Amtrak Expansion Plan

Has most Amtrak debt been repaid ?
Seems in these low interest times, Amtrak could borrow to fund improvements , as long as their was a clear path to savings from the financed equipment. I.E , they will pay for themselves.

The entire Acela order is being financed with a $2B loan (RRIF) underwritten by the USDOT. This includes all associated facilities improvements (some platform work and other odds and ends).

Amtrak has bought out most of their leases and as a consequence, "yes". Virtually all of their outstanding debt has been paid down. If there was a mortgage on Penn Station I believe that has been paid off as well or may be soon.

East point and Mr. O’Keefe: it sounds like you’re talking on parallel tracks.

You’re right, east point, Amtrak doesn’t have the fleet size to allow for variety of car type. They arguably have too many variants now, with at least five variants on coach seating, four different types of sleeper, at least half a dozen different food service cars plus the combination business-cafe, and the list goes on and on.

Also, Mr. O’Keefe has a valuable point in that Amtrak - or a subset of Amtrak management anyway - wants MUs for both on- and off-Corridor use. That doesn’t preclude them from offering a standard type of coach seating that broadly matches the seat pitch and width of the Amfleet I and Horizon fleet. The idea should be that a Regional train could have either conventional or MU equipment without a vastly different customer experience.

The all-stops regional thread makes me wonder, might this new equipment have more than two vestibules? It seems like you’d want to take every opportunity to minimize dwell time, and that can include boarding at three or four vestibules per car at high-level platforms.

I don’t know if Amtrak would want to run their own MUs on the NEC entirely. I could see DMUs running on the SPG/Greenfield to NHV shuttles. Maybe PennDot can run their own MUs on Keystone trains.

Arlington wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 7:15 pm The NightJet style stuff whether pods or cabin is a really great model of service, but it really does assume that all you really want is to lie down and go to sleep. Personally, I'm a huge fan of "just a pod" (which is why I like the Silver Starvation so much--pay for the bed, not the diner).

That works pretty well in Europe because the sleeper trains are very short. There's not much time for leisure activity. This week I'm looking at riding the Lisbon night train, you board in Madrid at 11pm, arrive Lisbon 7am. That's just enough time for 8 hours sleep. Same with the Night Riviera, depart 1130, arrive 8am. The Lowlander departs 11, arrives 7a, the Highlander departs 8p and arrives 8a. All of them have a lounge (the highlander has three, one for each section) where you can sit up and buy drinks/food. But there's not a lot of lollygagging, it's a true sleeper.

The only 2+ night sleeper is the Moscow sleeper which RzD runs with American-style sleepers where you can sit up.

Purchase of RF&P is a game changer.

east point wrote: ↑Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:29 am Purchase of RF&P is a game changer.

It’s incredible that VA bought the RFP, the SAL, and the C&O. Besides RGH service, the C&O purchase out to Clifton Forge means we are either getting a daily Cardinal or daily Regional service to CHW.

Who knew Virginia would become one of the best-connected states in the Union per size, rivaling Illinois and New York for diverse train service? The only corners without many options yet are the Shenandoah Valley and the Eastern Shore (Delmarva Peninsula.)

Ohio and Indiana, I hope you’re taking notes.

It appears HR 3163 covering Transportation Housing Urban Development, or in acronymese THUD, FY20 appropriations will soon be law of the land, as the House and Senate has sent this legislation on to the President. With Spending Bills, not much any president can do about them but sign.

This bill puts Amtrak funding into two pieces; $700M for the Corridor and $1.297B for the National System.

So it looks like "Amtrak did OK".

Can you (or someone) offer any previous years to put that number in context?

This link seems to suggest Amtrak only requested $1.8 billion, and got $1.997 billion, or nearly $200 million more.
https://www.enotrans.org/article/amtrak ... wn-budget/

But I'm not sure I'm comparing apples to apples. It also looks like Congress has raised the numbers in the past, so maybe that's just normal, presumably Congress adding in money for specific projects needed to gain the support to pass the bill.

ryanch wrote: ↑Fri Dec 20, 2019 12:34 pm Can you (or someone) offer any previous years to put that number in context?

This link seems to suggest Amtrak only requested $1.8 billion, and got $1.997 billion, or nearly $200 million more.
https://www.enotrans.org/article/amtrak ... wn-budget/

But I'm not sure I'm comparing apples to apples. It also looks like Congress has raised the numbers in the past, so maybe that's just normal, presumably Congress adding in money for specific projects needed to gain the support to pass the bill.

50 million more than last year for the corridor.
8.4 million more than last year for the national network.
100 million of funding in there is set aside for the Amfleet 1 and 2 replacements - I'm guessing the extra 50 this year for the corridor is for the purposes of that.

Seems Congress and Senate have a strange way of "rolling out the Adios drumheads" , by giving Amtrak more money ???

President Trump signed the Spending legislation; last evening - apparently while in flight to Florida.

Mr. Benton, you do raise an intererting point immediately,
but simply because Amtrak is "in the money" is not reason to perpetuate a line of business that was expected to be phased out in an orderly manner likely starting during '76. It has been said that the '79 "Carter Cuts" was "Phase I".

I'm sure the "washroom walls" at MILW HQ's (five floors of CUS), heard, when the S-I order was announced, "look what they've done now; we're going to be stuck with those trains forever".

David Benton wrote: ↑Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:35 pm Seems Congress and Senate have a strange way of "rolling out the Adios drumheads" , by giving Amtrak more money ???

The more interesting times are ahead. I think all of us are waiting patiently for the curtain to finally be opened and to see the blueprint towards the future Amtrak will put out just before reauthorization. I expect no one will get everything that they want. Those wanting to say adios to all 15 long distance routes will probably be disappointed by what gets proposed, but those who feel that the network is sacred and can’t have any changes will likewise be disappointed. If you are a fan of the sunset limited, I would be worried about the future prospects of the current route. I think you can divide long distance territory into three categories: 1) those served by routes they will preserve for historic and experiential reasons and to maintain basic connectivity between the country’s major regions and between all the corridors (Anderson compared the justification for continuing them as the same reason we fund national parks and the smithsonian and looks at them more as a recreation opportunity than serious transit.) 2) those served by routes that will be modified into new shorter trains that make up interconnected corridors. 3) and those areas where service may be proposed for discontinuation or replacement with buses. I think you will see a plan that aims to create the most regional corridors as possible while maintaining a slimmer long distance network that minimally connects the disparate regions together to avoid service islands. To what degree Congress will accept proposed changes is another matter. But you may see certain changes accepted and certain ones rejected depending on the political support in certain areas.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:45 am I'm sure the "washroom walls" at MILW HQ's (five floors of CUS), heard, when the S-I order was announced, "look what they've done now; we're going to be stuck with those trains forever".

That the mid-1970's Milwaukee should be so lucky! They were broke as a joke and probably needed the passenger trackage rights fees to put a little money in the til on a system that was woefully underutilized. In 1970, Milwaukee lost money on passenger trains. In 1972, Milwaukee did not lose that money and made a small trackage rights income. What a good deal.

Mr. Dunville, don't I know it; I was there!

The MILW Treasurer once remarked to me, that on May 5, 1971, when the wire from Amtrak paying for an estimated month of service showed up on time, it meant one less payroll he need worry about making.

I also heard second hand, another "sicko", the SP, roundly the same comment was made.

So while the Treasury Departments on at least two roads were happy to have the cash flow, the washroom walls heard from others who were concerned that once government weasels its way into something, you don't get 'em out all that easily.

And that, volks, is the dilemma the perfectly healthy roads are confronted with today.