago to Denver.
Running a sleeper as a parlor car permits an upscale seat. With better wi-fi connections, you can actually have a 8 person business meeting in two bedrooms.
Lest we forget, the Southern Pacific offered snack cars as well as automat cars. Eliminating dining options is a historic tool in the box of operators.
Posted by MargaretSPfan (Member # 3632) on :
PullmanCo -- Ys, the political realities are now different, but -- Anderson's real bosses are the 535 Congresspeople.
And the SP and other railroads did use may tools quite effectively to discourage people from riding their trains. It worked, and the ICC let the SP discontinue many trains, and never required the SP to explains why far fewer people were riding their trains.
And recent scuttlebutt says that the diner will be removed from the Starlight in November -- after the elections, I am sure.
We desperately need people like Ross Rowland -- people with a "Yes, we CAN!" attitude -- to lead many organizations. We do NOT need any more of the current and very destructive race to the bottom.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
The main reality is that for most routes remaining trains are simply too slow. That is until you check bus schedules. These are ridiculous. If you ever check any out it becomes obvious why you find only the desperate on Greyhound. They also seem to have given up.
Example: The famous high speed schedule of the City of New Orleans of around 16 1/2 hours for 921 miles? What is the time for this distance on the interstates where you can set your cruise control at 70 to 75 and leave it there? 13 hours easy. What is today's CNO? Without looking I would guess around 18 hours, and this is one of the better ones for time. Look at Ft. Worth to San Antonio for example.
Posted by Vincent206 (Member # 15447) on :
The operational reality is that the infrastructure of the current SW Chief route between western Kansas and Albuquerque is deteriorating. I was on that section about 2 years ago and it was obvious that the tracks were in need of maintenance. As the years go by and nothing is done, the ties will continue to deteriorate every year. There isn't any freight traffic on that corridor and BNSF isn't going to maintain the tracks to passenger standards without help from Amtrak and the states. If Amtrak and the states don't want to pay for maintenance, trains 3 and 4 will eventually be running at 25 mph between Dodge City and Albuquerque.
There also are 348 miles of track between Dodge City and ABQ that have no PTC installed and Amtrak will need to cover that cost, too.
The problems are clear but the solutions aren't easy or obvious. Switching 3/4 to the BNSF Transcon would create a faster and more dependable journey for Chicago to Los Angeles passengers, but many stations in Kansas, Colorado and New Mexico would get buses instead of trains.
Albuquerque would also be facing the "Maricopa Problem" if 3/4 stick to the Transcon. Belen to ABQ could be covered by local train service or NM Railrunner, but that would be a significant downgrade of service to ABQ.
The ridership info in the "Anderson Presentation" shows that most passengers are riding regionally. There were 15,200 tickets sold between CHI-LAX and 6,300 tickets CHI-FLG, but most of the largest city pairs are either in the Chicago to Kansas City corridor or the Los Angeles to Albuquerque corridor. There is very little ridership generated from the cities on the central part of the route.
The Southwest Chief problems are real and the solutions involve making difficult choices, but doing nothing is not a sustainable solution. Also, expecting Amtrak to upgrade and maintain the deteriorating infrastructure to passenger rail standards isn't financially realistic.
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
Vincent: I think you make a good argument for the SWC switching to Transcon. 25 mph between Dodge City and Albuquerque? They might as well hire some stagecoaches to take train passengers along that stretch. You could say hello to Matt and Miss Kitty while in Dodge.
George: Of course the passenger train is slow. But that aspect has never been a deterrent, at least in my mind. I like the leisurely pace. That's why it would be a real tragedy to eliminate the dining car, parlor cars, lounge cars, and even sleepers when that's a possibility. I guess I shouldn't complain, we will still get those wonderful cold box meals as an amenity.
Richard
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
quote:Originally posted by yukon11: Of course the passenger train is slow. But that aspect has never been a deterrent, at least in my mind. I like the leisurely pace. That's why it would be a real tragedy to eliminate the dining car, parlor cars, lounge cars, and even sleepers when that's a possibility
Richard, does Delta or any airline offer "nostalgia flights" aboard DC-6's and with in-flight services by Stewardesses (who must be single and hit the scale monthly) just as it was "back in the 50's?"
Time has moved on; and Congress has placed its biggest bet to date with $1.9B that Amtrak will provide needed transportation in the markets in which rail travel can be competitive. That means the product will be pitched to those who are simply looking for a means to get from "Eh to Bee".
Posted by Vincent206 (Member # 15447) on :
What are some possible changes that could be made to the Chief?
1) Move the Southwest Chief to the BNSF Transcon, adding stops in Wichita and Amarillo. But with this change Colorado, western Kansas and northern New Mexico would all lose train service if 3/4 move to the Transcon. Amtrak could extend one of the Missouri trains to run as far west as Dodge City to provide daytime service to western Kansas, but that would likely require some financial contributions from the state of Kansas.
Also, serving ABQ would be difficult. The Transcon runs through Belen which is about 35 miles south of ABQ. The New Mexico Rail Runner could be used to provide guaranteed connections between Belen and ABQ (and Santa Fe). Would passengers from Chicago and Los Angeles be willing to make a switch at Belen? The Rail Runner uses the old Santa Fe depot as its station in Belen so the transfer wouldn't be all that painful.
2) Break the Southwest Chief into 2 different trains. The first train would run between Los Angeles and Santa Fe. This route would take about 17 hours to run so it would have to be an overnight train. Eastbound, the train could leave LAX about 5 hours earlier to time arrivals in Flagstaff before midnight and create an early morning arrival time in ABQ. This train would then continue north to Santa Fe which might be a popular destination. Westbound, the train would run on roughly the same schedule it follows now (afternoon departure from ABQ, early morning arrival in LAX).
The trains to/from Chicago would run on the Transcon and terminate in ABQ with service to Santa Fe provided by the Rail Runner. With this option, the CHI-LAX passengers would likely be inconvenienced with a layover in ABQ or Belen. But unfortunately, with any proposal to fix the Chief, there will be people who lose service or convenience.
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
Mr. Norman: I hope that my concern isn't simply a Twilight Zone fantasy to revive the great passenger trains of the 1950's.
I can get into a frame of mind where there would be a good argument to discontinue all Amtrak long distance trains, and just have the NEC, Cascades, the Florida Brightlines, and other corridor trains that seem to be financially viable. The LD trains are dinosaurs, I quite agree.
What bothers me is Anderson's apparent attempt, at least for the next few years, to downsize and truncate the LD's, to the bone, to make them more financially feasible. The idea of a bustitute for any Amtrak, to me, is ridiculous unless track conditions would temporarily require it. If they can't run a train along a LD route, I think it would be better to eliminate the LD train altogether. I would feel sorry for small communities along LD routes if they lost train services. I don't know if the respective states could come up with a substitute. I would hope so.
If they eliminate several LD trains, you would think Amtrak could develop services and food quality, on the trains remaining, that would be attractive. I don't think "simplified dining" and box meals should be acceptable to Bill Grogan's goat, much less to passengers. I think food service, alone, is paramount to passenger acceptability for any moderate to long distance train.
IF the LD trains are chopped, it still would be sad to no longer have the "experiental" overnight trains and fresh, hot meals in a dining car. Maybe the only possibility would be a Rocky Mountaineer-like overnight train, from the Northwest to Glacier. It would have to be funded by private interests. If the rumor Margaret talked about, regarding deleting the dining car on the Starlight comes true, then maybe a RM train from SEA/PDX to Calif.
Richard
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Richard, I sincerely respect your thoughts.
If a private sector operator believes there is a market within the CONUS - Continental US - for a Luxotrain such as Rocky Mountaineer and is willing to pay railroads fair value for their access and priority dispatch (which Amtrak clearly is not), then "go for it". Otherwise it's time to accept that passenger rail and "experiential" are simply not congruent terms.
Posted by mgt (Member # 5479) on :
I find this debate interesting and somewhat depressing. As a non-American I would not dream of making any political comment. In the past 14 years my wife and I have travelled on trans-continental and north/south Amtrak routes. The Bedroom/dining-car/Pacific Parlour Cars have been an enjoyable and integral part of both our holiday and our transport experiences. We have met people, mainly Americans for whom Amtrak was the preferred option for long distance travel. Some had a deep-rooted fear of flying, others had the time to enjoy hassle-free travel. Others were making relatively short journeys. On the other hand I fully understand that a partly publicly funded transport system must take realistic financial decisions. In Britain, with our effective HST Intercity north/south service rail holds its own with the airlines up to 400 miles, i.e. Edinburgh/Glasgow to London. I suppose that is why Acela and other trains on the East Coast Corridor are so successful. In Britain there is now only very rudimentary catering, either trolley or buffet, and increasingly air-line style cramped seating. We also have a safe, widely used, efficient and very reasonably priced national bus service, if prone to delays caused by congestion and road-works. This serves the more populous areas; rural transport is a different matter. I wonder how much the loss of the LD routes would affect the rural communities in the US? I am aware that, previously, local Congressmen/women have been vocal in their support for Amtrak. Has that changed? Or is there a Dr Beeching factor at work? Many people in Britain who were outraged at Beeching's proposed closures, including my grandmother in the south of Scotland, only used the train once or twice a year, or not at all, even when the same journey by bus was slower and more uncomfortable, but there were several bus stops in the village compared to the one station. And once the railway went, the number of buses was cut! More affluent US acquaintances have found our enthusiasm for Amtrak odd, even idiosyncratic. On the other hand I recall the enthusiasm of a first time user rapturously extolling the virtues and comfort of train travel to his wife on his cell-phone, vowing to use it more often in future. Long distance train travel on regular routes offers something special. But that requires, for some passengers, comfortable sleeping accommodation and reasonable meals served in a pleasant setting. With equipment replacement becoming an issue does the market for this group of travellers in the US still exist?
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Mr. MGT et al the only real inconvenience be inflicted should all LD routes be discontinued will be to those who ride trains for "experiential" reasons. That of course means a lot of folk who participate at this and other passenger rail discussion sites.
There is no community on the Amtrak system inaccessible by highway; same of course cannot be said of Alaska, Canada, Russia, China, and of course others where rail represents the only way in or out. There are of course some folk who ride the LD trains for other than "experiential" reasons. There are the "can't drives", and a few who cannot fly account medical reasons. But the arguments of "I don't like flying or driving" simply do not justify $300M (Amtrak likes to say $700M) of taxpayer funds expended as well as the interference such trains cause to freight operations.
Being in the industry on A-Day, I assure you the washroom walls heard the intent was to have the LD trains gone by, say, 1976. That incidentally was the date that roads choosing not to join Amtrak could have petitioned regulatory authorities to discontinue their services. The 1979 Carter Cuts were the first step in an orderly discontinuance of the trains, as no end point having service lost such.
So I have no idea to what extent the apparent Anderson initiative to "whack 'em all" will be successful. I think he is of thought that funding for "the stuff that counts" i.e. reequipping, track and signaling upgrades, the Gateway project (to the extent such is REALLY an Amtrak project), creating the "Safety Culture" he enjoyed during his airline years, and seeking other economies and efficiencies about the System. As others have noted, Amtrak is a passenger transportation provider. Even if the need for funding to move trains over the road is reduced, the needs of infrastructure will never be satisfied. I'm certain that Anderson is of thought that if he shows an economic and efficient passenger railroad is being developed, the record levels of funding will continue
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
Bull, Mr Norman. The US is a big country with many communities not readily accessible by plane, and there are many people who cannot drive the distances to get there. Therefore, if there is no public transportation, those people cannot go where they want or need to go. We have poor bus transportation too, poor people without cars or the money to rent them, an aging population with many single/divorced women who cannot drive the distances and frankly whom it would be better to keep off the road. But of course the Republicans don't care about most of those people, since it's by and large not their voters.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
Bull, Sojouner. It is exactly the small town and rural areas that are most concerned about the long distance Amtrak services. These are also the people that most consistently vote Republican. It is the people in the northeast that most consistently vote Democrat that could not care less about the long distance trains so long as they get their high prices high costs flyers in the "Corridor" Do not forget, historically the major cuts is long distance services were made under a democrat.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
quote:Originally posted by sojourner: Bull, Mr Norman. The US is a big country with many communities not readily accessible by plane, and there are many people who cannot drive the distances to get there.
Ms. Sojourner, what concerns me is that if this "underserved" argument that you and others have set forth is agressively progressed, there will be like arguments heard from that demographic residing in, say, North Platte of "they got their train in McCook, we want ours". That could result in the proliferation of service along lines that got rid of such on A-Day. Now let's think what that would do to towards building an economic and efficient Amtrak.
Posted by MargaretSPfan (Member # 3632) on :
Mr. Norman -- Please, sir,what is wrong with giving people who have no passenger trains at all to ride restored service? We have had more than 60 years of highway "proliferation," and have been paying a huge price for that, both economically and in human lives (tens of thousands of injuries and deaths on our highways every year).
You seem not to care at all about the needs of the many people who cannot or should not drive. Are they not worth the cost of providing excellent transportation?
and before you remind us all of the high costs of doing so,please note that there IS plenty of money to pay for new rail infrastructure and operations. It is just both being hoarded -- trillions of dollars worth (see "Pananama Papers") and being wasted on wars and useless unneeded public works project like CA HSR, the Boston Big Dig, the Seattle Tunnel, etc.
And because tens of millions of formerly good-paying jobs have been shipped overseas, there are far fewer well-paid people who can afford to pay the taxes needed ti support the new passenger rail transportation projects that are needed.
The burden on the ordinary taxpayer nowadays is far, far higher than it should be, because many mega-wealthy people and most large corporations have been allowed to get away with paying far, far less than their fair share of taxes.
And any claim that Amtrak makes about not being able to afford [fill in the blank] needs to be carefully evaluated, using the knowledge insiders have shared that Amtrak's financials are, at best, very murky, and are more akin to smoke and mirrors than any sensible and clear statements. And Amtrak -- like other RRs -- often assigns expenses that rightfully belong in one area to another area, i.e., their common practice of dumping some of the costs of the NEC onto the LD trains.
And it is essential to also evaluate the worth of any new or restored passenger-train services in the context of the total resources that would be available for public services like passenger trains if so much of our country's resources were not both being spent o the wrong things (endless wars and unneeded public works projects (that only serve to fatten the bank accounts of already mega-wealthy people) and being hoarded (see "Panama Papers).
So -- there IS, after all, plenty of money for public services of all sorts. And it would be wonderful if passenger trains did proliferate. We desperately need that!
Instead of the proliferation of passenger trains, we have endured the proliferation of highways, to everyone's detriment.
We have all paid a huge prices for our country's lack of a sensible transportation plan.
The economic price of this highway proliferation is gigantic, because of the huge inefficiency of using trucks instead of trains to move goods long distances. Even now, an 18-wheeler can carry a maximum total load of only 40 tons, even hauling 3 trailers. And every truck needs at least one driver, and to keep going and get the goods there faster, they need 2 drivers per tractor.
But one freight car now is allowed to carry a maximum of 123 tons, and, as all of us know, freight trains are often 100 cars or more long, and need only 2 crewpeople to operate them.
Do the math: an 18-wheeler truck can carry a maximum of 40 tons per operator if there is only one driver, and only 20 tons per operator if there are 2 drivers (to drive almost continually). But a 100-car freight train can carry 6,150 tons per operator! That means a 100-car freight train with cars carrying 123 tons each is 153 times as efficient as a truck carrying 40 tons!
So -- passenger trains do need to proliferate.
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
Mr Harris, you are right, there were cuts made back when CARTER was president. They were despicable. But that is a long, long time ago. In the past few decades the Republican party has shown itself to be the enemy of Amtrak. The Republican "think tanks" speak out against it. Conservative publications editorialize against it. The few Congressional Republicans who were supporters--Kay Bailey Hutchinson and Trent Lott, for example--are mostly long gone. Trump put in a budget of 0 for Amtrak (though that was overridden in Congress). Scott Walker killed trains in Wisconsin on which work had already begun. John Kasich pooh-poohed expansion in Ohio. John Mica was a big enemy. The governor of Alabama just killed expansion in Mobile. And so on. It's all part of some game plan, talking points, etc etc, as if they can balance the budget by cutting the pittance to Amtrak.
In Niagara Falls, NY, the Republican candidate for mayor (fellow named Destino) railed against development of a larger train station. The Democrat who won reelection (fellow named Dysart) was for it. Now, the station gets only an average of about 90 passengers a day. But that's an average; in summer, Niagara Falls is pretty popular with tourists going up from NYC. So I ask you, is it appropriate for this point of entry to the US from Canada, at a spot to which tourists go, to be a tawdry little Amshack, as it used to be? In contrast to the cute little station Canada has in Niagara Falls, Ontario? When already lots more tourists go to Niagara Falls, Ontario, than Niagara Falls, NY, told that the Canadian side of the Falls is much nicer? Plus, the new station houses US Customs, and is intermodal for local transit. Plus, I believe much of the money to build it came from the federal stimulus package passed by the Democrats in 1998 to help curtail the very bad recession, so it wasn't even local money. Now, it did take disgustingly long to get done, and I don't know all the politics of it, which I'm sure involved some bad things on Dysart's part as well. But I do know that if ever a town needed a better-looking, more welcoming station, it was Niagara Falls.
Anyway, I don't have time to do lots of research but I can tell you, over and over, it is Republicans who are the enemies of Amtrak now. I don't mean Republican voters; of course some of them support it if they live in small towns it serves (esp on Empire Builder line). I mean Republican politicians.
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
quote:Originally posted by sojourner:
Scott Wilson killed trains in Wisconsin on which work had already begun.
Of course, you mean Scott Walker. We have our own "great Amtrak-hating Scott" down here in Florida (Rick). As far as Republican voters go, they seem to fall into line behind whatever Fox News, their talk radio gurus, and Big Orange in the WH dictate.
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
Oops, sorry, I've fixed it. Names are tough.
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
Mike, while Scott killed the federal funding for HSR, wouldn’t you rather have Brightline do it without your tax money? Their key to success seems to be real estate development along the ROW funding the new trains which in turn brings more people. Transit oriented development seems to be a good thing to me. I can’t find the he link where Brightline threw their hat in the ring to use the I-4 corridor for a new line Orlando to Tampa.
Save your taxes to fund LD service, that’s the only way it will survive. And then, apparently, only as an ‘experiential’ service on the routes Anderson has mentioned: CZ, CS, EB, and Florida.
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
Palmland, you're right; I for one am not wedded to Amtrak and am happy to have trains, private or public. But when are they coming? I thought there was to be a train Orlando to Tampa ages ago, but there isn't. That one little Sun line, whatever it is, that got put in in Winter Park is very local, commuters only. PS I think a train ought to go all the way to St Augustine. One of my favorite towns.
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
sojourner, you're conflating SunRail and Brightline, I think. As for me, I'm more concerned with the downgrading of Florida LD service.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
There is an authoritative report at another site that the Boy Scouts' Philmont Ranch will not open this Summer. This is account the risk of fire damage in Northern New Mexico.
If there was ever an opportunity for Amtrak to "Tomahawk Chop the Chief", this has got to be it. They could maybe avoid the 180 Day Notice citing the possibility of fires.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
quote:Originally posted by sojourner: I thought there was to be a train Orlando to Tampa ages ago, but there isn't.
Ms. Sojourner, is not 91-92, Silver Star, a train?
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
It's a train in a sense - I think Margaret is thinking about HSR between the two points, a la I-4.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
A staff reported article appears in the Albuquerque Journal that summarizes more objectively then some material generated by the advocacy groups regarding the Chief.
Posted by Vincent206 (Member # 15447) on :
My last trip on the Southwest Chief was in January 2016. I enjoyed that trip but it was easy to notice that the Chief's infrastructure was worn out. Most of my rail trips are between Seattle and Portland, which might be the most up-to-date and well maintained 79mph rail infrastructure in America. The Southwest Chief, by comparison, runs on tracks that are from another era. I can understand Amtrak's dilemma: finding money to fix an old rail plant that only serves 2 trains a day is difficult and Congress isn't going to drop hundreds of millions of dollars into Amtrak's lap. But Amtrak's solution to this problem, as spelled out in the Anderson Presentation, is a terrible way to fix the problem.
For decades Amtrak has been calling for states to pitch in and help with the long distance trains. Since 2016, Colorado, Kansas and New Mexico have collaborated on finding money to get the rails fixed with federal and local dollars. Much of the trackage has already been fixed in KS and CO. Another grant has been earned to improve most of the remaining bolted tracks in NM and fix other bits of ancient infrastructure. But now Amtrak is balking and threatening to annul parts of the Chief because there isn't a total solution to fix all the problems.
Amtrak has always operated on an incremental improvement basis. There never is enough money to make all the problems go away. And in this case, the states have stepped up. In the future, I can't imagine any state would be willing to put money on the table and shovels in the ground if Amtrak decides to replace train service with buses on the KS to NM corridor.
On the last page of the Anderson Presentation, the slide reads "Amtrak wants to partner with the states to expand corridor services to and from this corridor". If Amtrak is serious about partnering with the states to expand corridor service, they had better come up with a better solution than 7 hour bus rides.
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
Mr Norman, I was talking about that Sun Line, or whatever that private rail service is. I thought it was initially supposed to go all the way to Tampa but then it didn't. In fact, I thought there was supposed to be more service, but then the (Republican) governor shot it down.
Unrealiable LD trains is not something commuters and other more local travelers really want between Orlando and Tampa. Last time I took the Silver Star, 4 years ago, it was over 3 hours let getting to Lakeland, and that was NORTHBOUND from Miami!!!
Vincent, I so agree with your last paragraph. And, in general, when the government negotiates something, it should not reneg except in extreme circumstances.
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
One of the towns that will lose their train on the SWC route is Las Vegas, NM. Alan Affeldt, the owner of the Plaza hotel there (and La Posada in Winslow) is restoring the former Harvey House, La Castaneda, in Las Vegas.
This really is a great small town that apparently has their hopes for a renaissance pinned on the restoration of it as indicated by the Mayor in this article.:
“The renovation of this historic hotel helps make this a more attractive rail destination,” she said in an email. “It is our hope that La Castañeda will serve as an anchor business for the renovation of Las Vegas’ railroad business district, and that the railroad district will in turn be a portal into Las Vegas for railroad tourists visiting this historic city.”
While some may think this is wishful thinking, they should go to Winslow. That far less attractive town really has had a rebirth thanks to the tourist dollars La Posada brings as well as from the art work of his wife, Tina Mion.
With this is mind I have written Mr. Affeldt and provided various articles and commentary on the subject, including Anderson's presentation. Knowing him, I suspect he is already working with his congressional delegation to make their voice heard.
Posted by Vincent206 (Member # 15447) on :
The 2017 TIGER grant, awarded to Colfax County NM, is available online. The document shows how much work the states have put into preserving the Southwest Chief and what the latest grant will repair. If Amtrak pulls out at this point, no state should ever trust the Anderson/Amtrak regime again.
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
Mr. Palmland, if the SW Chief is still around in a few years, I might be able get in a visit Las Vegas, NM. Also, possibly a ride on the Cumbres & Toltec if I have the time.
Does anyone know why the SW Chief doesn't stop in Santa Fe? I think it would be a much more popular stop than, say, Albuquerque. Santa Fe has a great opera house and a fine symphony, playhouse, the Santa Fe RR arts district, fine restaurants, and other attractions.
Richard
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
Vincent, thanks for that impressive write up. I’ll forward it to Mr. Affeldt.
Richard, the Cumbres and Toltec is my favorite Narrow gauge operation. Be sure to ride eastbound from Chama up the ruling grade. There are no deluxe accommodations there but the place just reeks of a real railroad operation rather than the tourist excursion that it is. Unlike the Durango and Silverton you can wander the property at will.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Originally posted by yukon11: Does anyone know why the SW Chief doesn't stop in Santa Fe?
Because Santa Fe is at the end of a short branch line. The "Rail Runner" commuter service goes there, partly on the AT&SF passenger main, part on a new line, and part on the Lamy to Santa Fe branch. No main line train has ever gone to Santa Fe.
By the way, would the AT&SF be some sort of unique case in that it serves or did serve all the points in its corporate name, (does it still serve Atchison KS? ) but none of them were on their main line, and Topeka was the only one that was served by any of their through main line passenger trains, and not all those that went west out of Kansas City.
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
The good news is Kansas ended FY18 with $300M in operating surplus.
The bad news is the State Supreme Court said the amount of money the legislature pumped into the K-12 was about $500M under the target.
I don't think Kansas will actually fund the Hutchinson-CO state line track improvement job for the BNSF anytime soon.
As for those who think 3-4 could be re routed onto the Transcon, If I were one of Mr Buffett's managers, I'd be saying "cash up front, please". Amtrak walked away from the San Francisco Chief and ATSFs Transcon 47 years ago.
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
The ATSF merged into the BN over 20 years ago. BNSF was bought by Warren Buffett a few years back. It's a wholly owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway.
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
It looks the song lyric will not have to be changed to "on the Atchison, Topeka, and the Greyhound Bus".
From the article:
"On Wednesday, the US Senate passed a transportation appropriations bill with an amendment that includes $50 million in funds for track maintenance and safety improvements on the Southwest Chief’s route and compels Amtrak to stick to its commitment of providing matching funds for a federal grant to improve tracks along the passenger train’s route in Colorado."
Richard
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
Richard, that is good news for citizens of western KS and eastern NM. Let’s hope the House and President feel the same.
Posted by Vincent206 (Member # 15447) on :
That's an interesting photo accompanying the article about funding for the SW Chief.
quote: An Amtrak passenger train arrives in downtown Wichita just before noon on Friday. The company was making a test run between Dallas and Kansas City to see about the viability of starting passenger train service on the I-35 corridor.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
I think most interesting from the development Richard reports here, is that Anderson has now learned he is not the "Rail Baron" he might have thought himself to be. I'll place my bets that, as often in the past, the Board gave him the hollow promise "you have free hand...reducing deficits are first and foremost". Well, now he starts and look what happens.
Secondly, who could have ever thought differently about Congress? Well, they fooled me as I did.
When it appears commendation is order of the day having provided record funding, it also comes down to "fine, build a modern and efficient passenger transportation system concentrated in regions where rail travel can be competitive....but oh, don't touch MY train".
Posted by Vincent206 (Member # 15447) on :
If Anderson had killed the Chief, I think it would have had a devastating effect on the relationship between Amtrak and many of the state DOTs. Compared to some other states, CO, KS and NM don't contribute much to passenger rail service, but they were willing to back the Chief with political clout, a little bit of money and some local level resourcefulness in applying for grants. If Anderson had taken all that effort and run it over with a Greyhound bus, every other local community and jurisdiction would forever be reluctant to contribute any time or money to improving their Amtrak service. "Remember what happened to the Southwest Chief?" would be the chant every time Amtrak asks for help in the future.
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
I am delighted that there are still some Republican politicians willing to support Amtrak, as those senators who supported this KS-CO-NM effort have done. And things are sounding better for the Chief--though as Palmland points out, the House has to weight in as well. What's the forecast on that?
I think I will forget my hasty trip planned for December on the Chief--it would be much more convenient if I could wait a bit. What say you all?
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vincent206: That's an interesting photo accompanying the article about funding for the SW Chief.
quote: An Amtrak passenger train arrives in downtown Wichita just before noon on Friday. The company was making a test run between Dallas and Kansas City to see about the viability of starting passenger train service on the I-35 corridor.
*******************
I think, Vincent, that the photo and caption, beneath, are referring to the suggestion or possible plan for a new Amtrak route between Oklahoma City, Newton, and Kansas City, which would extend the Heartland Flyer northward. An article from last year:
Richard
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
There is an "internal" memo to Amtrak employees regarding the Chief that has gone "external" at several sites. Look around at the "usual suspects" and you will see it.
Other than touting "costs of $100M" to operate the Chief, it breaks no new ground.
Unless it was some kind of "honey trap" sprung by Congress upon the Board and their hired hand Mr. Anderson, I'd like to think that a sincere "get rid of the LD's and we will still fund you" signal was sent. However, given the resistance from Congress, the LD's remain that Sacred Cow with a $400M price tag.
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
Mr. Norman:
I think that if the only reason for retaining the existing LD trains is because Congress demands such, it's a losing proposition for everyone.
The corridor people won't like it as they would like the 400 million be redirected to Amtrak corridor train needs.
I don't think the LD train people like their trains, in their present state, to continue to limp along on a shoestring. The lack of minimally acceptable or unacceptable services, food, and other amenities is going to turn off everyone. Even as a "experiential" or train "hobbyist", it's getting to the point where I won't ride any LD until I can see substantial improvements.
What's the answer? I don't know. Possibly the 15 LD trains could be consolidated into just a few, with an upgrade in services with the ones that remain. If not, the only thing I can think of would be for BNSF and UP to receive large federal subsidies to allow BNSF & UP to run a passenger train(s), under their label, along some of the LD routes.
Richard
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
Generally in the rest of the country people that think at all about Amtrak think about the widely scattered long distance trains. If those go away, all people in the majority of the country will see is another high priced pork barrel serving the northeast, which is generally regarded as the wealthiest most arrogant part of the country anyway, and not due any special favors. If the people in DC cannot figure that out, they will, as Amtrak will simply be regarded as another commuter service to be treated accordingly.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Mr. Harris, reading "between your lines", there appears to be ready public acceptance that regional/commuter train systems exist "coast to coast" and all are deserving of public funding. Just think. on A-Day, there were seven metropolitan areas having "heavy" commuter rail - and five of those were in the Northeast. Today, there are seventeen.
So I'd like to think that "We the People" would continue to fund the five distinct regions in which there is intercity service independent of whether the existing LD system remains.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
A Bob Johnston report posted today on TRAINS Newswire states that effective December 31, Amtrak will not operate trains over any route not equipped with Positive Train Control.
More routes than The Chief could potentially be affected; here's a Fair Use quotation:
The policy means the Amtrak Board would insist the following trains on FRA-exempted routes be discontinued:
Southwest Chief: between La Junta, Colo., and Dailies, N.M., and through Topeka, Kan. Cardinal: over the Buckingham Branch Railroad between Orange and Clifton Forge, Va. California Zephyr: 152 miles of UP’s Green River subdivision west of Grand Junction, Colo. Texas Eagle: 110 miles of UP’s Desoto subdivision south of St. Louis, Mo. Downeaster: north of Haverhill, Mass., to Brunswick, Maine., on Pan Am Railways Vermonter: north of Springfield, Mass., on the New England Central Ethan Allen: on Vermont Railway east of Whitehall, N.Y. City of New Orleans: a total of 18 miles on Canadian National around Memphis, Tenn., and New Orleans
In all likelihood, some kind of accommodation will be made so that the well-accepted Downeaster will continue service, but this is one more nail in the coffin for the future of several LD's.
Lest we forget, there is no assurance that UP is agreeable to a permanent reroute of the Zephyr. This is an Amtrak dictum, not theirs owing to track maintenance.
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
Trains had a 3:45pm update that seems to take us back to ‘it’s all about the SWC.
Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari tells Trains News Wire, "where PTC is not implemented and operational, it is expected that nearly all carriers will qualify for an alternative PTC implementation schedule under law.
"For those carriers and routes operating under an extension or under an FRA-approved exemption, Amtrak is performing risk analyses and developing strategies for enhancing safety on a route-by-route basis to ensure that there is a single level of safety across the Amtrak network.
"For those very limited routes where a host may not achieve an alternative schedule by year’s end, Amtrak will suspend service and may seek alternative modes of service until such routes come into compliance."
Posted by MargaretSPfan (Member # 3632) on :
Yet ore hypocrisy from Amtrak -- claiming they care about safety, but forcing passengers to ride buses, whch are not anywhere nearly as safe as trains . Or discontinuing service and thus forcing thsoe who can drive to drive, and deal with the huge risks inherent in driving a motor vehicle. But, hey -- that would not longer be Amtrak's roblem! at least, that is what it seems to me to be the view of top Amtrak management.
PTC is NOT a mature technlogy, and of corse it still has a lot of problems. Just listen to the talk o any railroad radio feed on either railroadradio.net or Broadcastify.com, and you wil hear many instances where the engineer tells teh dispatcher hsi or her PTC system is not working, and even after the Help Desk has done all it can, all the Help Desk person can do is tell teh engineer to proceed without PTC.
PTC is just an excuse that Asnderson, followng the instructions of the Amtrak Board, is using to get rid of the long-distance trains. And I am sure teh major carriers -- the Class 1s -- whose tracks Amtrak opertes over, would be overjoyed if amtak stopped runnng all its long-distance trains.
The good news is tha the US Senate did recenth vite 92 to 6 in favor ofAmtrak. I was astounded that any issue was able to ge such incredible bipartisan support,and taht it was Amtrak taht got taht near-unanimouso support is incredible and very wonderful! And there was another voetin teh Senate that was 93 to 6 in favor of Amtrak!! wow....
I just hope the House of Representativs will voet as strongly ni favor of Amtrak s the Senate has!
In te mean time, please keep contacting your congressional representatives. Keep the prssure one, and we may -- just maY! -- save amtrak long-distance trains!
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
Maybe my thinking is inept, but I was under the impression that routes with less than 6 passenger trains, per day, were exempt from PTC requirements.That should mean the Raton Pass would be exempt. The Rail Runner has received federal funding for implementing PTC, although I don't know how quickly PTC can be installed.
"You can operate a safe railroad without PTC and you can have accidents with PTC,” Boardman adds. He references an unfortunate accident in 2016 in which the southbound Palmetto struck and killed two maintenance workers on Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor, which is protected by Amtrak’s form of PTC".
Richard
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Richard, within your linked Newswire material is this comment from Mr. Boardman:
quote:“If Amtrak requires PTC on any exempted portion,” he tells Trains News Wire, “the full cost of the PTC installation and maintenance becomes Amtrak’s
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
NARP/RPA reports on testimony of Amtrak's Chief Operating Officer made at a Congressional hearing. There are words within such to suggest that "no PTC, no ttain" is other than hard and fast, but rather will be reviewed "case by case".
quote:While this risk analysis process and mitigation plan development is still underway, let me be clear that Amtrak’s goal is to continue to operate all of our services over all of our current routes come January 1, 2019. Exactly how we accomplish this will vary across our network, based on the specifics of each route, but I want to assure the Committee that, at this time, we believe we will have strategies in place that will permit us to continue operations until operational PTC or PTC-equivalency is achieved for all of our network
A careful read shows a "bus bridge" could still be implemented, but chopping up the City, 58-59, for lack of short non-PTC segments will not occur.
Read more at the RPA website.
Posted by yukon11 (Member # 2997) on :
I did read the whole article at the RPA website. I find the statements by Amtrak Exec, VP Naparstek a little ambiguous. I guess we won't see any immediate shutdowns of train routes after Dec. 31.
Here is an article, from one day ago, suggesting bus substitutions for Amtrak routes without PTC after Dec 31:
There was an editorial in the summer issue of Passenger Train Journal regarding the "real story of Positive Train Control". They point out that PTC is an overlay safety enhancement technology designed to counteract human error, and that it only augments existing signaling and traffic-control systems, not replace them. They went on to say PTC will not prevent accidents caused by track and equipment failure (eg broken rails), trespassing, grade-crossing collisions, and some types of train operator error.
Maybe after 2/2/19 the groundhog will give us a prediction.
Richard
Posted by Vincent206 (Member # 15447) on :
quote:Amtrak has informed federal, state and local officials along the route of the daily Southwest Chief that, with the enactment of the recent full-year funding bill by Congress, it will provide matching funds to enable a federal grant to be awarded for safety and reliability upgrades on the train’s route in Kansas, Colorado and New Mexico.
This should end discussions about a bus bridge and truncation of the Southwest Chief, for now.
The announcement also mentions that Amtrak has received $50 million for improvements to the LD system. I wonder what other LD trains are going to get some money?