Florida East Coast Proposes Passenger Service

[Anderson]

Unless there are degradation issues, the cars should have been designed for at least 90 MPH operation given their initial area of operation (the ATSF main line). The question of 100-110 MPH operation is, of course, an open one...but most of the talk now appears to be focused on 80-90 MPH speed maximums instead of 110/125 MPH, and adding 10-20 MPH to operations along a 20-40 mile segment of track (i.e. Orlando-Cocoa) would seem to have marginal benefits for the time being.

Methinks you grossly under-estimate the amount of 100+ speed that is being contemplated. Actually the proportion of 100+ running proposed will probably be higher for this than say between Boston and New York on the NEC.

The plan as stated is 90mph from Miami to West Palm, that is all of about 65 miles or so.

Then 110mph from West Palm to Cocoa which is about 130 miles.

And finally Cocoa to Orlando 125 mph over a distance of about 55 miles or so.

So only about a quarter of the total distance is targeted form 90mph MAS. The rest is 100+, mostly 110mph. Of course there will be some PSRs at curves etc. But the general prevailing MAS is planned to be as stated above.

That said, I am skeptical that they will start the entire service in 2014. They will probably get a lower speed initial segment upto Cocoa in place by 2014 if that. I am skeptical about that too.

You're right insofar as that wasn't my understanding, at least for the initial service. I was under the impression that even getting things up from 80 MPH to 90 MPH wasn't necessarily in the plan. However, it seems entirely possible that such could have been referring to Cocoa-Jacksonville services rather than Miami-Cocoa...and, of course, that some discussion on the JAX-MIA FEC service plan got muddled with this plan and that I just misread things. I'll have to plead a bit of confusion here...the fact that there are two services being talked about over the same segment of track isn't helping things here at all.

 

[Anderson]

I hold some FEC bonds. They are rated B3, or junk, and pay a really nice interest rate (8.125%) and are secured paper. They are junk because RR's do not generate large amounts of cash, especially FEC, and their assets are in difficult to convert real estate. The bonds represent virtually the entire debt of the RR, $475 million and mature in 2017. The RR is profitable but not by much, especially considering the debt service $ every six months. Any funding of passenger trains and new lines will require all outside money. Should the RR incur any debt itself I do not believe they could pay it because the current bond issue is secured and any other paper would be subordinate and carry a prohibitive interest rate if anyone would buy the paper at all. I suspect a new corporation would have to be created to run the service and to issue debt paper. FEC as currently structured cannot issue any debt paper without retiring the current bond issue and there is little money to do that. Stay tuned.

From what I've read, FEC went to issue bonds last year and had to offer over 10% on them(!).

Of course, lower grades on bonds seems to be nothing new...Norfolk Southern only gets BBB+...which seems oddly low for such a profitable (almost wildly so) company.

 

[bretton88]

I hold some FEC bonds. They are rated B3, or junk, and pay a really nice interest rate (8.125%) and are secured paper. They are junk because RR's do not generate large amounts of cash, especially FEC, and their assets are in difficult to convert real estate. The bonds represent virtually the entire debt of the RR, $475 million and mature in 2017. The RR is profitable but not by much, especially considering the debt service $ every six months. Any funding of passenger trains and new lines will require all outside money. Should the RR incur any debt itself I do not believe they could pay it because the current bond issue is secured and any other paper would be subordinate and carry a prohibitive interest rate if anyone would buy the paper at all. I suspect a new corporation would have to be created to run the service and to issue debt paper. FEC as currently structured cannot issue any debt paper without retiring the current bond issue and there is little money to do that. Stay tuned.

From what I've read, FEC went to issue bonds last year and had to offer over 10% on them(!).

Of course, lower grades on bonds seems to be nothing new...Norfolk Southern only gets BBB+...which seems oddly low for such a profitable (almost wildly so) company.

It should be noted that this proposal is being overseen by FECI (Florida East Coast Industries), not the FEC. FECI is not in debt, and has plenty of valuable properties that will only get more valuable. All the FEC would probably do is operate the trains.

 

[Anderson]

I hold some FEC bonds. They are rated B3, or junk, and pay a really nice interest rate (8.125%) and are secured paper. They are junk because RR's do not generate large amounts of cash, especially FEC, and their assets are in difficult to convert real estate. The bonds represent virtually the entire debt of the RR, $475 million and mature in 2017. The RR is profitable but not by much, especially considering the debt service $ every six months. Any funding of passenger trains and new lines will require all outside money. Should the RR incur any debt itself I do not believe they could pay it because the current bond issue is secured and any other paper would be subordinate and carry a prohibitive interest rate if anyone would buy the paper at all. I suspect a new corporation would have to be created to run the service and to issue debt paper. FEC as currently structured cannot issue any debt paper without retiring the current bond issue and there is little money to do that. Stay tuned.

From what I've read, FEC went to issue bonds last year and had to offer over 10% on them(!).

Of course, lower grades on bonds seems to be nothing new...Norfolk Southern only gets BBB+...which seems oddly low for such a profitable (almost wildly so) company.

It should be noted that this proposal is being overseen by FECI (Florida East Coast Industries), not the FEC. FECI is not in debt, and has plenty of valuable properties that will only get more valuable. All the FEC would probably do is operate the trains.

Point taken. Also, it seems entirely possible that if FECI funds the capital side of things, FEC might be able to make enough off of the freight shipping they'd surely pick up to defray the risks of passenger operation losses (well, cash losses) while FECI can harvest a bunch of depreciation. Of course, as I said before...I am fairly certain that FEC/FECI is trying to use this to "backdoor" access from the FEC main to Tampa. After all, if they drop the tracks down the center of the Beeline and the center of I-4, they'll get the RoW for free.

And that's the other side of this: Even if the operation crashes and burns, FECI can pull back service frequencies, probably extract a subsidy from the state (I suspect that this operation will be very popular, considering how badly the Orlampa train cancellation went over) and/or dump the operation (and equipment) in Amtrak's lap and just run freight. And if they do so, they've basically picked up a Cocoa-Tampa RoW for the cost of a failed experiment...basically, they've taken a calculated risk.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

The idea of the Talgos in operation has been batted around here before, BUT...

1)From what I've read, two trainsets would not be enough, but...

What if FEC negotiated with Talgo to build more? Could it be done in time for 2014 service? The manufacturing facility exists and the FRA has approved the design.

2)Labor costs more here in the States, but...

Talgo, it seems to me, might be willing to 'cut a deal' since they built the WI facility with the idea of building more trainsets and the 'start up' costs would be minimal for the Talgos. Also the FEC would get good P.R. for buying "American" - albeit from a Spanish company.

3)They might not be the ideal, but...

The design is modern, some might even say 'sexy.' Certainly European tourists would feel 'at home' in such a trainset. With their lighter weight, Talgo's could be marketed as 'green,' which is something FEC is promoting for its proposed service. And in fact, they would help keep fuel costs down for the FEC. Talgos could possibly be the 'close enough' product with really good timing for this service.

I'm sure some folks here will say 'no way,' but obviously FEC must have a plan or two - possibly even a trick or two - up its sleeve, when it comes to rolling stock, for them to claim service will start in two years or so, and we are left speculating until more information becomes available. :mellow:

 

[jis]

FEC can have two Bombardier MLV train sets with 4 cars each with Acela style seats installed, for cheap from the CRDA from the discontinued ACES rolling stock 125mph capable, ready to run. They could also pick up 4 P40s for cheap from NJT I suppose. Moreover they could use the remaining 25 options to get more cars for previously negotiated price within two years.

Just sayin'.... not suggesting that it is necessarily the best of ideas.

 

[NE933]

Is for the NJT multilevels capable of 125mph, that's a 'duh' about me because the me thought they were blessed for only 110. Still though, even at that speed they would provide a formidable rail service. As for the Talgos, I like the railcars in Wisconsin creations as well as those in Oregon and Washington, but the Wisconsin version's engines are horrificly shocking in attractiveness, the nadir of appeal, so much so that I fear the American public won't take it seriously.

But i'll try to not distract from the more main issue of FEC passenger services. If the Talgos and multilevels are all we got to get something running for now, then by all safe means use them.

 

[Eric S]

Is for the NJT multilevels capable of 125mph, that's a 'duh' about me because the me thought they were blessed for only 110. Still though, even at that speed they would provide a formidable rail service. As for the Talgos, I like the railcars in Wisconsin creations as well as those in Oregon and Washington, but the Wisconsin version's engines are horrificly shocking in attractiveness, the nadir of appeal, so much so that I fear the American public won't take it seriously.

But i'll try to not distract from the more main issue of FEC passenger services. If the Talgos and multilevels are all we got to get something running for now, then by all safe means use them.

Just to clarify, those are cab cars, not locomotives.

 

[NE933]

Just to clarify, those are cab cars, not locomotives.

They are?! OHHHhhh... well that's much better, but then what do the locomotives look like then? Picktures?

 

[Anderson]

FEC can have two Bombardier MLV train sets with 4 cars each with Acela style seats installed, for cheap from the CRDA from the discontinued ACES rolling stock 125mph capable, ready to run. They could also pick up 4 P40s for cheap from NJT I suppose. Moreover they could use the remaining 25 options to get more cars for previously negotiated price within two years.

Just sayin'.... not suggesting that it is necessarily the best of ideas.

Were the ACES sets actually "train sets" (i.e. articulated batches of cars), or just sets of cars that ran together as a rule? I ask because the combination of those two things...well, that might be enough to cover a service (though again, two sets on their own is going to be woefully insufficient).

 

[Eric S]

Just to clarify, those are cab cars, not locomotives.

They are?! OHHHhhh... well that's much better, but then what do the locomotives look like then? Picktures?

No locomotives were ordered. The plan was just to use existing Amtrak locomotives with the 2 ordered Talgo trainsets. Had the Madison extension gone through, then locomotives would have been ordered along with 2 additional Talgo trainsets.

 

[jis]

FEC can have two Bombardier MLV train sets with 4 cars each with Acela style seats installed, for cheap from the CRDA from the discontinued ACES rolling stock 125mph capable, ready to run. They could also pick up 4 P40s for cheap from NJT I suppose. Moreover they could use the remaining 25 options to get more cars for previously negotiated price within two years.

Just sayin'.... not suggesting that it is necessarily the best of ideas.

Were the ACES sets actually "train sets" (i.e. articulated batches of cars), or just sets of cars that ran together as a rule? I ask because the combination of those two things...well, that might be enough to cover a service (though again, two sets on their own is going to be woefully insufficient).

They were used as two 4 car consists. They are just individual cars with different layouts, so they work best when in the specific combination.

BTW, they are capable of 125mph but are currently certified for only 100mph.

 

[George Harris]

The current contracts out there for single level cars, by-level cars, and engines all say 125 mph.

 

[VentureForth]

Could the FEC make the Southern terminus of this line actually at the cruise terminals if it is a shared location with their freight pickups?

 

[Anderson]

Could the FEC make the Southern terminus of this line actually at the cruise terminals if it is a shared location with their freight pickups?

You'd probably want at least some separation or split in the terminal (I don't think being offloaded next to a bunch of intermodal freight is going to be terribly popular).

 

[VentureForth]

I meant generally together, not literally.

 

[jphjaxfl]

Could the FEC make the Southern terminus of this line actually at the cruise terminals if it is a shared location with their freight pickups?

You'd probably want at least some separation or split in the terminal (I don't think being offloaded next to a bunch of intermodal freight is going to be terribly popular).

In the early days of the Florida East Coast, the Havanna Special did disembark passengers directly to the overnight ship to Havanna, Cuba. It was next the piers that handled freight. One if the reasons for the Overseas extension to Key West was to get passengers closer to Havanna with more time on the train, less time on the ship.

 

[NE933]

No locomotives were ordered. The plan was just to use existing Amtrak locomotives with the 2 ordered Talgo trainsets.

I'm gonna sound like Dorothy when learning the gowned lady in Oz was, in fact, a witch, albeit a 'good' one", about the Wisconsin Talgos using Amtrak locomotives: They Are?!!

Why i of all AU people didn't know this is a total mystery...

 

[RRUserious]

This raises a question for me. How many private rail lines are there? Surely not every rail line became part of Amtrak. There must have been at least short routes that never had problems with ridership.

 

[jis]

This raises a question for me. How many private rail lines are there? Surely not every rail line became part of Amtrak. There must have been at least short routes that never had problems with ridership.

AFAIK the only privately owned common carrier passenger railroad in the US today is Saratoga and North Creek. They did not exist before 1971. There are no surviving common carrier passenger operations that are privately owned in US that survived from before A-Day. The private passenger operations other than S&NC that exist are all tourist kind of operations, not common carrier operations.

 

[Anderson]

This raises a question for me. How many private rail lines are there? Surely not every rail line became part of Amtrak. There must have been at least short routes that never had problems with ridership.

AFAIK the only privately owned common carrier passenger railroad in the US today is Saratoga and North Creek. They did not exist before 1971. There are no surviving common carrier passenger operations that are privately owned in US that survived from before A-Day. The private passenger operations other than S&NC that exist are all tourist kind of operations, not common carrier operations.

Well, and S&NC is sort of a tourist operation as well (albeit it's a slightly different sort). The others all either:

A) Joined Amtrak eventually (DRG&W and the Georgia Railroad were the last holdouts here; they cut service in the run-up to mergers); or

B) Had their passenger services shifted to public transport agencies (Conrail in the mid-80s and the CSS&SB in the late 80s were the last transfers on this front, IIRC; the LIRR was another example, though in that case I forget when NY State took things over).

There were probably a few lines that didn't get into trouble (and by a few lines, I mean specific routes), but they were largely overwhelmed by the general collapse in passenger service. An example that comes to mind would be the San Diegans (which Santa Fe never moved to get rid of).

 

[PRR 60]

This raises a question for me. How many private rail lines are there? Surely not every rail line became part of Amtrak. There must have been at least short routes that never had problems with ridership.

AFAIK the only privately owned common carrier passenger railroad in the US today is Saratoga and North Creek. They did not exist before 1971. There are no surviving common carrier passenger operations that are privately owned in US that survived from before A-Day. The private passenger operations other than S&NC that exist are all tourist kind of operations, not common carrier operations.

Well, and S&NC is sort of a tourist operation as well (albeit it's a slightly different sort). The others all either:

A) Joined Amtrak eventually (DRG&W and the Georgia Railroad were the last holdouts here; they cut service in the run-up to mergers); or

B) Had their passenger services shifted to public transport agencies (Conrail in the mid-80s and the CSS&SB in the late 80s were the last transfers on this front, IIRC; the LIRR was another example, though in that case I forget when NY State took things over).

There were probably a few lines that didn't get into trouble (and by a few lines, I mean specific routes), but they were largely overwhelmed by the general collapse in passenger service. An example that comes to mind would be the San Diegans (which Santa Fe never moved to get rid of).

I would consider the Grand Canyon Railway is the same category as the Saratoga and North Creek. It runs daily, year-round (with one or two holiday exceptions), performs a serious transportation function, and even has joint ticketing with Amtrak.

 

[Eric S]

No locomotives were ordered. The plan was just to use existing Amtrak locomotives with the 2 ordered Talgo trainsets.

I'm gonna sound like Dorothy when learning the gowned lady in Oz was, in fact, a witch, albeit a 'good' one", about the Wisconsin Talgos using Amtrak locomotives: They Are?!!

Why i of all AU people didn't know this is a total mystery...

When WI had the $800+ million for the MKE-MSN Hiawatha extension, the plan was to use state funds to buy 2 Talgo trainsets (the 2 currently under construction and/or nearly finished), and use the federal funds to buy 2 additional Talgo trainsets and 8 locomotives (2 per trainset). With the cancellation of the MKE-MSN extension, WI switched to planning to just use existing Amtrak locomotives for the 2 state-purchased Talgo trainsets.

I can't recall exactly, but I wouldn't be surprised if in 2009 or 2010 there were renderings of the Talgo trainsets showing some sort of Talgo locomotive paired with them, perhaps leading to the confusion. That, or you've just been walking the Yellow Brick Road too long.

 

[MikefromCrete]

This raises a question for me. How many private rail lines are there? Surely not every rail line became part of Amtrak. There must have been at least short routes that never had problems with ridership.

Southern, D&RGW, Rock Island, South Shore, Reading, all opted out. Southern and Rio Grande elected to run their own trains to have complete control over main lines, Rock Island was broke and couldn't afford the entry fee, Georgia got a tax break if it continued to run passenger trains (which it did as mixed trains), Reading and South Shore were essentially long distance commuter trains.

Southern and Rio Grande, after a number of years, gave up and joined Amtrak.

Rock Island went bankrupt and was sold and broken up into various new companies. Its two remaining intercity trains (which had been subsidized by Illinois for a couple of years) went away; Chicago RTA bought Chicago-Joliet route and operated commuter trains.

Georgia merged into CSX, lost its tax break and the mixed trains went away.

Reading became part of Conrail and all of Conrail's commuter trains were taken over by public authorities or discontinued.

South Shore bought out by public authority.

Alaska Railroad control transferred from U.S. DOT to state of Alaska.

Saratoga and North Creek and Grand Canyon Railroad, although primarily tourist runs, connect with Amtrak, either directly in the case of S&NC, or via bus in case of Grand Canyon and probably could be considered privately owned and operated intercity.

Until the FEC begins operations in Florida (and that's far from being a reality), there's no other privately owned and operated passenger trains in U.S.

 

[Anderson]

Huh. I did not know that IL had been subsidizing the Rock Island operations.