Long Distance service planning is now FRA's responsibility

[Amtrak25]

I suppose you have already entered your comment in the FRA LD Committee docket pointing this out? I have.

Yes I have. Mine was rectifying the sloppy Pittsburgh situation between the Pennsylvanian and Capitol Ltd with a neo-Three Rivers or Broadway Limited since Airo trainsets will be incompatible with thru car arrangements.

But most other advocates seem pre-occupied with Daily Cardinal and Lake Shore Rail Alliance, which ignore midwest and Chicago access from New Jersey, eastern, and central Pennsylvania.

 

[Amtrak25]

I remember a hearing with Anderson back around that time where he was talking about this. Unlike some I don't think their intention was to discontinue or dismantle the entire network of all 15 long distance routes 100% though I think as hinted the vision was altering portions of the network to mostly shorter daytime running segments and retaining a couple of the more scenic long distance trains intact as more of a premium experiential type tourist trains possibly influenced by services like the Canadian (they basically indicated the Coast Starlight, California Zephyr, and Empire Builder as the services they would keep as is as tourist trains) - a network setup I think most of us would have opposed pretty strongly.

Anderson was fool enough to spill his cookies and blather that he wished to have a network of only 5 - 10 long distance trains, so probably a Silver train and the Lake Shore Ltd to hold it together on top of the 3 western trains. He did lease a bunch of Superliners to California, so sure the Chief would come off.

He was a very confused, ignorant, and unteachable little man, how he thought he could emulate VIA Rail's Canadian, Ocean, and Skeena while coach passengers are restricted to filling station food in the cafe car (which most still are) and flexible dining slop served in plastic in the so-called diner.

 

[Amtrakfflyer]

Anderson was fool enough to spill his cookies and blather that he wished to have a network of only 5 - 10 long distance trains, so probably a Silver train and the Lake Shore Ltd to hold it together on top of the 3 western trains. He did lease a bunch of Superliners to California, so sure the Chief would come off.

He was a very confused, ignorant, and unteachable little man, how he thought he could emulate VIA Rail's Canadian, Ocean, and Skeena while coach passengers are restricted to filling station food in the cafe car (which most still are) and flexible dining slop served in plastic in the so-called diner.

Agree with everything above and I will add Gardner was right there with him, if not calling the shots from behind the scenes. Coscia and the BOD are/were just as complicit. I really wish the minutes for this little discussion were on the record. The last sentience of the meeting minutes from above:

“Anderson and Gardner led the Board on the future of the National network”

 

[Amtrakfflyer]

The powers to be thought it wise to give the FRA responsibility for long distance route planning since a biased was sensed within Amtrak’s management against the long distance routes. I think that needs to go a step farther and have the FRA oversee the new long distance equipment order planning process. Why is one appropriate and not the other?

A. Amtrak is dragging their feet. They had no problems ordering new corridor or Acela equipment.
B. Amtrak has mothballed not only older equipment but some brand new equipment on the LD routes as well: diners, baggage, and to a lesser extent some V2 sleepers.
C. If Amtrak is still operating under the Anderson era thought process a long distance order from them might be entirely inappropriate. IE: One bastidized food service car for the entire train. No lounges/domes or true diners. Sleepers? We just don’t know but this is a once in a generation order.

Keeping this on topic why was the FRA truly put in charge of route planning? I think these two subjects are very much intertwined.

 

[lordsigma]

My biggest problem with Anderson was that he created, presumably out of a level of arrogance, an unnecessarily antagonistic relationship with the advocacy community and certain policy makers in the way he implemented certain things and in the manner he engaged with the community (or the lack thereof). I think his cost cutting and breaking even agenda was largely mandated by his board and by various pieces of legislation that were in place so I’m not sure placing the blame for all that entirely at his feet is fair. I also don’t necessarily have an issue with someone having a different vision or view of what the business should look like. I do think there are probably aspects and areas where he was critical of the business as usual at Amtrak and limitations of the network that did have some merit. The problem is instead of having a constructive conversation about these things he wanted to ram through flawed solutions with a my way or the highway type mentality which I think damaged any sense of trust between the community and Amtrak’s managers.

 

[jis]

The problem is instead of having a constructive conversation about these things he wanted to ram through flawed solutions with a my way or the highway type mentality which I think damaged any sense of trust between the community and Amtrak’s managers.

The problem was exacerbated by the fact that in effect it was the blind leading the deaf on that my way or the highway trip, since Anderson had absolutely no railroad operation experience, passenger or otherwise, and arguably Gardner did not have much practical on the ground passenger railroad experience either. He had pushed plenty of papers and studies in Congress. They had successfully gotten rid of anyone that had any deeper knowledge of the problem space, and any that were left were carefully shunted into a siding never to be heard from. They were theoreticians working hard to prove their point. Some could argue that Gardner is still somewhat like that.

 

[zephyr17]

Some could argue that Gardner is still somewhat like that.

No doubt of that whatsoever.

 

[Amtrak25]

Anderson could not make the adjustment from the private to public sector like Graham Claytor did - did not understand that traditional profitability is not the be-all/end-all of a public service, had no regard to who buttered his bread, yet was fool enough to think APT fixed cost allocation accounting had sufficient validity to be a decision-making tool, and that his effective Board of Directors is actually 535 people on Capitol Hill. Shouting matches with Senators Moran and Heinrich with his SWC mental complex sealed hs fate and went beyond even what the NEC-centric Chairman Coscia could stomach.

While he would take advice form Gardner, as though his background on a shortline freight railroad made him competent at Amtrak, he would not take advice from predeecssors Boardman or Moorman to not waste time, energy, and political capital attacking the LD network.

 

[lordsigma]

I’m not sure I’d agree on Moorman as some champion of long distance service. There was an interview with him that circulated after his tenure where he voiced the most outright and directly hostile comments about long distance I have ever heard any of them make. In the same interview he also praised Anderson and basically said he supported his moves 100%. Maybe he was saying different things privately but this didn’t sound like anyone philosophically distant.

 

[Amtrak25]

I’m not sure I’d agree on Moorman as some champion of long distance service. There was an interview with him that circulated after his tenure where he voiced the most outright and directly hostile comments about long distance I have ever heard any of them make. In the same interview he also praised Anderson and basically said he supported his moves 100%. Maybe he was saying different things privately but this didn’t sound like anyone philosophically distant.

Yes, we know about his interview. He was mixed bag, but did say the LD trains cover their above the rail costs and did advise Anderson not to touch them. Anderson's reponse was "It's my railroad now". Moorman did not take advantage of the full 6 months he was there beyond his tenure to advise Anderson since it was a waste of his time.

 

[Anderson]

Yes, we know about his interview. He was mixed bag, but did say the LD trains cover their above the rail costs and did advise Anderson not to touch them. Anderson's reponse was "It's my railroad now". Moorman did not take advantage of the full 6 months he was there beyond his tenure to advise Anderson since it was a waste of his time.

Either that or he did take advantage of it and was roundly ignored.

 

[GDRRiley]

big updates to the FRA study website
Meeting Materials
One of the early maps they created based on looking at travel corridors

 

[zephyr17]

big updates to the FRA study website
Meeting Materials
One of the early maps they created based on looking at travel corridorsView attachment 33246
View attachment 33245

Now that looks like a decent network!

 

[GDRRiley]

Now that looks like a decent network!

Yep the plan seems to be bring back service to most routes that have been cut outside of some in the east coast

 

[Willbridge]

Yep the plan seems to be bring back service to most routes that have been cut outside of some in the east coast

I see a healthy representation of concepts that have been discussed here. I go back to the beginning of Amtrak and through the years there have been some awful ideas presented in national studies, ignoring local or regional expertise..

 

[danasgoodstuff]

I'm surprised to not see Chicago - Moline - Iowa City - Des Moines - Omaha not on those maps, it's where the people are in Iowa and I think track still exits right thru downtown Des Moines. It is on this Rail Passengers map
https://www.railpassengers.org/site/assets/files/1165/grid_and_gateway_-_narp_removed.pdf

 

[GDRRiley]

I see a healthy representation of concepts that have been discussed here. I go back to the beginning of Amtrak and through the years there have been some awful ideas presented in national studies, ignoring local or regional expertise..

FRA was smart to carve this into 5-6 groups each focused on a region and then combine their plans into one

I'm surprised to not see Chicago - Moline - Iowa City - Des Moines - Omaha not on those maps, it's where the people are in Iowa and I think track still exits right thru downtown Des Moines. It is on this Rail Passengers map
https://www.railpassengers.org/site/assets/files/1165/grid_and_gateway_-_narp_removed.pdf

That is not along distance train as its well under 750mi.

 

[danasgoodstuff]

FRA was smart to carve this into 5-6 groups each focused on a region and then combine their plans into one

That is not along distance train as its well under 750mi.

You're right, of course, but I always forget that you have to look at what, 3 maps to get the full picture of all the proposals?

 

[GDRRiley]

You're right, of course, but I always forget that you have to look at what, 3 maps to get the full picture of all the proposals?

3 yeah, connect us, corridorID and this study

 

[dlagrua]

I believe that most here would support the FRA plan to restore National and Regional train service as shown on the maps. What is being conveniently ignored is the shortage of equipment. Amtrak sends out an RFP to 8 different rail car manufacturers and to date no contracts have even been discussed. As they say, you can't put the cart before the horse.

 

[jis]

I believe that most here would support the FRA plan to restore National and Regional train service as shown on the maps. What is being conveniently ignored is the shortage of equipment. Amtrak sends out an RFP to 8 different rail car manufacturers and to date no contracts have even been discussed. As they say, you can't put the cart before the horse.

No contract has been discussed mainly because no RFP has been sent yet. The RFP is scheduled to go out sometime this year. All that has happened so far is that an RFI has been sent and processed and vendors qualified.

 

[dlagrua]

No contract has been discussed mainly because no RFP has been sent yet. The RFP is scheduled to go out sometime this year. All that has happened so far is that an RFI has been sent and processed and vendors qualified.

Sounds like fact finding for the moment. Hope that the process moves along quickly. Thanks for the update

 

[John Bredin]

I believe that most here would support the FRA plan to restore National and Regional train service as shown on the maps. What is being conveniently ignored is the shortage of equipment. Amtrak sends out an RFP to 8 different rail car manufacturers and to date no contracts have even been discussed. As they say, you can't put the cart before the horse.

IMHO, the FRA long-distance plan is the horse and Amtrak's LD car purchase the cart. The FRA plan will set forth what LD routes, and at what frequencies, Amtrak should run. Of course Amtrak can advance plans for new LD equipment in parallel absent the FRA plan, but the FRA plan should precede the actual ordering of new LD equipment. In other words, Amtrak can work on what LD equipment it wants but only the FRA plan can answer how much LD equipment it should buy.

To make the LD equipment purchase the horse and the FRA LD plan the cart would mean Amtrak would order new equipment without a full sense of how many trains it will be operating. The purchased number of cars or trainsets would dictate -- and quite possibly limit -- how many new/restored LD services recommended by the FRA are actually operated. In other words, an LD equipment purchase without the FRA LD plan could end up preserving an equipment shortage, albeit not as severe as the one we've got.

Stated another way, Amtrak ordering equipment without the FRA LD plan would be under political pressure to lean towards something just a little north of mere replacement numbers rather than "wasting money" by buying "too many" cars or trainsets; "Amtrak operates only 'N' LD trains, why are you buying 3 x 'N' LD trainsets?" If the FRA plan is released before new cars or trainsets are ordered, the plan can be pointed to as a concrete reason for ordering enough LD equipment to implement the plan.

Look at the Midwest Venture cars. In the absence of the relevant states having firm plans to run additional frequencies or services (beyond Illinois's already-financed plans to run a couple of Quad Cities trains IIRC), Illinois DOT ordered only enough trainsets to operate the existing Midwest services minus the Hiawatha service. An additional order had to be placed just to equip the Hiawathas with Ventures.

 

[Seaboarder3023]

I recently submitted a comment discussing restoration of service over the CSX S-Line in Florida. I don't know if it will help, but it can't hurt.

 

[jis]

FRA’s Long-Distance Study Produces Map of Expanded Amtrak Services

A map that was recently shared at town hall meetings shows a dramatically expanded long-distance network.

railfan.com