Cape Flyer

[CRail]

Rail service is contracted by the Commonwealth. If Mass Coastal went belly up the state would hire another carrier to run the trash train and serve the military base. Cape Flyer service has nothing to do with any of that.

[BandA]

Is MC / CCCR doing a good job? Have the IP issues affected local service?

If MC went belly up, they could hire GU or someone like Morristown & Eire which used to run the Maine Eastern. Getting both the freight service and the tourist train is the hard part. Heck imagine if they found some whiz-bang operator that wanted to run freight, a dinner train, and the Cape Flyer! The T/Keolis would hate that.

[Safetee]

There are many ways to make lots of money on cape cod. Unfortunately, running trains isn't one of them.

[BandA]

Trash train must be profitable or they wouldn't run it.

[MickD]

The Flyer has done better than just break even since
second year it ran...albeit not be stupendous numbers..
but it gets the ridership it needs to make the numbers work..

[Arborwayfan]

If the Cape Flyer breaks even or even makes a little profit for CCRTA, isn't that because the state only charges them part of the cost of maintaining and upgrading the railroad? Ie the trains cover their avoidable costs but they only work because the railroad exists without the trains having to cover its whole cost? Is it the same with Mass Coastal trains (including its scenic operations), with them pay $x per train mile or some such payment based on their relatively light use of the infrastructure? Surely, for example, the new bridge in Wareham was paid for from some state appropriation.

My overall question: how much of the cost of having a railroad (ROW, roadbed, track, signals where they exist, etc.) to and on Cape Cod is covered by railroad operating revenue and how much is covered by state appropriations?

[Safetee]

mass dot lion share

[Arborwayfan]

I thought so. That doesn't meant the Flyer is a bad idea; if anything, it would probably be good for MassDot of the Flyer ran more, and therefore paid more to help support the capital costs. Ditto for Mass Coastal. And roads work more or less the same way, even when they are toll roads: the state puts the road there and anyone can use it as little as they want without having to pay the whole cost of having the road. But it's good to know what we mean when we say a service is breaking even.

[BandA]

Railroad ties last 30-40 years I think, and in the Cape Cod area drainage should be decent? (Hopefully creosote doesn't affect well water ) So if you re-build it and they come 15 years from now it is still a worthwhile project. But if they never come then it is wasted money.

I assume the Cape Flyer is heavily subsidized by grants, and that if those went away it would be in big trouble. The structure of having 3 transportation agencies involved in a service makes it harder to keep it running well, if any of the 3 (CCRTA, MBTA/Keolis, or MassDOT) becomes disinterested there is risk.

[Falmouth Secondary to Otis]

As previously written Cahir has promoted the Cape Flyer over the years as a seasonal service that operates without a subsidy and generates a small profit, making it self sufficient financially. The exception to that was the initial year of operation when service was extended to Columbus day and ran at a loss after Labor day. Increasing service during the regular summer season should be tried to increase ridership and help reduce traffic congestion, which in turn would also bring in extra operational revenue as well.

[Safetee]

does the flyer in fact cover all the marginal costs of its' crews and fuel etc as well as all the costs of the related mass dot track and signal work from hyannis to middleboro and the cost of all the train equipment, plus make a profit? if true, that is truly an amazing operation.

[Falmouth Secondary to Otis]

does the flyer in fact cover all the marginal costs of its' crews and fuel etc as well as all the costs of the related mass dot track and signal work from hyannis to middleboro and the cost of all the train equipment, plus make a profit? if true, that is truly an amazing operation.

I believe all the operating costs are covered and everything else you mentioned is the property of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, so I don't see how it could possibly cover any of the infrastructure costs. Of course you can email Tom Cahir - [email protected] to ask that question and maybe he'll respond with a answer.

[Arborwayfan]

Summing up: Fares more than cover all of CCRTA's costs for operating the train, consisting of (a) whatever the T charges CCRTA for the equipment and crews, (b) whatever MassDOT charges CCRTA for the use of the track, which is only a small share of what MassDOT spends to maintain it (including big items like that Wareham Bridge spread out over a long period of years), and maybe (c) the cost of advertising etc specific to this train (though those might be rolled into CCRTA's general budget and are probably small in any case. The train is more or less like a bus operating over a very lightly-used public road that needs more public money for maintenance than it generates in gas taxes or tolls.

Question: If fares cover the marginal cost of the Cape Flyer on its present schedule, is there any chance that fares could also cover the costs of operating Mass Coastal or successor private trains from Hyannis to Middleborough on the other days of the week in the summer? I.e. could the resident scenic operator on the Cape offer connecting service when the Flyer doesn't run, and earn enough to come out ahead by covering more of the ownership and long-term maintenance costs of their equipment, getting more hours and pay for their employees, etc., even if the company didn't make a big profit? Would people be willing to change at Middleborough?

[Safetee]

I think it would be wonderful to actually see the real "covered" costs of the Cape trains as opposed to the assumed covered costs. My impression is that there was enormous political pressure for the service over many years and as a consequence finally somebody close to the golden dome said "Fine, we're from Missouri, if you can meet "this criteria" season after season we'll do it." I tend to think that the cash recovery criteria threshold developed for the Flyer is very low thereby insuring success.

[Arborwayfan]

So what you are saying, Safetee, is that you suspect that either the T is charging less for equipment and crews than it actually costs, or MassDOT is charging an unreasonably low price for the track? Those are the two ways that I can see that the operating costs could be being subsidized without saying so.

Are you saying that the Flyer shouldn't be said to be covering its costs unless it brings in enough to pay back the state for all improvements that were made to allow the Flyer in some short period of time?

Are you saying that the Flyer shouldn't be said to be covering its costs unless it brings in enough to pay for all the costs of owning and maintaining the railroad except whatever MassCoastal pays?

I don't think anyone is saying that the Flyer's ticket revenue is covering either of those things.