How much are Class I and II railroads paid by Amtrak?

Thanks. I found a pretty good one googling, though not at Trains. I should've realized this would exist.

taracer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 3:16 pm

eolesen wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 1:35 pm

taracer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 12:54 pmIf anything, most Class 1's are ripping off Amtrak now a days, in fact it's kind of criminal in my opinion.

By what measure? If they're paying less than the present-day opportunity cost, in any other business that would constitute a government taking....

Yes, that's kind of what I'm getting at, the ROW's should be nationalized, and should have been at least 40 years ago.

The constitution has a part that says the government cannot take things unless they pay market value for them. You would also have to get enough congressmen and a President on board to create this legislation.

For many reasons, neither the left nor the right wants to sponsor legislation to nationalize the infrastructure nor pay for it. Even the most socialist leaning people in Washington know it would be a crippling move to our economy even if we could financially afford it.

Even if tomorrow the private freight carriers voluntarily gave up their assets for free - most of the world (not just the USA) depends on our railroad network to provide food, energy, natural resources, steel, automobiles, etc... If we just turned it over to Amtrak and ran the passenger trains first, you would have monster supply chain tangles and snarls, and we all know how well that worked after Covid/shutdown. We are still paying the price for that.

Why should Amtrak pay more especially if it wasn't for Amtrak the private railroads would not get free upgrades payed by the government.

Tadman wrote: ↑Tue Dec 12, 2023 11:29 amIf we just turned it over to Amtrak and ran the passenger trains first, you would have monster supply chain tangles and snarls.

This.

The issue isn’t really ownership. It’s something embedded in the CN v Amtrak STB filing — freight and pax don’t work well together under modern conditions.
The system built by 19th century joint operations didn’t work once conditions changed.

The goal should be to disentangle, especially at key bottlenecks.

Red Wing wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 8:06 am Why should Amtrak pay more especially if it wasn't for Amtrak the private railroads would not get free upgrades payed by the government.

Maybe you can elaborate here, because I'm willing to bet a steak dinner (at a place GBN eats, not an Amcafe) that Amtrak's largesse to class 1's for infrastructure improvements is less than 5% of all class 1 infrastructure spending in a given year.

ryanwc wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 11:23 am

Tadman wrote: ↑Tue Dec 12, 2023 11:29 amIf we just turned it over to Amtrak and ran the passenger trains first, you would have monster supply chain tangles and snarls.

This.

The issue isn’t really ownership. It’s something embedded in the CN v Amtrak STB filing — freight and pax don’t work well together under modern conditions.
The system built by 19th century joint operations didn’t work once conditions changed.

The goal should be to disentangle, especially at key bottlenecks.

There is certainly some truth to this, and the PPP's help here. There is no reason for big freight to go downtown in Chicago or New Orleans, but it does, and the Class 1's have been trying to solve this for years. One of the biggest modern success stories in railroading is the Meridian Speedway (KCS and NS) and it is basically the biggest New Orleans bypass imaginable, because the freight tracks across a 300yo city are so slow and crowded.

Tadman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 2:16 pm

Red Wing wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 8:06 am Why should Amtrak pay more especially if it wasn't for Amtrak the private railroads would not get free upgrades payed by the government.

Maybe you can elaborate here, because I'm willing to bet a steak dinner (at a place GBN eats, not an Amcafe) that Amtrak's largesse to class 1's for infrastructure improvements is less than 5% of all class 1 infrastructure spending in a given year.

Well that's obvious. Why would Amtrak pay to maintain trackage that they will never run on? What is the percentage of rails Amtrak use? Improvements have been made across the country for Amtrak's benefit on private railroads that those railroads get to use too. It would be interesting to see how much government pays including Amtrak pays to maintain and upgrade rail lines and not just rails that Amtrak uses.

Mr. Red Wing, I think you will find that Amtrak funded improvements to the roads are the nature and scope of that recently appropriated for Malta MT..

I "drove" the Googlemobile through there, and from what I could see, when Amtrak makes a station stop there, the Great Northern is effectively tied up. There does not appear to be a second track through the station. What if Amtrak is early (it can happen) and needs to "wait for time"?

I'm not sure what is planned there, but if it's a betterment being made because Amtrak is there, and for which would not otherwise be needed, then so be it they should pay.

Red Wing wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 7:27 am

Tadman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 2:16 pm

Red Wing wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 8:06 am Why should Amtrak pay more especially if it wasn't for Amtrak the private railroads would not get free upgrades payed by the government.

Maybe you can elaborate here, because I'm willing to bet a steak dinner (at a place GBN eats, not an Amcafe) that Amtrak's largesse to class 1's for infrastructure improvements is less than 5% of all class 1 infrastructure spending in a given year.

Well that's obvious. Why would Amtrak pay to maintain trackage that they will never run on? What is the percentage of rails Amtrak use? Improvements have been made across the country for Amtrak's benefit on private railroads that those railroads get to use too. It would be interesting to see how much government pays including Amtrak pays to maintain and upgrade rail lines and not just rails that Amtrak uses.

It maybe obvious, but in the opposite direction of what you expect.

Amtrak pays, and this is agreed by all parties involved, perhaps half or less of the market rates for a fast train to have trackage rights or a slot on a mainline. The "how much is half" is subject to discussion, but no parties allege Amtrak is paying their fare share.

Furthermore, as I state above, Amtrak contributes very little to the maintenance and reinvestment in railroad infrastructure. Each year, the Class 1's in the US spend about $23 billion or 38pct of their revenues in track and locomotive renewal. The recent $2b Amtrak capital expenditure is one-time and historically high spend that is very partially going to class 1 bottlenecks that Amtrak desires to straighten out. If it were worth it to the Class 1's, they would spend their own money on it.

Do some research and reading, because it is not obvious at all that Amtrak or the feds are floating others' boats. Its the other way around and the numbers support that assertion.

(Cue the assertion that airports and interstates are propped up at the expense of rail and not by user fees and fuel taxes...)

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 9:26 am Mr. Red Wing, I think you will find that Amtrak funded improvements to the roads are the nature and scope of that recently appropriated for Malta MT..

I "drove" the Googlemobile through there, and from what I could see, when Amtrak makes a station stop there, the Great Northern is effectively tied up. There does not appear to be a second track through the station. What if Amtrak is early (it can happen) and needs to "wait for time"?

I'm not sure what is planned there, but if it's a betterment being made because Amtrak is there, and for which would not otherwise be needed, then so be it they should pay.

How hard is it to build a 2nd track through the station?

eolesen wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 4:00 pm (Cue the assertion that airports and interstates are propped up at the expense of rail and not by user fees and fuel taxes...)

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

The age old argument between passenger rail advocates and critics. The truth of course is in the middle of the arguments usually made by both. Yes airports and interstates get a lot of funding from user fees and fuel taxes, but not to the point of being completely self sufficient absent any general fund spending. The highway trust fund notably hasn’t been self sufficient in years. Yes - it has a transit account that siphons some of that revenue into public transportation, but on the other hand not all of that is going to rail forms of transit - some of that is going to city and regional busses. And even if one eliminated that account altogether the fund would still not be self sufficient. Having said all that the general fund dollars have a lot more airline passengers and interstate drivers to be spread among so then you likely have a higher subsidy for the mode per passenger for rail though the dollar amount for air transportation and highways is likely much greater. I’d add however that that’s just across the board comparing the mode as a whole. There are certainly going to be highway projects funded by the trust fund that have a higher subsidy per user than certain rail projects. So while it’s often brought up as an argument by both those for and against rail like many things the truth is somewhere in the middle and both sides have some arguments they can make. The better argument to have instead of whether to have or get rid of Amtrak or rail forms of transit entirely is to instead have the debate about the merits of individual projects and efforts on an individual basis.

Within the larger debates of government's role in the economy and toward national defense and the greater good, including through use of levers that promote or regulate, an essential dynamic that's been created for our freight railroads comes from largely having to raise private capital for their infrastructure within the competitive marketplace while their competitors do not. This only compounds what's found amongst competing technologies as well with rail's equipment among the more expensive and longer-lasting, especially in light of innovation.

As fingers get pointed at "greedy" owners and managers, including misunderstanding the how & where PSR provides benefits within that dynamic with the industry ranking 25-50th among 100 in ROI and while there's debate about Amtrak's place, I think the crux of the matter goes to their contribution at least to the cost, but even better a fair competitive return, on the (marginal) capital they require from those private freight railroads. That's what those managers have most to concern themselves with toward long-term health and well-being, including having to put greater burdens where they can to cross-subsidize where they can't, and with owners considering competing alternatives when it comes to re-investing capital into the business.

In that larger debate where some call for converting our rail infrastructure to public ownership, including to Amtrak's benefit, the other side of the coin is to privatize competing infrastructure and/or Amtrak with, as someone recently pointed out amongst the threads, no stomach for either at this time.

David Benton wrote: ↑Sat Dec 16, 2023 1:43 am How hard is it to build a 2nd track through the station?

In many cases, the second track exists. Ventura, CA, once on the SP Coast Line, now part of the Pacific Surfliner route, is one single track location I found on a hasty search. The photo is a screenshot from Google maps.

John_Perkowski wrote: ↑Sat Dec 16, 2023 12:36 pm

David Benton wrote: ↑Sat Dec 16, 2023 1:43 am How hard is it to build a 2nd track through the station?

In many cases, the second track exists. Ventura, CA, once on the SP Coast Line, now part of the Pacific Surfliner route, is one single track location I found on a hasty search. The photo is a screenshot from Google maps.
IMG_4342.png

The satellite view may look promising, but the street view tells a different story.

Oh hell no. There's large hill there with the highway on top of it. That white line on the sat view? That's a retaining wall. In other words, there's really not any room there, and that's Union Pacific territory. Guess where the local siding is? To the west, Santa Barbara and the Amtrak Station there. To the east, well, not far. Just across US 101. What's even worse is that there's an "East Ventura" station that requires a backup move to get in no matter how you approach it.

I'm getting Perryville, MD MARC station vibes. They gotta offload, reload any passengers there, and go.

It needs major re-engineering to get a second track in.