by andrewjw
What government land did they use? I thought they built and operate mostly on private ROW.
Railroad Forums
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman
andrewjw wrote: ↑Thu Nov 28, 2019 10:54 am What government land did they use? I thought they built and operate mostly on private ROW.Depends - is the turnpike authority privately- or publicly-owned? If public, it may be receiving a hidden subsidy, if private no. (Though the airport’s land is public, and I don’t know the payment structure that Brightline has arranged with the Orlando airport authority.)
mtuandrew wrote: ↑Thu Nov 28, 2019 10:28 amWhat government land?SouthernRailway wrote: ↑Thu Nov 28, 2019 10:14 am Brightline has been able to use tax-advantaged bonds and I think governments have paid for some crossings and maybe are offering funds for more stations that governments want. That’s it.Has Brightline been charged fair market value for the use of government land? If not, that’s another subsidy.
SouthernRailway wrote: ↑Thu Nov 28, 2019 5:15 pmWhat government land?Per my last post:
For stations that government wants it to build?
Brightline runs on a private right of way and the stations that it wanted are all in its own buildings on its own land. Real estate using its own investments and own property is key.
mtuandrew wrote: ↑Thu Nov 28, 2019 12:09 pmDepends - is the turnpike authority privately- or publicly-owned? If public, it may be receiving a hidden subsidy, if private no. (Though the airport’s land is public, and I don’t know the payment structure that Brightline has arranged with the Orlando airport authority.)Brightline isn’t exactly cogent to our conversation topic here, but it does illustrate a different model in which government solely acts as a facilitator rather than an operator.
John_Perkowski wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2019 10:17 pm Those favorable tariffs for the USG exist to this very day.Yes, because Virginia ridership isn't up and service isn't expanding, the Piedmonts aren't looking to expand, MASS didn't just pay to extend their SPG line to GFD, NYS didn't work with Amtrak to lease and upgrade another line........all because it doesn't matter.
As for Amtrak, the freight roads are still proscribed by RPSA 70 and it’s successor acts to operate their own service. Why would they want to? Amtrak outside the corridor carries a pittance of the nations passenger traffic at a loss. The equipment is car for car older than the late HW era gear was when it was scrapped in the late 50s and 60s.
Outside the Corridor and Chicago service, Amtrak is redundant and no longer something which matters. Absent a sudden major long term petroleum shoertage grounding commercial aviation, it’s going to stay that way.
SouthernRailway wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2019 7:31 pm The posts above are great.And again, what are these incurred costs? How much extra does it cost to run an Amtrak versus a freight, particularly when your line already exists and when the various states have invested in the line?
The perspective that "private railroads need to incur costs that they aren't reimbursed for to handle Amtrak" is just really mind-boggling.
If people want fast, frequent and punctual Amtrak trains: pay for them. I'm willing to. But I'm not willing to use government to force private businesses to incur costs to operate a business that I, as a voter, want. There goes freedom, if that's what government can do.
CSX takes over a line that hosted passenger operations prior to their ownership and has posted track speeds. All they have to do is maintain to the level it was at the beginning of the agreement. If it is a Class 3 track, they have to keep it at Class 3. If it is Class 2 track, they have to keep it maintained to Class 2 standards....all of which helps their operation, as it makes the freight sp[eed higher.
Track maintenance to passenger standards: CSX is required to maintain all of its lines used by Amtrak at the same level of utility (a measure that includes track classification and speed and “a reasonable degree of passenger comfort”) as they were at the start of the agreement, with limited exceptions. CSX must bear the entire cost of such maintenance, though Amtrak reimburses the freight carrier for the incremental cost that hosting its trains imposes on CSX. The host may adjust speeds at various locations as long as the overall ‘pure running time’ (scheduled time minus dwell times and padding) on that segment is not lengthened If CSX receives FRA approval to downgrade a track segment resulting in lengthening of Amtrak’s running time, Amtrak must pay for any adjustments necessary to maintain its previous higher speed.
SouthernRailway wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:14 am (2) delaying freight trains so that Amtrak can take priority.that's a lot of the problem. The hosts aren't really delaying their trains, even though they are supposed to provide priority. Notice it doesn't say exclusive occupancy or without delay. From the agreement above:
CSX is obligated to move Amtrak trains efficiently: The freight carrier “shall make every reasonable effort … to deliver Amtrak trains to all scheduled passenger stops … by the scheduled time therefor” and “to avoid excessive delays and, consistent with safety, to make up delays” regardless of where they occur, as well as “to service, inspect, and perform running repairs as necessary” so that an Amtrak train may complete its trip over CSX lines.If your train is in double track territory, which the State, Amtrak or even the host paid for and you refuse to operate the train around it, you're not living up to the agreement. Again, when you follow the same train from Manassas, Va to Toccoa, Ga and there are double-tracked sections, how much is it REALLY going to cost to get one train around another?
The hosts can say "This isn't going to work and this is why."
(c) Preference over freight transportation. --Except in an emergency, intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation provided by or for Amtrak has preference over freight transportation in using a rail line, junction, or crossing unless the Board orders otherwise under this subsection. A rail carrier affected by this subsection may apply to the Board for relief. If the Board, after an opportunity for a hearing under section 553 of title 5, decides that preference for intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation materially will lessen the quality of freight transportation provided to shippers, the Board shall establish the rights of the carrier and Amtrak on reasonable terms.
SouthernRailway wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:14 am Added costs that Class Is bear are (1) track maintenance costs to maintain track for high(er) passenger train speeds when maintaining track for lower freight train speeds would suffice, at less cost, and (2) delaying freight trains so that Amtrak can take priority.The freight railroads and passenger transit agencies which Amtrak trains run over also include additional insurance costs, signaling costs, dispatcher labor costs, etc. It's more than just the two costs you wrote earlier. Trinity Metro had to double their insurance coverage costs and add another passing siding in Tarrant County including all the costs of laying steel tracks, turnouts or switches, signals, lawyers, consultants, and construction workers so the Texas Eagle can run two trains a day on Trinity Railway Express tracks between downtown Fort Worth and downtown Dallas in lieu of remaining on Union Pacific tracks. Over time, the additional insurance costs every year will far outweigh the costs of building the extra passing siding and additional maintenance caused by the Texas Eagle trains on TRE tracks. The TRE is a passenger train service which was already maintaining the tracks to a higher standard than what most freight trains need, yet hosting Amtrak trains costs them more every year than not hosting Amtrak.
electricron wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 10:44 am The freight railroads and passenger transit agencies which Amtrak trains run over also include additional insurance costs, signaling costs, dispatcher labor costs, etc. It's more than just the two costs you wrote earlier. Trinity Metro had to double their insurance coverage costs and add another passing siding in Tarrant County including all the costs of laying steel tracks, turnouts or switches, signals, lawyers, consultants, and construction workers so the Texas Eagle can run two trains a day on Trinity Railway Express tracks between downtown Fort Worth and downtown Dallas in lieu of remaining on Union Pacific tracks. Over time, the additional insurance costs every year will far outweigh the costs of building the extra passing siding and additional maintenance caused by the Texas Eagle trains on TRE tracks. The TRE is a passenger train service which was already maintaining the tracks to a higher standard than what most freight trains need, yet hosting Amtrak trains costs them more every year than not hosting Amtrak.The railroads already have to pay for most of that (and typically, Amtrak is self-insured on freight tracks) so I'm curious as to how you know that Amtrak (or some other entity) isn't assuming the incremental costs of, say the additional maintainers or dispatchers?