27 replies to this topic

[me_little_me]

I vote for Virginia and North Carolina!

[Anderson]

So do I...though I'd also vote for some of the projects that had early environmental work funded that should be coming to a close.

[Ozark Southern]

Illinois should get some for double-tracking STL-CHI.

[jis]

Aren't we getting a little ahead of ourselves here?

[Ozark Southern]

Aren't we getting a little ahead of ourselves here?

It's impossible to get too far ahead with absolutely baseless speculation.

[afigg]

Aren't we getting a little ahead of ourselves here?

It's impossible to get too far ahead with absolutely baseless speculation.

+1. The threat by Secretary LaHood to potentially redistribute the CA HSR funds is simply a political ploy to push the CA legislature to get off the pot, get the authorization bills passed and get going on the project. Appears to be having the desired effect from the brief new bits I've seen on the topic.

But, if the CA HSR funds were to be redistributed, the funds would have to go to projects where the funds can be fully obligated by September 30, 2012 and fully spent by September, 2017. That puts marked constraints on who could get the funding.

Virginia DC to Richmond would be out, and even with the Richmond to Raleigh segment of the SEHSR corridor submitting a final EIS for a Record of Decision, won't be able to obligate the funds in time. NC could put some of the funds to work on the Raleigh to Charlotte corridor, but the Tea party members in the state legislature would make a major effort to reject the funds.

No, the funds would have to go to states and Amtrak where they could be put to work quickly. For the NEC & Amtrak, the North Portal Bridge project would be at the top of the list. CT for the New Haven-Springfield corridor, PA/Amtrak for the Keystone East, MD for the NEC BWI Airport station rebuild and 4th track, IL for double-tracking the CHI-STL corridor, WA for more Cascades corridor projects, CA for the LOSSAN corridor, with leftovers for VT and ME because they don't need much. Or give Amtrak $500 million to buy a first batch of new single level cars from CAF.

And, what would be a wacky turn of events, if Gov. Walker loses the recall election and the Democrats gain control of the State Senate in WI, to WI to revive the Milwaukee to Madison Hiawatha extension. But this is all pointless, because the CA HSR project should move forward.

[Devil's Advocate]

And, what would be a wacky turn of events, if Gov. Walker loses the recall election and the Democrats gain control of the State Senate in WI, to WI to revive the Milwaukee to Madison Hiawatha extension. But this is all pointless, because the CA HSR project should move forward.

Is Scott Walker actually in trouble? I thought I saw that recent polling had him retaining power after several high profile endorsements from the business community. Is the CA HSR project no longer in serious jeopardy? Everything I've seen in recent months has been about how much of the project has stalled and how close they are to losing their funding.

[George Harris]

Everything I've seen in recent months has been about how much of the project has stalled and how close they are to losing their funding.

They are preaching the funeral of somebody that ain't dead yet, and may not even be that sick.

[Anderson]

Walker is, from what I can tell, likely to survive the recall. As to projects...
1) From what I can tell, the biggest problem with VA is that the legislature is out of session. I do legitimately wonder whether, given the option, McDonnell would pull a special session to get something through here (Richmond works...very oddly). Also, while WAS-RVR might be out, what about going to 110 MPH on RVR-NFK and considering the existing project to be part of the overall project?
2) The biggest hiccup on reviving WI, assuming a Democratic win in WI, is that the legislature there is out of session.
3) There's a part of me that would rather see a $500m single level car order or a large Amtrak bilevel order placed (say, starting with a small coach order to add to the existing 130 bilevels that could be "started" immediately, and then going onto other LD cars). It's sad, but somehow I find myself more excited by lots of incremental improvements at this point than I do any big projects.

[afigg]

Walker is, from what I can tell, likely to survive the recall. As to projects...

Walker is slightly favored to win the recall election, in part because the Republicans and the supporting PACs were outspending the local Democrats by something like a 10:1 margin. But special elections are about turnout, and it comes down to whether more people angry at Walker turn up to vote than people who are not. Walker's opposition to the Milwaukee-Madison rail project is a minor sideshow in the special election and this is not a political board, so leave it at that.

1) From what I can tell, the biggest problem with VA is that the legislature is out of session. I do legitimately wonder whether, given the option, McDonnell would pull a special session to get something through here (Richmond works...very oddly). Also, while WAS-RVR might be out, what about going to 110 MPH on RVR-NFK and considering the existing project to be part of the overall project?
2) The biggest hiccup on reviving WI, assuming a Democratic win in WI, is that the legislature there is out of session.
3) There's a part of me that would rather see a $500m single level car order or a large Amtrak bilevel order placed (say, starting with a small coach order to add to the existing 130 bilevels that could be "started" immediately, and then going onto other LD cars). It's sad, but somehow I find myself more excited by lots of incremental improvements at this point than I do any big projects.

The VA or WI legislature would have little to do with getting the funds. Most of the funds are stimulus grants which don't require state matching, so it is mostly up to the executive branches acting on applications that were previously submitted. The legislatures would mainly be a factor if they opposed the projects.

The main issue is that the funds would HAVE to be obligated by end of September which means all the agreements have to be signed, the EIS process has to be far enough along to qualify. Virginia has only just started the funded EIS process for the DC (actually Alexandria/AF Interlocking) to Richmond corridor. The $75 million that VA got in 2010 for 11 miles of 3rd track is in limbo because CSX and the FRA can't reach an agreement and may be dead for now as far I know. With CSX being an obstacle in NY and VA, the FRA is not likely to redistribute funds to any projects on CSX tracks.

I mentioned WI as a joke because it would be unlikely even if Walker does lose the recall election. There would be very little time to restart the project, redo the agreements, then re-allocate funds back to WI.

The September, 2017 deadline for completing the expenditure of the stimulus funds is a major consideration. Rules out putting funding towards an Amtrak bi-level order because the contract for the 130 bi-level corridor cars is racing against the clock to spend the federal portion of the funds on delivered cars by 2017. An order to CAF would be far easier because the new production run could follow the delivery of the last of the 130 LD cars (plus TBD cars from the option) in later 2015.

This is a moot discussion anyway, because CA will do what it needs to move ahead with CA HSR project. On the other hand, we are likely to see some modest redistributions of leftover funds from the $8 billion and from projects that are stalled (such as the $75 million for the 3rd track in VA).

[Shawn Ryu]

Put ALL MONEY, EVERY LAST PENNY AVAILABLE to Northeast. lets build ONE real HSR before we start working on other corridors.

[Devil's Advocate]

Put ALL MONEY, EVERY LAST PENNY AVAILABLE to Northeast. lets build ONE real HSR before we start working on other corridors.

To the best of my understanding, true HSR would require a whole new much straighter right of way in the Northeast. So are you saying that we should duplicate a system that is already working fine and is within spitting distance of operational fare recovery with a brand new system that will start out tens-of-billions in the red? Seems like there would be plenty of other places better suited to brand new ROW's than the Northeast.

[Ozark Southern]

Put ALL MONEY, EVERY LAST PENNY AVAILABLE to Northeast. lets build ONE real HSR before we start working on other corridors.

To the best of my understanding, true HSR would require a whole new much straighter right of way in the Northeast. So are you saying that we should duplicate a system that is already working fine and is within spitting distance of operational fare recovery with a brand new system that will start out tens-of-billions in the red? Seems like there would be plenty of other places better suited to brand new ROW's than the Northeast.

Agreed, and I think that's essentially what we're doing. We have three HSR corridors that actually show promise of getting high speed trains--California, IL/MI/MO, and NC/VA. I think CA's goal is ambitious, but I actually like what the other two corridors are doing better--increasing speed is secondary to increasing frequencies and reliability. 110MPH is just fine, and easily beats any driving time. The only advantage the car has, then, is the ability to leave whenever you want. Better frequencies strip the car of that advantage, and induce many more people to take the train. 220MPH would be awesome, but I'd rather every train in the country run at 110 before we spend a lot of money to make one or two trains faster than that.

[Shawn Ryu]

Put ALL MONEY, EVERY LAST PENNY AVAILABLE to Northeast. lets build ONE real HSR before we start working on other corridors.

To the best of my understanding, true HSR would require a whole new much straighter right of way in the Northeast. So are you saying that we should duplicate a system that is already working fine and is within spitting distance of operational fare recovery with a brand new system that will start out tens-of-billions in the red? Seems like there would be plenty of other places better suited to brand new ROW's than the Northeast.

Agreed, and I think that's essentially what we're doing. We have three HSR corridors that actually show promise of getting high speed trains--California, IL/MI/MO, and NC/VA. I think CA's goal is ambitious, but I actually like what the other two corridors are doing better--increasing speed is secondary to increasing frequencies and reliability. 110MPH is just fine, and easily beats any driving time. The only advantage the car has, then, is the ability to leave whenever you want. Better frequencies strip the car of that advantage, and induce many more people to take the train. 220MPH would be awesome, but I'd rather every train in the country run at 110 before we spend a lot of money to make one or two trains faster than that.

Money would be better spent on corridors that a lot of people use. More bang for the buck. Build HSR, reduce time between DC and Boston and ridership would go through the roof.

[Devil's Advocate]

Money would be better spent on corridors that a lot of people use. More bang for the buck. Build HSR, reduce time between DC and Boston and ridership would go through the roof.

You just keep saying the same thing without any explanation for how you arrived at that conclusion.

[Shawn Ryu]

Many people are already taking Acela now, The logic says if you cut down the time between DC and Boston by 1/3, which is possible with a true HSR, the ridership would increase and profit will soar.

And I suspect it will by A LOT. Give HSR to region where passenger train is important to maximize the dollars being poured in.

[Devil's Advocate]

Many people are already taking Acela now, The logic says if you cut down the time between DC and Boston by 1/3, which is possible with a true HSR, the ridership would increase and profit will soar. And I suspect it will by A LOT. Give HSR to region where passenger train is important to maximize the dollars being poured in.

1. If many people are already taking the Acela now then the current plan to add more carriages to each consist seems to make good economic sense. It also makes sense to improve curves and track spacing as budgets and maintenance schedules allow. To the best of my understanding that's exactly what Amtrak is trying to do at this point.

2. Logic says that if you start out several billion in the red then you won't be seeing any profits at all unless and until you pay off your massive debt burden, thus turning the closest thing Amtrak has to a self-reliant corridor into yet another funding controversy.

3. Ideally the NEC would be included in planning for a future ROW that can operate at much faster speeds and be funded primarily by private lending. This too is already in progress, although the timing and method of funding is still up in the air.

4. Florida and the Midwest have strong potential for true HSR, but they also have elected anti-rail politicians that are openly hostile to funding passenger rail projects. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

5. Texas also has potential but our history on passenger rail projects is not very encouraging. We're also an oil-centric state that promotes using as much oil as possible, and HSR really doesn't fit into that goal at all. And we're about to lose the one dependably pro-Amtrak politician we had.

6. All things considered I think it makes the most sense to continue to fund California's HSR project, assuming they don't suffer a Proposition Eight style ideological reversal. California has a better track record on actually completing passenger rail projects than many other locations. They also have one of the largest passenger rail customer bases and several pro-rail cities. Their Achilles heel is their state budget, but with enough Federal funding that might not be an insurmountable obstruction. Ideally over time the first few legs would build upon each other and eventually connect the whole state through other funding sources, possibly even reaching into Oregon and Washington.

[Anderson]

Texas,
I agree on most of your points. However, I do disagree on a few of them:
1) The Florida project melted down for a variety of reasons, most surrounding a Governor who went anti-rail more or less out of the blue. However, the Phase I there was never a very good project idea on its own given how little time you cut off of the trip for that much money (i.e. I think you gained 15 minutes from everything after the first $400 million). The fact that the FEC is looking into its own plan says something, too; it's a real shame that there's no way to simply cut FDOT out of the loop here and work directly with the FEC.*
2) The problem with CA's project is its sheer scope and scale. I think the valley plan is good (and, as noted elsewhere, at the very least you can run a limited-stop express down the valley at 125 MPH with it)...the main issue is that there needs to be something, anything, linking LAUS directly to the valley within a sane amount of time and not involving a bus.
3) As to the NEC, I'm not entirely sure what to do there. The NYP-WAS market is, to a large extent, "mined out" right now (i.e. you can add capacity and get more ridership, but we're really down to diminishing returns); the WAS-PHL and PHL-NYP markets are mined out. The big room for improvement is in the NYP-BOS and "through NYP" markets (i.e. PHL-PVD).
4) Another place for improvement would be extending the higher-speed NEC services in several directions (i.e. towards HAR, ALB, and RVR/RVM). The Virginia services show what you can do when you extend the services (i.e. the VA trains are not only massive net positives to the NEC, but from what I can tell, they're pretty close to covering their own costs now even excluding "up the corridor" tickets). The New York State services have an issue insofar as there's no way to "run through" NYP comfortably, and I don't know what sort of market might exist between the Keystone Corridor and WAS/BAL, but in general trying to get even 110 MPH services extended further out would be a good move.

Honestly, I think funding something in CA makes sense...but the CA program threatens to vacuum up all of the HSR funding that is available and then some, and I'm not sure about the business plan there. The big jam is the Bakersfield-LAX connection...which is going to be expensive, whether you do it aimed at 79 MPH or 220 MPH operations. I think that link is necessary, though. But aside from that, there are lots of places to look for substantial incremental service improvements that can probably increase ridership dramatically.


*The question to ask here is whether or not it would have been worth helping the private railroads meet the ATS requirements back in the 40s. If so, then I think helping the FEC make their shot at passenger service would make sense.

Edited by Anderson, 31 May 2012 - 12:54 PM.