fredmcain
Service Attendant
The status quo *IS* an option if Congress mandates it. So far they have just passed a resolution but I would be surprised if they back down.
Regards,
FMC
Regards,
FMC
The status quo *IS* an option if Congress mandates it. So far they have just passed a resolution but I would be surprised if they back down.
Regards,
FMC
Well, yes, of course. The current pending legislation provides $50 million (if I understood that right) and taken together with state monies that should bring us closer to the $100 million figure that was thrown out in the "leak". *BUT* this legislation has NOT passed the House yet! The house could raise the funding, cut it, or elimination the whole thing altogether. We have no choice but to wait and see. In the meantime, if you feel strongly about this, keep hammering on your rep.The status quo *IS* an option if Congress mandates it. So far they have just passed a resolution but I would be surprised if they back down.
Regards,
FMC
You mean if Congress (or someone else) FUNDS it.
And then after upping it to $200 million, they'll say that that's just too much for it to be justifiable altogether.Don't worry, as soon as the $100 million is secured, the mysterious Amtrak fake number generator will up the ante to $200 million
No. The plan was for the train to terminate in Albuquerque coming east, passengers would switch to a bus to Dodge City or Kansas City, and then the train would resume there and continue on to Chicago. It was not that the train stops before Albuquerque and only the bus runs there.Adding another twist to an already complicated plot...has anyone else noticed that the bus bridge is described as between Albuquerque and Dodge City or wherever? But the SWC line from the west joins the Rail Runner tracks in Isleta Village, ten miles or so south of Albuquerque. So if PTC is the sticking point, the Chief can't even get to ABQ from the west and the train/bus transfer would need to take place in Isleta (or Belen). (Can you say "blech?")
I dunno. I get the idea that, after reading through that "leaked" article again, that the whole concept of a "bus bridge" is probably dead. But they did not say what they intend to do other than "all options". They did say that they are willing to continue working with the states to find a solution so maybe the whole thing really is an attempt at gold digging.No. The plan was for the train to terminate in Albuquerque coming east, passengers would switch to a bus to Dodge City or Kansas City, and then the train would resume there and continue on to Chicago. It was not that the train stops before Albuquerque and only the bus runs there.Adding another twist to an already complicated plot...has anyone else noticed that the bus bridge is described as between Albuquerque and Dodge City or wherever? But the SWC line from the west joins the Rail Runner tracks in Isleta Village, ten miles or so south of Albuquerque. So if PTC is the sticking point, the Chief can't even get to ABQ from the west and the train/bus transfer would need to take place in Isleta (or Belen). (Can you say "blech?")
RPC is pointing out that the train coming from the west, can't reach Albuquerque all the way, due to that PTC issue over the last few miles from Isleta to Albuquerque...No. The plan was for the train to terminate in Albuquerque coming east, passengers would switch to a bus to Dodge City or Kansas City, and then the train would resume there and continue on to Chicago. It was not that the train stops before Albuquerque and only the bus runs there.Adding another twist to an already complicated plot...has anyone else noticed that the bus bridge is described as between Albuquerque and Dodge City or wherever? But the SWC line from the west joins the Rail Runner tracks in Isleta Village, ten miles or so south of Albuquerque. So if PTC is the sticking point, the Chief can't even get to ABQ from the west and the train/bus transfer would need to take place in Isleta (or Belen). (Can you say "blech?")
Kinda seems to me - in at least a few cases - that it is actually *ANDERSON* who is making some of the PTC mandates, not Congress or the FRA. Several people on this group have already pointed out some puzzling inconsistencies.RPC is pointing out that the train coming from the west, can't reach Albuquerque all the way, due to that PTC issue over the last few miles from Isleta to Albuquerque...No. The plan was for the train to terminate in Albuquerque coming east, passengers would switch to a bus to Dodge City or Kansas City, and then the train would resume there and continue on to Chicago. It was not that the train stops before Albuquerque and only the bus runs there.Adding another twist to an already complicated plot...has anyone else noticed that the bus bridge is described as between Albuquerque and Dodge City or wherever? But the SWC line from the west joins the Rail Runner tracks in Isleta Village, ten miles or so south of Albuquerque. So if PTC is the sticking point, the Chief can't even get to ABQ from the west and the train/bus transfer would need to take place in Isleta (or Belen). (Can you say "blech?")
Congress did not make a mandate about requiring PTC on a segment that carries only one train each way. That is something that even the FRA did not mandate. That is something that Anderson dreamed up. So either you are just plain wrong, or are being disingenuous.Nope. Congress made the mandate. Anderson is the one choosing how to deal with it, but Congress made the mandate.Kinda seems to me - in at least a few cases - that it is actually *ANDERSON* who is making some of the PTC mandates, not Congress or the FRA. Several people on this group have already pointed out some puzzling inconsistencies.RPC is pointing out that the train coming from the west, can't reach Albuquerque all the way, due to that PTC issue over the last few miles from Isleta to Albuquerque...No. The plan was for the train to terminate in Albuquerque coming east, passengers would switch to a bus to Dodge City or Kansas City, and then the train would resume there and continue on to Chicago. It was not that the train stops before Albuquerque and only the bus runs there.Adding another twist to an already complicated plot...has anyone else noticed that the bus bridge is described as between Albuquerque and Dodge City or wherever? But the SWC line from the west joins the Rail Runner tracks in Isleta Village, ten miles or so south of Albuquerque. So if PTC is the sticking point, the Chief can't even get to ABQ from the west and the train/bus transfer would need to take place in Isleta (or Belen). (Can you say "blech?")
-FMC
The former. I was thinking of the F&B mandate and got it confused with Anderson's PTC one.Congress did not make a mandate about requiring PTC on a segment that carries only one train each way. That is something that even the FRA did not mandate. That is something that Anderson dreamed up. So either you are just plain wrong, or are being disingenuous.Nope. Congress made the mandate. Anderson is the one choosing how to deal with it, but Congress made the mandate.Kinda seems to me - in at least a few cases - that it is actually *ANDERSON* who is making some of the PTC mandates, not Congress or the FRA. Several people on this group have already pointed out some puzzling inconsistencies.
-FMC
My understanding is that BNSF's commitment is contingent upon getting the trackage up to state of good repair and the signals upto current standards. That Capital Cost is what is being bickered about and where the $50 million and $100 million numbers are being tossed about, that is to be spent over the next 5 or so years. Once the track and signal are in that state BNSF has offered to maintain them in that state for 20 years.So what does BNSF spend 50 million on this route? Does it get banked and spent over the period of 20 years some posters are stating that BNSF states will keep mx up on the line?
My understanding is that BNSF's commitment is contingent upon getting the trackage up to state of good repair and the signals upto current standards. That Capital Cost is what is being bickered about and where the $50 million and $100 million numbers are being tossed about, that is to be spent over the next 5 or so years. Once the track and signal are in that state BNSF has offered to maintain them in that state for 20 years.So what does BNSF spend 50 million on this route? Does it get banked and spent over the period of 20 years some posters are stating that BNSF states will keep mx up on the line?
Mind you, this is my vague understanding and it could be wrong.
Unfortunately at present given Amtrak's attitude it is to their advantage to obfuscate and stretch truth to the limit or a bit beyond to give a picture that the SWC is hopelessly expensive, and that is what they are doing. They should be asked to provide a full detailed accounting of their claims since they have not proved to be very trustworthy.
Well, yes, Congress did come up with the PTC mandate after the devastating wreck on the UP near Ventura a number of years ago. But, I guess what I meant by Anderson making the mandate is that he is INTERPRETING the mandate in such a way as to fit his own agenda.Congress did not make a mandate about requiring PTC on a segment that carries only one train each way. That is something that even the FRA did not mandate. That is something that Anderson dreamed up. So either you are just plain wrong, or are being disingenuous.Nope. Congress made the mandate. Anderson is the one choosing how to deal with it, but Congress made the mandate.
Thanks. I was also obliquely pointing out that the original bus bridge proposal was even more capricious than it first seemed. Look at it from east to west: it's okay to run from CHI to Dodge City (we all agree on that), not okay to run from Dodge City to Rosario (north junction with RailRunner)(okay with FRA, not okay with Anderson), not okay to run from Rosario to ABQ (not okay with FRA or Anderson), okay to run from ABQ to Isleta (south junction with RailRunner)(not okay with FRA, apparently okay with Anderson), okay to run from Isleta to Dalies (okay with FRA, okay with Anderson, but I don't think this segment is getting PTC). This is "decision-based data making" at its finest.RPC is pointing out that the train coming from the west, can't reach Albuquerque all the way, due to that PTC issue over the last few miles from Isleta to Albuquerque...No. The plan was for the train to terminate in Albuquerque coming east, passengers would switch to a bus to Dodge City or Kansas City, and then the train would resume there and continue on to Chicago. It was not that the train stops before Albuquerque and only the bus runs there.Adding another twist to an already complicated plot...has anyone else noticed that the bus bridge is described as between Albuquerque and Dodge City or wherever? But the SWC line from the west joins the Rail Runner tracks in Isleta Village, ten miles or so south of Albuquerque. So if PTC is the sticking point, the Chief can't even get to ABQ from the west and the train/bus transfer would need to take place in Isleta (or Belen). (Can you say "blech?")
Wasn't that the case a few months ago when he said something about not running his trains on tracks w/o PTC after the end of the year?Kinda seems to me - in at least a few cases - that it is actually *ANDERSON* who is making some of the PTC mandates, not Congress or the FRA. Several people on this group have already pointed out some puzzling inconsistencies.
-FMC
Oh, probably not but at the very least it could well make Anderson's life politically more difficult. I'm not sure Congress can fire Anderson (we've discussed that here before) but what they COULD do is make things miserable enough for him that he might just resign.Any truth that Senate passed Amtrak portion of bill guaranteeing SWC will operate full route ?
Alright, JIS, I'm going go out and expose my ignorance here. What is the "SMS analysis"?We are all waiting with bated breath to see the objective documented SMS analysis supporting the absurd stance. Maybe American Engineers have to be modeled as the most incompetent in the world to arrive at Anderson’s desired results. But it would be good to know what the assumptions are that go into the analysis.
Enter your email address to join: