NE corridor carved out from Amtrak

[DanS]

Regarding privatization, I'm all for it, but that's really not the topic of this thread. At a minimum, the vast majority of rail traffic in the US is private anyway and always has been.

They'll break it up, it will be starved for funds (it now will only be in the interest of a few states to fund it so it won't get much money from Congress)

It would be better that the states who benefit from it pay for it, rather than having to beg North Dakota senators for funding.

[Az]

I am actually with DanS on this one, generally, though I do think there may be potential for Federation-wide passanger rail travel.

[Mr. Harley]

Sandman, you stated:

If you're going to meddle with the railways, it's not a good idea to have a state-owned network and privately operated rolling stock. That's what Britain has.

I have always thought that was a good sounding idea, but never did any research. What problems have the Brits had - and Spiffor, could you post some specifics too, especially on the Sweden bit? I am interested in this, but have never done any research.

Az, reference your question about cars being subsidized in the USA - heavily, when all costs are figured in. That actually hurts our train industry, as long haul Trailer Trucks are massively subsidized compared to the damage they do to the roads. There is some argument about the level of subsidy, because if you eliminate environmental costs the subsidy goes down substantially.

Plus you have to assign a value to the human lives lost, let's say, to fine particulate pollution (diesal and tire rubber) and if the life of the elderly are worth less than those in the prime of working age. There was a big fuss over that several years ago when the Bush administration did exactly that with another pollution issue, exactly which one escapes me now. The problem with the hullabaloo is that human lives do have a vaule in the modern economy, and the elderly are worth less - ask any insurance company that pays out malpractice claims. It's a messy area where economic facts, morality, and philosophy all intersect, so of course we argue about it until we are blue in the face.

[Timexwatch]

Originally posted by DanS
Regarding privatization, I'm all for it, but that's really not the topic of this thread. At a minimum, the vast majority of rail traffic in the US is private anyway and always has been.



It would be better that the states who benefit from it pay for it, rather than having to beg North Dakota senators for funding.

But then you run into the problem of having a consortium of states having to squabble about funding and then having to get that from the state legislatures, which is infinitely a bigger pain in the ass. One look at the underfunded DC Metro should clue you in.

[DanS]

which is infinitely a bigger pain in the ass

It might be a bigger pain in the ass, but at least you won't have to build another freakin' Dorgan Museum of the Buffalo or whatever in North Dakota just to ensure funding for rail in the NE corridor. Squabbling is no problem, IMO. It's the normal course of business.

Besides, the DC Metro isn't that underfunded. It might not be the best way to fund an organization, and I would be happy to see a better way instituted, but it does work nowadays. I suspect those who bring this up are doing so in part to shift blame for bad management to something that they don't control.

[Az]

But then you run into the problem of having a consortium of states having to squabble about funding and then having to get that from the state legislatures, which is infinitely a bigger pain in the ass. One look at the underfunded DC Metro should clue you in.

Yep. Many a case of Metrorail with conflciting municipalities are a case of this ( Tel Aviv is a prime case )

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
Nobody with any money (and the train is not significantly cheaper than cheap airfare) or any time constraints would bother with the train on that route. Plus, cars are actually significantly cheaper than the train in the US, where we don't tax the hell out of our gasoline. So teh train on long routes becomes a compromise transport that pleases no one because it's both expensive relative to driving and very slow relative to flying.

If we had fast modern trains and we made them express trains instead of commuter trains then that number could easily be slashed in half if not in a quarter. Amtrak has two problems 1) other then in the NE it doesn't have right of way 2) Most of it's trains stop in every little town instead of going from big city to big city and having smaller commuter trains move people from big city to small town.

[Az]

trains faster than 200kmph demand a wholly different quality of tracks and track maintenance. very expensive.

[Adam Smith]

Lots to say here, but I don't really have time now, so just a couple of items to start.

First, this is a very, very, very good idea for a reason that was not mentioned anywhere in the article. For a long time Amtrak has been screwing the states in order to stay afloat. A friend who is a consultant tells me that Amtrak typically charges states 10 times what it charges itself to do the same repair work. States therefore have little desire to work with or fund Amtrak. However, states can now fund transportation projects as a way of meeting their air quality targets under the Clean Air Act, if they can show that the projects reduce pollution and congestion. States are therefore able to internalize some of the pollution and congestion externalities that automobile users do not pay. The Alameda Corridor project in Los Angeles has already been completed using this type of funding. The Alameda II project in Los Angeles and the CREATE project in Chicago are currently being built. By getting Amtrak out of the picture, states would finally have both the ability and the incentive to fund similar projects in the Northeast Corridor.

Second, regional is the way to go. You can probably put together a reasonable set of regional networks in the Northeast (incl central PA and central NY); midwest (think hub and spoke in and out of Chicago); California; Pacific Northwest; and maybe even Florida and Texas. The rest just isnt worth the trouble. For example, I've seen Amtrak ridership figures showing that one 430 mile segemnt across Wyoming averages just seven (count 'em) passengers a day. That's just not viable in any way.

Third, you need to remember that the US rail system (and Canada's too) are very different than the european systems. The US transportation system as a whole carries about 4.3 trillion passenger miles each year, and about 4.3 trillion ton-miles of freight each year. So for every passenger you see, somewhere, somehow there is a ton of freight moving too. Both passengers and freight contribute to pollution and congestion. In the US railroads carry about 40 percent of the freight. In Europe, they carry about five percent. So if you are going to set up regional passenger system, you need to find a way for both types of service to use the network.

[VetLegion]

Freight rail is healthy in the US and operates some 140,000 miles of track. It transports about 1.6 trillion ton-miles a year, or over 5,000 ton-miles per person in the US. There has been no letup in growth of ton-miles transported over the last 100+ years.

Naturally. Total length of track has fallen drastically in developed countries since WW I, but what remains is used. Freight is healthy everywhere. These two claims hold:

Freight rail is always profitable, in every country.
Passenger rail is always unprofitable, in every country.

They held back in the glory days of 19th century railroads and still hold, despite French claims that TGV is profitable (it may be, but the government builds track and pays for research. We're talking billions) and Japanese that the Shinkasen isn't loosing money. I wouldn't bet that there are no subsidies going into it.

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by VetLegion

Freight rail is always profitable, in every country.
Passenger rail is always unprofitable, in every country.

absolutisms.

how much it shows you come from a totalitarian past

[VetLegion]

Greek railroads with new Canadian Bombardier rolling stock

[Bereta_Eder]

I hope that's untrue or we may end up killed on the rails like the brits every week

[VetLegion]

The ones I drove in were Canadian. New, airconditioned and cool. But I got yelled at by an elderly lady who thought I was sitting in her place. Which I was, but that is no excuse for yelling at me.

[Bereta_Eder]