Forbes Article - Amtrak Expansion Will Increase Shipping Costs

Suffice to say, "the faithful" over at another site at which I learned of this article are "not exactly happy":

Forbes

Fair Use:

Long-distance intercity passenger rail should not exist in this country.

First and foremost, this country is too big for passenger rail to be cost-effective in most places, except for connecting dense cities that are a relatively short distance apart. ... In the U.S., Amtrak travels on tracks that primarily transport freight. Passenger rail enthusiasts often complain that freight trains “get in the way” of passenger trains, and that it slows Amtrak service, but the reality is that Amtrak trains receive priority over freight trains and travel much faster than freight trains. As a result, passenger trains cause a traffic-management nightmare for dispatchers, who must weave them in and out of freight trains, which invariably entails freight trains needing to pull over into a siding to let an Amtrak train pass

My take: this article concisely sets forth as to how over the past fifty years the US rail system has, by "rationalizing" plant and adopting new operational strategies such as Precision Railroading (that is the term with which Saint Elwood christened his plans, as distinct from the shortened PSR) to further the efficient movement of freight traffic, adversely affected what limited passenger trains move over these lines. Such is simply recognition that the Class I roads are no longer in the passenger train business, and what business is proffered to them resulting from that "Faustian pact with the Devil" they entered into over fifty years ago, should and will be handled at the sufferance of their freight traffic.

As a result, passenger trains cause a traffic-management nightmare for dispatchers...

Is it really a nightmare, or is it just making things a little more difficult?

In any case, my 5 minutes of Google searching and some really bad napkin math shows that transportation costs account come in around 10% of revenue. According to the FRA, railroads account for 28% of total freight ton-miles in the US. Making the very conservative assumption that freight rail costs the same per ton-mile as other modes (worst case scenario, right?) that means rail freight accounts for 2.8% of the transportation costs.

If our 1 or 2 a day Amtrak results in a 10% increase in rail freight costs (even 1% would be unlikely, IMHO), that would account for 0.28% of transportation costs for goods. So, in a "worse case" scenario, costs on the $1M in materials used to renovate my mansion could increase by $2800.

I largely agree with this quote "long-distance intercity passenger rail should not exist in this country," with the caveat that I am okay with it as long as the true cost of railroads having to put up with the annoyance of Amtrak is paid. Amtrak trains should be treated like how "rush freight" is treated... a higher cost associated with operating it in a normal freight environment.

Funny but when Conrail had the Mohawk and ran vans at 70mph Amtrak at 79mph never was an issue. Could it be Pretty Shitty Railroading and their longer trains that the physical plant cannot handle nor was ever designed for? Could this be the root cause of the delays?? Would it not be better to run say two 6000ft trains instead of one 12000ft? According to some its cheaper because we don't have to pay those crew members to run that second train. But if your tying up your own railroad because you can not get trains over the road how much are you saving??? One Amtrak three time a week in some cases causes this much disruption. Please

We will make this work and blame anything we can if it doesn't.

Remember kids, figures never lie but liars always figure.

Mr. Junkie, the "big unknown" over your territory is how much, if any, of what the State of New York pays Amtrak, and Amtrak in turn pays Chessie, is directed towards access. If some of what the State pays represents access, then you collectively are getting "adversely affected", or in the vernacular, "screwed".

However, if Chessie is simply getting the same payment from Amtrak, however measured, as she gets through Ohio and Indiana (we know neither subsidize anybody's intercity train), then Amtrak simply "gets what they pay for". "We will never know" as such is contained within a bilateral agreement between Amtrak and Chessie; and neither party can be obligated to disclose anything under FOIA.

I know it must hurt personally, being a long-standing, competent, Passenger Engineer, that for reasons outside your control, you cannot expediently "get over the road". I sincerely respect that.

This article was clearly written by someone with ties to the freight railroads or airline industry, or with some other interest in the failure of rail travel. Long distance rail travel is a critical transportation connection for the rural towns along these corridors. And while the service to many of these places is certainly not high quality, the answer is not in scrapping rail altogether, but in investing in and modernizing these services.

A great place to start would be nationalizing the railroads, but I don't think the anti–passenger rail evangelists on this site are ready for that conversation.

I don't think any of the proposed Amtrak expansion has anything to do with the long distance service frequency and so I don't know what this claim is based on.

Matt Johnson wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 1:00 am I don't think any of the proposed Amtrak expansion has anything to do with the long distance service frequency and so I don't know what this claim is based on.

That is a good point. I think what the true point is - is that the writer opposes passenger rail on freight tracks with references to long distance trying to make the point sound more effective. I don’t think the real point is that passenger rail interferes with the road’s ability to operate efficiently but that it rather interferes with them operating at the level of efficiency and margins their shareholders may desire and interferes with the said rationalizations of the plant due to the plant requirements for hosting passenger trains. IE to put it bluntly - it interferes in making cuts some may like to see. An unsurprising point of view from a Wall Street publication. Investors understandably want a return on their investment and there’s nothing wrong with that. And fortunately - they don’t have full say on everything in our society.

I think it’s important for people who may question excesses of Wall Street not to be demo gouging however. There’s nothing bad about wanting a decent return - we all want to be successful in our endeavors and investment is a critical part of the life blood of our economy and financial system. I think the problem today in the digital age in most areas of our society is that most people - from politicians to business people to managers to workers place themselves in bubbles of like mindedness and nodding heads and it’s too easy to tune out opposing view points. This leads to a hardening and rigidity of viewpoints and an inability to consider other alternatives. And it makes compromise and middle ground difficult. Explains a lot of the excesses we have today from our business practices to our hardened polarized politics. Communication is key to a successful society - and is the single most broken thing in society these days. The problem with PSR is not the idea itself but rather that some roads have taken it too far - like other areas of society corporate hallways are just bubbles of like mindedness and yesmen and no one is going to challenge the boss and offer an opposing view that well if we go this far with this cut it might bite us in the rear end down the road. And this bubble syndrome is not unique to corporate board rooms and executive suites by any means.

TurningOfTheWheel wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 4:19 pm This article was clearly written by someone with ties to the freight railroads or airline industry, or with some other interest in the failure of rail travel. Long distance rail travel is a critical transportation connection for the rural towns along these corridors. And while the service to many of these places is certainly not high quality, the answer is not in scrapping rail altogether, but in investing in and modernizing these services.

A great place to start would be nationalizing the railroads, but I don't think the anti–passenger rail evangelists on this site are ready for that conversation.

First, let it be noted the captioned message is quoted in its entirety as all points within such are addressed in this post.

Well Mr. Wheel, there are certainly other sites out there that are more oriented towards advocacy than here.

I suppose that some portion of the "can't drives" residing in, say, Williston ND and who must travel to Minneapolis for a doctor's appointment do find the LD's "critical". What is to me, "dangerous" is that what if there is a similar "can't drive" residing in Dickinson and that person also considers the LD's "critical"? This could lead to a situation of "they got theirs, we want ours" - and back on goes the "North Coast Hiawatha" that the Carter Cuts got rid of.

Again, let us not lose sight that from one who held an entry level Non-Agreement position with a Class I on A-Day, the LD's were not intended to be a "forever". They were intended to be an "ease the pain" transition after, say, about five years (the period that non-joining roads were to continue operating trains under RPSA70) and at that time to start removing them in an orderly manner, i.e. cut the Cardinal and Sunset before the Lake Shore.

However, politicians with names such as Mike Mansfield, Harley Staggers, Frank Church, and Trent Lott all wanted to "bring home some bacon" and coerced Amtrak to add their pet trains to the system. Now allow me to note that Harley's was as useless as the others, but I acknowledge was a small price for his saving the railroad industry with the "Dereg" Act bearing his name.

Now that these "Lions" have all left Congress and it appears that Amtrak has become "just a line item in the Spending Bill", it is simply time to resume what appeared to begin with the Carter Cuts, and with "ease the pain busteetoots" part of the plan (all Amtrak stations, unlike VIA, are accessible by public highway). This will allow the investor-owned Class I industry to operate their roads in a manner so as to maximize their returns to those owners in that they are rid of these intrusions that, based upon authoritative hearsay, hardly pay their "fair share" for access and as such constitute a "taking without just compensation" under the Fifth Amendment. Lest we forget, if the roads start to take the "Gospel According to Saint Elwood" too literally, they will lose customers - and those customers just might be JBH, UPS, FedEx, and "Smiley".

Finally, regarding "nationalization", which presumably to the advocacy community would mean passenger train service would be greatly expanded, that's a "been there, done that, didn't work".

disclaimer: author Long UNP ("S&P outperform" YTD 7-31; UNP down 9.8%, S&P down 13.3%).

This article, and others like it, though speaking with a degree of truth, as a practical matter, speaks in terms of vast and useless generalizations. Here are my observations, applicable to the above-noted Conrail Mohawk Division, part of a broader area with which I was involved in Operations between 1987 and 1990.

In the manner of full disclosure, I am retired from Conrail and receive a pension funded by NS and CSX.

Conrail then, as Class I railroads today, are "network" systems. To the extent any network reflects schedule-specific plans driven by customer commitments, random variation in performance will likely be minimized.

ALL users of our network, including trackage rights tenants, commuter agencies and Amtrak were recognized and treated as "Customers" and their needs were recognized in good faith. Our physical plant reflected its legacy of significant passenger operations, particularly in the territory of the Mohawk Division, with extensive double track. All Main Tracks were signaled with TCS and designed with higher speed crossovers. Running meets and overtakes were typical where Amtrak was involved.

Amtrak benefited from a CR physical plant that was adapted to support premium intermodal and freight services.

Our train Dispatchers were highly skilled in the performance of their craft. Managers were available to discuss unusual situations, and did so regularly, on the premise that problems were better managed by prevention.

Of course, we were less than satisfied with our business relationship with Amtrak, but we took care to address those matters elsewhere. Our Train Dispatchers recognized and faithfully accorded Amtrak its due priority.

As an overview, we would emphasize the importance of efficient handling of Amtrak as a predictor of our own performance of our own premium intermodal freight services, which were extensive. Unusual Amtrak delays were discussed with senior management, on a morning conference six days per week. Handling of Amtrak (and Commuter) priority was a test of our dispatching skill and never discounted "with a wink".

Tangential to all this, I had at times engaged Amtrak on the negotiation or adjustment of its schedules, and at times was offered additional "recovery time", supposedly in the hope of improving Amtrak's statistical performance. Believing in the axiom that "late trains more often than not lose time" - and that Train Dispatchers, in good faith, will use all the schedule time they have been given - I consistently refused the bait.

To the extent that Amtrak seeks to expand its services, the cost of such improvement or facilities as reasonably needed should be underwritten by Amtrak (or the sponsoring agency) with the carrier(s) rightfully asserting their needs IN GOOD FAITH.

I would have thought that a freight railroad would be too embarrassed to admit they can't handle 1 or 2 passenger trains daily.

Mr. Benton, you have a point quite applicable to when Mr. Carey and myself were with the railroad industry. My dates were 6-70 to 12-81.

"The Gospel" was still being "heard from on high" by Saint Elwood, and had not yet been proclaimed to his disciples.

But today, when - at least on paper - every train will meet so that crews can be swapped and "get home under HOS" rather than being tied up away from home, that a yard will be clear to avoid having another train waiting outside Yard Limits and with a crew dying, the interjection of a train running on a fixed schedule and often against the prevailing flow of traffic, can impose quite a burden on a road with a PSR operating plan.

TurningOfTheWheel wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 4:19 pm A great place to start would be nationalizing the railroads, but I don't think the anti–passenger rail evangelists on this site are ready for that conversation.

The amount required to be paid to nationalize the railroads in the nation would be many hundreds of billions of dollars, approaching the vicinity of a trillion. I don't believe that is a wise expenditure of taxpayer funds.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 7:21 am Mr. Benton, you have a point quite applicable to when Mr. Carey and myself were with the railroad industry. My dates were 6-70 to 12-81.

"The Gospel" was still being "heard from on high" by Saint Elwood, and had not yet been proclaimed to his disciples.

But today, when - at least on paper - every train will meet so that crews can be swapped and "get home under HOS" rather than being tied up away from home, that a yard will be clear to avoid having another train waiting outside Yard Limits and with a crew dying, the interjection of a train running on a fixed schedule and often against the prevailing flow of traffic, can impose quite a burden on a road with a PSR operating plan.

And if everyone stays to the schedule looking at you host railroads and Amtrak there shouldn't be a problem. Yet both seem to not make their schedule. Can't have PSR without Schedule.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 7:21 amthe interjection of a train running on a fixed schedule and often against the prevailing flow of traffic, can impose quite a burden on a road with a PSR operating plan.

If you're on a PSR operating plan, the fixed schedule of the passenger move is already part of that plan.

Where it goes haywire and becomes a burden is when said passenger move is running hours late... You've now broken the schedule for everything else that was planned around it.