SEHSR Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor

SouthernRailway wrote:2. Norfolk Southern is pretty hostile to new passenger train lines, as evidenced by how it's handled the proposed Charlotte Red Line.

And yet Norfolk Southern is doing just fine as a host railroad to Virginia's expanded Intercity service, both along the Blue Ridge and to Norfolk. The key has been to offer win-win upgrades (and to be free to offer them elsewhere on the NS system, in Roanoke's case, on the Virginian line, rather than on the Crescent Corridor where the new ROA train will run) that's all.

SouthernRailway wrote:Plus the NS line through upstate SC has large stretches that are single-track only, and it's a pretty heavily-used freight line. Even if NS approved additional passenger trains, surely it would require capacity increases, paid for by tax dollars.

Yes, they will, and SC will come to see that when they realize how much cheaper rail is when trying to accommodate freight traffic.

The Crescent Corridor between WAS and LYH still has plenty of stretches of single track. That's hardly a stopper for 2x/3x a day. Yes, NS will want stuff, probably nice long sidings, but here the case is that those sidings will also speed container freight to/from the South Carolina Inland Port (and to Charleston). Passengers win, shippers win, intermodal freight wins, but most importantly, NS wins and SC wins.

And political attitudes can change very fast when confronted with big-ticket Interstate projects, as they also did in Virginia along I-81, where there had been a toll-road consensus c.2000. This proved grossly expensive (even as a PPP), and NS raised its hand and offered to move the same number of trucks for much less financial help (help with intermodal yards and passing tracks...much of the Crescent Corridor in Virginia is single-track-with-passing-sidings). Frugality favors rail upgrades. Frugality has a way of winning, particularly when employers/manufacturers start demanding more competitive freight service.

Arlington, SC is not funding passenger rail. Period.

Virginia is a "purple" state, with big-city types in the DC suburbs, who are pro-transit. It is very different than SC.

SC is a very deep red, historically rural state. There are no large cities there and there is no deep history of passenger rail in the state and no political attitudes whatsoever in favor of it today. State government is run by suburban/rural conservatives, who have no use for public transportation in their own lives, too.

Read this past Sunday's Greenville News and tell me where funds for passenger rail will come from, please.

SouthernRailway wrote:Read this past Sunday's Greenville News and tell me where funds for passenger rail will come from, please.

The fact that there was also a Monday issue of the Greenville News says that its publishers, in fact, believe that tomorrow can be different from today, but if we missed news to the contrary, be sure and link it here.

Moderator's Note: Seriously, guys. Give it a rest, or we will. The world is not full of absolutes.

SouthernRailway wrote:Given legislators like Mike Fair, there are enough anti-rail zealots in the legislature who would probably try to block even a train that NC and GA alone funded; see, for example, what some Texas legislators are trying to do to stop even a privately-built HSR line.

While I can certainly see the ability of SC to stop SEHSR, even if it were 100% federally funded do you also believe that they would attempt to block regional service paid for by GA and NC? I guess its certainly possible but even New Hampshire never tried to block the Downeaster outright and the politics seem quite comparable. I think the political analysis of this is helpful. I know South Carolina is certainly among the most conservative states in the country but some of these points are beyond what I thought was going on there.

SouthernRailway wrote:2. Norfolk Southern is pretty hostile to new passenger train lines, as evidenced by how it's handled the proposed Charlotte Red Line. Plus the NS line through upstate SC has large stretches that are single-track only, and it's a pretty heavily-used freight line. Even if NS approved additional passenger trains, surely it would require capacity increases, paid for by tax dollars.

I completely agree there and so I take it that you're postulating that neither NC or GA would be willing to pay for capacity increases on NS tracks in SC. Doable to make improvements in NH using ME tax dollars but I think "down South" that might not be realistic at all. That makes sense. And if you're right then "ok...it won't happen". Thanks for taking the time to write this out. I had assumed to a certain degree that the section traversing SC was minimal and perhaps of sufficient capacity not to require further improvements.

gokeefe, thank you for your post.

For improvements on the NS line: The NS line through upstate SC, on the way between Atlanta and Charlotte, is about 100 miles long. Significant portions of it are single-track. Plus there is a new "inland port" near Greer that results in a lot of freight train activity. I just don't see NC and GA paying for improvements for that track if it's for passenger rail use.

Yes, NH and SC politics are probably somewhat similar, although I would think that SC is more conservative. Didn't Obama carry NH? Plus NH has Boston nearby, which is probably a good traffic generator for rail, since you don't need (or want) a car once you're in Boston itself. Atlanta is SC's equivalent of the nearby big city, but a car there is more or less required, so taking a train there is less feasible than taking one to Boston.

Having spent years involved in politics in the Southeast, including for transit issues, there is unfortunately just a die-hard suburban crowd there that equates passenger rail with socialism. Makes no sense to me, but they do exist.

SouthernRailway wrote:For improvements on the NS line: The NS line through upstate SC, on the way between Atlanta and Charlotte, is about 100 miles long. Significant portions of it are single-track. Plus there is a new "inland port" near Greer that results in a lot of freight train activity. I just don't see NC and GA paying for improvements for that track if it's for passenger rail use.

How about Port of Charleston unwittingly promotes sufficient capacity for passenger rail as a by-product of promoting NS upgrades to/from its Inland Port and SCDOT pays for intermodal freight upgrades as the cheapest way of creating capacity and reducing maintenance costs on I-85 and I-26? That is essentially what happened in Virginia: NS didn't want passenger trains, but it clearly wanted help on the Crescent Corridor (and on the Virginian line). Neither side had to see the deal as "pro-passenger-rail" consensus, it was about maximizing highway and industrial benefits for the lowest costs. (Similar happened in recent Mass-CSX deals). It is an issue of finding aligned interests, not that interests are fundamentally mis-aligned.

SouthernRailway wrote:For improvements on the NS line: The NS line through upstate SC, on the way between Atlanta and Charlotte, is about 100 miles long. Significant portions of it are single-track. Plus there is a new "inland port" near Greer that results in a lot of freight train activity. I just don't see NC and GA paying for improvements for that track if it's for passenger rail use.

Yes, NH and SC politics are probably somewhat similar, although I would think that SC is more conservative. Didn't Obama carry NH? Plus NH has Boston nearby, which is probably a good traffic generator for rail, since you don't need (or want) a car once you're in Boston itself. Atlanta is SC's equivalent of the nearby big city, but a car there is more or less required, so taking a train there is less feasible than taking one to Boston.

Having spent years involved in politics in the Southeast, including for transit issues, there is unfortunately just a die-hard suburban crowd there that equates passenger rail with socialism. Makes no sense to me, but they do exist.

I don't think we can suggest the politics of NH are anyways compatible to the politics of SC. I don't think we can suggest a train between Boston and Maine is similar to a train between Atlanta and Charlotte. I don't think Atlanta as a city is interconnected to other cities by surface transportation as well as Boston. That's probably why Atlanta's Hartsfield Airport is ranked as high in ridership as it is, and why Boston's Logan airport is far down the list.

From a Wiki listing of busiest airports in America:
1 Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport ATL 45,308,685
8 Charlotte Douglas International Airport CLT 21,347,428
18 Logan International Airport BOS 14,721,693

From a Wiki listing of Amtrak train stations in America
6 South Station Boston 1,434,148
23 Back Bay Boston 540,770
24 North Station Boston 475,447
??? Charlotte Charlotte CLT 201,48
??? Atlanta Peachtree Station Atlanta ATL 99,005

I wonder what's the main reason why Atlanta is served so poorly by Amtrak? Could the answer be that Atlanta is much, much farther away from other major US east coast cities than Boston?

From a Wiki listing of the largest cities on America's east coast:
1 New York 20,092,883; Distance from Boston = 216 miles, Distance from Atlanta = 864 miles
6 Philadelphia 6,051,170; Distance from Boston = 320 miles, Distance from Atlanta = 778 miles
7 Washington 6,033,737; Distance from Boston = 439 miles, Distance from Atlanta = 638 miles
8 Miami 5,929,819; Distance from Boston = 1504 miles, Distance from Atlanta = 662 miles
9 Atlanta 5,614,323; Distance from Boston = 1078 miles
10 Boston 4,732,161; Distance from Atlanta = 1078 miles
18 Tampa 2,915,582; Distance from Boston = 1342 miles, Distance from Atlanta = 456 miles
20 Baltimore 2,785,874; Distance from Boston = 401 miles, Distance from Atlanta = 684 miles
22 Charlotte 2,380,314; Distance from Boston = 840 miles, Distance from Atlanta = 245 miles

Note: Boston, on the northern end of the NEC, is closer than Atlanta to all the other east coast cities except those in Florida and specifically Charlotte. Even the Florida cities on this list are farther away from Atlanta than D.C. is from Boston. There's a valid reason why the NEC attracts many riders; it's the relatively short distances between major metros.

Note: Half of all Amtrak riders come from the NEC and more than half of them come from NYC.

Elecitron, I think that we agree. I don't think that a train from SC to Atlanta is comparable to a train from NH to Boston. Since as we both agree, Boston is much more accessible via rail or other public transportation once you're in town, compared to Atlanta, a train to Atlanta won't have the same traffic that a train to Boston would.

For that reason and others, SC is much less likely than NH would be to support a passenger rail line, even if their politics were otherwise equal (and they're not).

SouthernRailway wrote:Elecitron, I think that we agree. I don't think that a train from SC to Atlanta is comparable to a train from NH to Boston. Since as we both agree, Boston is much more accessible via rail or other public transportation once you're in town, compared to Atlanta, a train to Atlanta won't have the same traffic that a train to Boston would.

For that reason and others, SC is much less likely than NH would be to support a passenger rail line, even if their politics were otherwise equal (and they're not).

Yes, I cana agree with that. Additionally I would like to point out that NH doesn't subsidize any Amtrak trains today. If SC decided to subsidize a train, and that is a big if, it'll more likely wish to subsidize an intra-state train from Spartanburg to Columbia to Charleston than an interstate one.
There are very few examples of states subsidizing trains into other states, usually only into a major metro lying on its border, and only one state subsidizes a train through one state to reach a second state.

electricron wrote:There are very few examples of states subsidizing trains into other states, usually only into a major metro lying on its border, and only one state subsidizes a train through one state to reach a second state.

Actually I'm not entirely sure that's true. The Michigan service crosses through Indiana to reach Illinois and I'm certain INDOT doesn't pay a dime towards those trains nor does Amtrak operate them as part of their "basic system".

Another example is the Carolinian which is subsidized by NCDOT at least to WAS without any assistance from VA DRPT even though close to 60% of the track miles are in Virginia. Obviously the District of Columbia doesn't count as a state but that strikes me as a simple technicality.

Also I believe the Vermonter operates through Massachusetts without any support from MassDOT. I believe Amtrak covers operations from SPG to NYP. That's somewhat of a mixed example as one could argue that in effect VTrans is only paying to get the train to SPG and not NYP.

The Carolinian is probably the best example as all others are trains that meet with the NEC within the boundaries of their own state. NCDOT without a doubt is covering operations through Virginia on its own dime. The train comes very close to covering its full operating costs (almost 90% farebox recovery, an amazing feat for a medium distance train in conventional operations).

gokeefe wrote: Actually I'm not entirely sure that's true. The Michigan service crosses through Indiana to reach Illinois and I'm certain INDOT doesn't pay a dime towards those trains nor does Amtrak operate them as part of their "basic system".
Another example is the Carolinian which is subsidized by NCDOT at least to WAS without any assistance from VA DRPT even though close to 60% of the track miles are in Virginia. Obviously the District of Columbia doesn't count as a state but that strikes me as a simple technicality.
Also I believe the Vermonter operates through Massachusetts without any support from MassDOT. I believe Amtrak covers operations from SPG to NYP. That's somewhat of a mixed example as one could argue that in effect VTrans is only paying to get the train to SPG and not NYP.
The Carolinian is probably the best example as all others are trains that meet with the NEC within the boundaries of their own state. NCDOT without a doubt is covering operations through Virginia on its own dime. The train comes very close to covering its full operating costs (almost 90% farebox recovery, an amazing feat for a medium distance train in conventional operations).

You're correct about the Carolinian and the Michigan trains as far as extending beyond border cities and entirely through a neighboring states. The "one" train I was thinking about earlier but didn't list was the Downeaster subsidized entirely by Maine. I consider the Vermonter extending into Massachusetts more akin to extending to a border city (Springfield), which isn't exactly on the border but I believe it is close enough and it also doesn't extend entirely through another state. The Carolinian is much like the various Pennsylvania ,Virginia, and Vermont trains, extensions of NEC regional trains, the entire length of these trains' operations aren't being subsidized by the states. But North Carolina is subsidizing it tentirely through Virginia.

Michigan had been subsiding the Blue Water and the Pere Marquette for some time, and just recently started to subsidize the Wolverines. Michigan's subsidy increased from $8 Million/year to $25 Million/year starting in FY 2014.
Other Michigan services facts;
A) 20 years ago in 1994, MDOT paid just $965,000 in subsidy — $1.5 million when adjusted for inflation. Since that time the subsidy fees have increased 25.9 times.
B) MDOT bought the Kalamazoo-to-Dearborn section from Norfolk Southern for $140 million. It received close to $350 million in federal funds to buy and improve the track for 110 mph operations and will eventually just contribute $37.5 million in state funds.

Thanks for the corrections

electricron wrote:Michigan had been subsiding the Blue Water and the Pere Marquette for some time, and just recently started to subsidize the Wolverines. Michigan's subsidy increased from $8 Million/year to $25 Million/year starting in FY 2014.

Worth remembering that the primary reason for this sudden increase was the adoption of a formula that required equal treatment of state supported services by Amtrak. Consequently Michigan's bill for service went up substantially in a single year. Other states have not nor will they ever see such dramatic increases because they have been paying close to the formula rate all along.

Returning to SEHSR I do think this project will eventually move forward. However it may stop in Charlotte and stay there for quite some time. Both Virginia and North Carolina are obviously supportive and until South Carolina and Georgia see an opportunity for full federal funding I think they'll shy away from any political support of the project. I also think that ultimately these track sections are likely going to be owned by Amtrak as with the NEC. This means that in theory Amtrak will eventually own the former RF&P. That may be decades away but in this analysis it seems like the obvious choice.

First, thanks gokeefe for the details on trains that states like VT, NC, and MI support which cross through significant stretches of other states (MA, VA, and IN, respectively). It isn't just ME supporting across NH, and I'd add about 100miles of OK's Heartland Flyer's 200 miles is in Texas. (SC is 133 miles out of the 258 between Charlotte and Atlanta)

gokeefe wrote:. I also think that ultimately these track sections are likely going to be owned by Amtrak as with the NEC. This means that in theory Amtrak will eventually own the former RF&P. That may be decades away but in this analysis it seems like the obvious choice.

Well, let's just say that large stretches will have government owners. For better or worse, MA and CT own their parts of the NEC, and NC and VA know they have to purchase the CSX S-Line between Petersburg and Raleigh before they up to 110mph.

Here, from Sept 2014, is the VADRPT's thoughts on SEHSR (which, for them, is DC-Charlotte, which includes this picture:

Arlington wrote:First, thanks gokeefe for the details on trains that states like VT, NC, and MI support which cross through significant stretches of other states (MA, VA, and IN, respectively). It isn't just ME supporting across NH, and I'd add about 100miles of OK's Heartland Flyer's 200 miles is in Texas. (SC is 133 miles out of the 258 between Charlotte and Atlanta)

The Heartland Flyer's entire route is 206 miles. About 75 miles is in Texas. Texas today does help subsidize the train, Oklahoma isn't subsidizing the train all by itself.

Purchasing around 150 miles of right-of-way to only achieve 110 mph seems wasteful. How many trains per day would be using it? Carolinian, Silver Star, Silver Meteor, and Palmetto; eight passenger trains per day. I don't believe Amtrak would buy it either, Amtrak would place that task upon both the states of Virginia and North Carolina.