This thread is getting really long!Does anybody know what was the longest thread ever on AU?
Talgos Mothballed was well over 150 replies when it finally petered out. But we can always try!
Amtrak Official: Jacksonville-Miami rail going to happen
- Thread starter NAVYBLUE
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
Talgos Mothballed was well over 150 replies when it finally petered out. But we can always try!
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
"Name that Station!" is now at 1367 replies and counting!
D
Doug Simmons
Guest
As much as I appreciate all that Amtrak has done to preserve and maintain some semblance of passenger train service in this country, perhaps the solution to some of the Florida service problems requires abandoning Amtrak as the only possible provider of such services. FEC has pointed the way by announcing their proposed Miami to Orlando service.
There are many great ideas that I see in this discussion. Panhandle service at least as far as Pensacola. West coast service to Naples. East coast service MIA to JAX. Behind all the discussions, though, lies the awareness that AMTRAK will never be willing to take on such operations, except perhaps as the operator of services paid for by the state of Florida. Well, if FL is going to have to pay for the improvements (and perhaps some operating subsidy), then maybe FL should create a state department to oversee and implement a program of developing and growing a statewide service network, and to work with the railroads (not just FEC and CSX, but also the shortlines that might be necessary to have a comprehensive network of trains). Put the actual operation of the trains out to bid, allowing the railroads, outside operating companies (in cooperation with the railroads), and even AMTRAK itself to bid for the operation.
As long as AMTRAK is treated as the only game in town, the chances of growing a Florida oriented and based system of passenger trains will always be backseat to the NEC and its needs. The future of the US itself lies in redeveloping the independence of the states and the regions of the country from the centralized control of the federal government, and the same applies to the development of future passenger train service.
There are many great ideas that I see in this discussion. Panhandle service at least as far as Pensacola. West coast service to Naples. East coast service MIA to JAX. Behind all the discussions, though, lies the awareness that AMTRAK will never be willing to take on such operations, except perhaps as the operator of services paid for by the state of Florida. Well, if FL is going to have to pay for the improvements (and perhaps some operating subsidy), then maybe FL should create a state department to oversee and implement a program of developing and growing a statewide service network, and to work with the railroads (not just FEC and CSX, but also the shortlines that might be necessary to have a comprehensive network of trains). Put the actual operation of the trains out to bid, allowing the railroads, outside operating companies (in cooperation with the railroads), and even AMTRAK itself to bid for the operation.
As long as AMTRAK is treated as the only game in town, the chances of growing a Florida oriented and based system of passenger trains will always be backseat to the NEC and its needs. The future of the US itself lies in redeveloping the independence of the states and the regions of the country from the centralized control of the federal government, and the same applies to the development of future passenger train service.
Tumbleweed
OBS Chief
"The future of the US itself lies in redeveloping the independence of the states and the regions of the country from the centralized control of the federal government, and the same applies to the development of future passenger train service."
Wow, this is a powerful, quoteworthy statement!
Wow, this is a powerful, quoteworthy statement!
Last edited by a moderator:
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
You are absolutely right about the that states need to participate more in the business of providing passenger rail service within the state. It is a fool's errand to depend on Amtrak's LD network to provide intra-state service meeting all needs for such. OTOH, the imlpied theory about passenger rail service being centralized is also generally patently false, but a popular myth by which many seem to live their lives. Read on for an explanation....
But first let us consider Florida's case as an example. FL already has a department within its DOT, which runs Tri Rail and Sun Rail. It does contract out operations. I just learned that Bombardier Transportation has got the cotnract for the Sunrail operations. It should be relatively simple for Florida to expand the role of this outfit that already exists to hande intercity travel in Florida if it so chooses, and have it operate the JAX to MIA segment by contracting it out to someone.
OTOH, the extension of a section of the Silver Service via FEC is a different ball of wax altogether since it is an add on to the Amtrak National Network, and of necessity Amtrak will be involved in that, should it come to pass.
Incidentally, even on the much maligned NEC, Amtrak (and by implication centralized federal funded outfit) only handles interstate-operations, except for the case where the states have contracted with Amtrak to handle a portion of the intra-state operations (Pennsylvania and Keystone Corridor, MARC and Penn Line, and now New York and Empire Service), in which case of course the funding is arguably from the state and hence no federal monopoly.
By far the largest amount of resources deployed and passengers carried on the NEC and its offshoots is by state agencies which run mostly intra-state operations with short extensions across state boundaries (NJT into New York and Philadelphia, MBTA into Rhode Island, SEPTA into New Jersey). And there are several cases where one state contracts with an agency of another state to run services for it (MNRR and NJT for Port Jervis and Pascack Valley, SEPTA and the State of Delaware for Wilmington/Newark service, MBTA and the State of Rhode Island for Providence service, MNRR and the State of Connecticut for the New Haven Line).
The fact of the matter is everywhere in the US where there is relatively effective rail passenger service, Amtrak is just one of the players, and bulk of the service is actually run by the states or funded by the states. So the centralized control of passenger rail service in the US in general is a myth. If it applies at all it does so only to the Amtrak LD network and the NEC Amtrak service. The cross subsidy to cover NEC capital is demonstrably small if any, and now there is a cross subsidy the other way from NEC operations to the rest of Amtrak.
And as rightly pointed out states need to step upto the plate, as many are, some with exceptional results, if they desire intra-state service that is really useable, irrespective of who they choose to run it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ocala Mike
Lead Service Attendant
Yes, and arguably false. The internet is full of political forums on which both sides of the proposition are discussed to death.
Last edited by a moderator:
The question is a bit more complex than it seems given the nature of the operation. Service on the FEC line is expected to include at least one section of one of the Silvers, possibly more. That's a "National System" train running from New York, which means you'd either be back to revenue splits and the like for the first time since the Crescent-Sunset sleeper or you'd be forcing a transfer.
Corridor service, on the other hand, is another subject entirely...but again, the issue of through service and through ticketing comes up, and that has always been a risk/issue with multiple providers (especially if, gulp, checked luggage gets involved).
As to bidding: From what I can tell, CSX wants absolutely nothing to do with operating passenger trains (at least at present and based on the Camden/Brunswick line row in MD). UP seems to be in the same boat, though I think they may run a contract operation in the Chicago area for Metra...not sure there. BNSF and NS, I believe, would put something together if the price was right and/or they saw enough profit in it. To put it another way, if NS had a monopoly in VA I suspect there's a non-trivial (albeit not necessarily major) chance they'd be talking with the state about adding and operating NS-branded passenger trains with VA's backing for through ticketing and through service past DC.
Both UP & BNSF run commuter ops for METRA. And UP plays quite nicely out in California with Amtrak California. At one point it certainly seemed that UP was doing all that it could to hurt Amtrak, but I think that things have turned the corner a bit since then. I'm not saying that UP is going to just give away slots to Amtrak, or start running its own passenger service. But when dealt with properly and fairly, UP isn't quite as opposed to passenger rail service as many believe.
And to all, please don't bring up the daily Sunset Limited as an example of UP not wanting Amtrak service, as that deal was blown by Amtrak. UP merely put the icing on the cake with their huge price tag.
Alan,
The Sunset Affair was merely the latest chapter in the mess surrounding that train (and indeed UP and SP both). I'm also thinking of the back-and-forth over the Coast Daylight (when IIRC Amtrak or CA already own the slot [i think Brown purchased four slots back in the 70s but only three are in use] that UP doesn't want to let loose).
The Sunset Affair was merely the latest chapter in the mess surrounding that train (and indeed UP and SP both). I'm also thinking of the back-and-forth over the Coast Daylight (when IIRC Amtrak or CA already own the slot [i think Brown purchased four slots back in the 70s but only three are in use] that UP doesn't want to let loose).
I don't ever see the CC going over the Donner Pass to Reno. UP sends a lot of slow, heavy freights over the pass; I can't believe it would be too interested in having more passenger traffic on the line.
Right now, it's a five-hour train trip. Although there are no nonstop or even direct flights between Sacramento and Reno, I think Greyhound (about three hours, $7.00-$30.00) or private car (about two hours on I-80) provide too much competition.
Well one can't really say that UP deliberately targeted the Sunset right after the UP/SP merger and the resulting meltdown that occurred. Yes, Amtrak operations were badly impacted, but then so were UP's operations. Their trains were just as badly delayed, if not worse, by their meltdown as Amtrak's. Then we come to the daily proposal, which again wasn't UP's fault.
Now that said, considerable funding was given to UP many years ago back when the Talgos first arrived, to restore service between Vegas and LA. And UP made most of the needed improvements with that money. However, thanks to a battle with environmentalists over a tourtise, one small stretch of work was not completed for several years. When the lawsuit was finally thrown out and things should have been ready to go, UP which had already taken advantage of the increased capacity that the earlier improvements had created, suddenly demanded more money for still more double track.
That killed the idea for then and the Talgo trainset named Las Vegas was purchased by the State of Washington and renamed Mt. Adams in 2004. Prior to that point, the trainset was still owned by Talgo and leased to Amtrak. Washington also owns the Mt. Baker & Mt. Rainer while Amtrak owns the Mt. Hood and Mt. Olympus trainsets. Each also owns a couple of spare cars.
My point in all of this is that while I don't think that UP is the most passenger friendly RR out there, it also isn't quite as bad as many people think. And one of the biggest strikes that many railfans count against UP is the Daily Sunset, which again wasn't UP just being mean to pax rail services. Top UP & Amtrak exacs had agreed to daily ops for the Sunset and then Amtrak underlings dotting the I's and crossing the T's tried to change the agreement and UP walked away and threw up their ridiculous dollar figure to end any further negotiations.
As for slots for the Coast Daylight, I have to admit that's not one that I've heard before. I'd love to read any source materials you can link to as I'm quite curious about this idea.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, but it isn't an outrageous amount of money that they're asking for.
Is there anywhere I could go for further reading on that? I've never heard that before, it's always been presented as "Mean old UP wants swimming pool of gold!" though I've always figured that there was a wee bit more to it than that.
Not that I've seen. Mind you, I also haven't gone looking either. But I'd guess that if there was something out there, someone would have seen it by now and posted a link that I would have bumped into.
It wasn't big, bad old UP. Or at least not all by themselves.
Last edited by a moderator:
Caesar La Rock
OBS Chief
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Messages
- 703
I don't know what Amtrak's plan is for the Sunset Limited going daily, but in my opinion they are better off waiting until they decide to replace the Superliner Is and Genesis locomotives later on during this decade. From there they can add more/supplement the trainsets for the Sunset Limited and finally make the route daily.
Last edited by a moderator:
N
Nathanael
Guest
Citation needed. Everything I've seen says that UP was the one which did not want to provide a workable agreement.
Interestingly, Boardman settled for a schedule change and reconsideration of daily service in 2014. I'm wondering, therefore, if there was some particular double-tracking project or something which was scheduled to be done in 2014. Colton Flyover is supposed to be done in 2014...
I'd like to put up the thread, but I can't find the old Coast Daylight thread where my information was posted.
Edit: Here we go (I searched on Google):
http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/48378-speculation-on-daylightstarlight-scheduling/?p=371662
SP sold several slots to California on the Coast Line back "in the day", per that post. If it's incorrect, I'll happily be corrected, but that's the best info I have.
Edit: Here we go (I searched on Google):
http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/48378-speculation-on-daylightstarlight-scheduling/?p=371662
SP sold several slots to California on the Coast Line back "in the day", per that post. If it's incorrect, I'll happily be corrected, but that's the best info I have.
Last edited by a moderator:
Aaron
Lead Service Attendant
And UP has been double-tracking the route furiously over the past couple of years. From what I've read, by 2015, it should be almost completely double tracked between Colton and El Paso. It seems like a good stance to take for Amtrak to just leave UP alone for a couple of years, then go back when the infrastructure can already better handle the increased frequency so UP has less of a case to make that Amtrak needs to pay for the upgrades.
Aaron
Lead Service Attendant
The original PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) for the daily Sunset required less equipment overall than the current operation, since it was being used more effectively (The plan combined the SL/TE into a single daily CHI-LAX train, and then created a new train that would run daily from SAS-NOL). It required 1 fewer locomotive, 4 fewer sleepers, 4 fewer diners, and 1 fewer lounge. It would have needed 4 more lounge/diners, but the plan was to get those from the Capitol Limited in exchange for sending the extra diners and sleepers that way.
Here's the plan itself: http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/970/304/PRIIA-210-SunsetLtd-TexasEagle-PIP,0.pdf
Caesar La Rock
OBS Chief
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Messages
- 703
Thanks. As for what Amtrak will do that will likely take place a few years down the road. I just hope that section from San Antonio to New Orleans isn't given a downgrade.
Everything you've seen has simply assumed that UP was the bad boy, since the only thing that most people have found regarding those discussions was the amount that UP demanded. People took 1+1+1 and found that it equaled 4 without knowing what really went down.
As for a citation, can't provide one since again as I noted elsewhere, I've yet to see anything in print.
Amtrak desperately needed a schedule change to the Sunset, both from an equipment perspective and a passenger perspective in general even though some times are really horrible. After the failed talks on a daily service, and many attempts to revive those talks and undo the damage caused, Amtrak settled for a simple schedule change and UP got the promise that Amtrak would stop bugging them on daily service for several years.
N
Nathanael
Guest
On the other hand, your description is compatible with the idea that top UP and Amtrak execs signed off on an *unworkable* agreement, and when the time came to dot the Is and cross the Ts, the people who actually did the work pointed out some things which were necessary to make it work, at which point UP said "A workable agreement? We can't have that!"
It's also compatible with UP being jerkish and refusing to negotiate.
In short, your version *actually makes UP sound like the bad guy*. So.
That's a nice theory, but far from correct. Sorry!
You can take my word for it or not, I don't much care, but again Amtrak blew the deal. And considering how long you've been around here, you should know by now that I don't tend to post rumors and hearsay.
On the one hand, I'd like to see corroboration. On the other hand, while I'd like that, I also know the nature of knowing things in this world, and part of that nature involves not always being able to say how or why you know it. Alan has sufficient credibility in my mind that I'm inclined to believe that he has information that he has good reason to believe. Whether it is correct or not, obviously I can't say for certain, but I'll roll with his version of events as being decently probable.
To what Alan said, let me point out that it seems to be working: PPR on the Sunset is up quite strongly compared to other LD trains, which suggests that they're attracting longer-distance riders. To the extent that the change was a gambit to swap Palm Springs traffic for Arizona traffic, I believe it is working.
To what Alan said, let me point out that it seems to be working: PPR on the Sunset is up quite strongly compared to other LD trains, which suggests that they're attracting longer-distance riders. To the extent that the change was a gambit to swap Palm Springs traffic for Arizona traffic, I believe it is working.
- Status
