A CEO's attention to detail

[Caesar La Rock]

The German government has passed various measures attracting additional passengers through ultra low fare offers, largely against the advice of railroad professionals, and has failed to match these measures with additional capacity or investment.

This comes on top of an unfortunate history of problems with new trains and other equipment and lack of investment if not downsizing and minimalist thinking in other areas, meaning DB was anything but prepared for the additional riders.

I remember when they introduced those, especially when fuel prices were skyrocketing in Europe. I asked myself, so where is DB getting the additional trains from? Even if you want to argue new trains are on the way, and they have a lot of new equipment on the way, they're a few years away at best. So DB as some have stated basically shot themselves in the foot. As far as good rail service in Europe, the countries I hear about are Austria, Netherlands, Spain, and Switzerland.

 

[cirdan]

As far as good rail service in Europe, the countries I hear about are Austria, Netherlands, Spain, and Switzerland.

Not sure about Spain. Trains are extremely comfortable, there I agree. But the overall experience is not that good. With the exception of a few flagship routes, services are typically infrequent with huge gaps in the timetable. On many of the new routes intermediate stations are located well away from downtown areas which cancels out any time savings made by the train being faster. The online booking system is somewhat unfriendly if you don't know the tricks, and there is poor integration between suburban and intercity services. On-train food services have been reduced quite a bit, if not totally eliminated on some routes, which can be a pain on longer journeys. Typically you need to book well in advance as at many times it is impossible to get a ticket on the day of travel. All this may be good for RENFE's bottom line, but is not exactly passenger friendly.

 

[JamesWhitcombRiley]

About CPKC, I turned on C-SPAN today and there was Amtrak honcho Gardner in a House subcommittee saying what a great partnership they have with CPKC. Well, he was responding to a representative from Kansas, and there had been earlier discussion of Baton Rouge, but take it for what you will. Page 69 of the PDF here: Amtrak Operations: Examining the Challenges and Opportunities for Improving Efficiency and Service | Transportation and Infrastructure Committee which also has the video, as does C-SPAN. From June 6, 2023. Many recent topics on these forums got a mention of course. I guess that's what the Rail Passengers Association is for, distilling and analyzing (and advocating), but the 122 page back and forth in the PDF, or the unedited three hour video, has its merits.

 

[Bonser]

It is right there in the Big Book of Amtrak Excuses:

Chapter 23: What to do when there appears to be no rational-sounding excuse.

As has been mentioned before, Amtrak runs on time where it controls the tracks.

 

[AmtrakMaineiac]

As far as good rail service in Europe, the countries I hear about are Austria, Netherlands, Spain, and Switzerland.

It sounds like Italy had a pretty good system, at least when it is not on strike. Although I have no personal experience of it yet (I plan to next year). The various "Freccia*" services sound impressive.

 

[Bostontoallpoints]

A more interesting question might be: If there were no freight railroads to blame, would Amtrak run on time, or would there be another excuse?

I have been on many late trains. Equipment issues with Amtrak caused many of the delays which snowballed into freight delays because of the lost travel window. On the other hand the Northeast Corridor trains run pretty much on time and there is little to no freight traffic on that line.

 

[MARC Rider]

As has been mentioned before, Amtrak runs on time where it controls the tracks.

They've been having some problems in the NEC, mostly due to heat restrictions, track construction, and the occasional moveable bridge having problems. And also catenary being blown down. Usually, the delays are less than 30 minutes, but occasionally they have a doozy.

 

[Herb]

A more interesting question might be: If there were no freight railroads to blame, would Amtrak run on time, or would there be another excuse?

The better question is “If all railroad infrastructure was owned by the Federal and State governments (like our Highway system ) would passenger service run on time? For the answer check out the Swiss National Railroad. They run passenger service and freight. Their passenger service is on time 96% of the time and that is measured at every stop not just at the final destination.

 

[jis]

The better question is “If all railroad infrastructure was owned by the Federal and State governments (like our Highway system ) would passenger service run on time? For the answer check out the Swiss National Railroad. They run passenger service and freight. Their passenger service is on time 96% of the time and that is measured at every stop not just at the final destination.

It will still depend on how stressed the system is. If demand is way more than supply then it will affect OTP among other things. OTOH, if the resources available are more than enough to meet demand then things will work better. Switzerland is fortunate to not have a level of demand that they are unable to handle given the resources available.

In the US, given the mindset and cultural tendencies it is not at all clear that a nationalized infrastructure would be adequately resourced to handle the demand. Heck we can't even get consensus or even a simple majority on nationalizing the infrastructure. So trying to use Switzerland as an example to discuss what might happen in the US at best is a fool's errand.

What will happen will be at best something like on the NEC where trains sometimes do well and sometimes don;t, and things break down every so often. It is all a consequence of insufficient resources to meet demand.

 

[cirdan]

The better question is “If all railroad infrastructure was owned by the Federal and State governments (like our Highway system ) would passenger service run on time? For the answer check out the Swiss National Railroad. They run passenger service and freight. Their passenger service is on time 96% of the time and that is measured at every stop not just at the final destination.

Switzerland has for decades been investing high levels of money in improving the infrastructure and ensuring there is sufficient capacity. Ultimately because this is what the people want.

The network was already mostly electrified by the 1950s. There are several major projects under construction right now that will alleviate pinch points or add capacity. Recently new base tunnels were opened under the Alps. Plus countless less spectacular but equally necessary projects involving for example re-alignment of routes, new stations, new tunnels, even entirely new lines. I don't think there has been a time since the 1980s that there have not been several major projects under construction simultaneously. And there is plenty more in the pipeline. Of course all this costs money, and that money can only be spent because people support it being spent. And they only support it being spent because they use the trains and see the advantages they offer.

To see the opposite there are plenty of African and South American countries where governments took ownership of the railroads that had hitherto been run somehow successfully (when one takes into account the circumstances), and then through general disinterest allowed things to deteriorate to the point that there was hardly anything left at all.

An incompetent corporation will sooner or later have to face the wrath of its shareholders or face bankruptcy. An incompetent government agency protected by a rut of indifference can wriggle on seemingly forever. Especially if the government always has more pressing problems to attend to.

Japan is an example of a country where the railroads are essentially privately owned and still manage to perform to a very high standard.

The differentiating factor is thus not who owns the railroad but what are the public and policy demands placed on it.

 

[AmtrakMaineiac]

It will still depend on how stressed the system is. If demand is way more than supply then it will affect OTP among other things. OTOH, if the resources available are more than enough to meet demand then things will work better.

See Germany for an example of this happening in a government run system.

 

[MARC Rider]

An incompetent corporation will sooner or later have to face the wrath of its shareholders or face bankruptcy. An incompetent government agency protected by a rut of indifference can wriggle on seemingly forever. Especially if the government always has more pressing problems to attend to.

Management of private corporations can also be incompetent, and governments can manage things very well. The shareholders, especially if widely distributed, have little power over the management of corporations. The most that can happen is that the stock prices will go down. Then the shareholder is faced with either bailing out or hoping things will get better. There are investors who buy distressed companies like that and then strip the assets bare, destroying the corporation, but making a lot of money off the sales and the transaction fees. At least government-owned enterprises in democratic countries have to consider facing the wrath of the voters. I imagine in a country like Switzerland, where most people ride the trains at least some of the time, the voters have a great interest in the successful operation of the railroad. In the US, outside of the northeast and certain other large cities, not so many people ride the trains, and so it's less of an issue that voters consider. But it is of some interest, or all of those senators from flyover states wouldn't have raised a stink about the plan for a bus bridge on the Soutwest Chief, and it was a lot easier for the senators to apply pressure to a public company like Amtrak than it would have been for them to do the same to, say, BNSF, if they were running the train.

 

[jis]

In the US indeed the problem is lack of consistent commitment to adequately resource a national passenger rail system, or even a regional one, barring an exception or two. Even in the same region there are significant differences. For example LIRR and MNRR are significantly better funded than NJT, specially on operating budget side of things. No CEO can overcome such hurdles irrespective of whether they are managing a public, private or hybrid outfit. They can only operate the best they can making tough decisions on what parts of the system to abandon to keep the rest running.

 

[lordsigma]

Management of private corporations can also be incompetent, and governments can manage things very well. The shareholders, especially if widely distributed, have little power over the management of corporations. The most that can happen is that the stock prices will go down. Then the shareholder is faced with either bailing out or hoping things will get better. There are investors who buy distressed companies like that and then strip the assets bare, destroying the corporation, but making a lot of money off the sales and the transaction fees. At least government-owned enterprises in democratic countries have to consider facing the wrath of the voters. I imagine in a country like Switzerland, where most people ride the trains at least some of the time, the voters have a great interest in the successful operation of the railroad. In the US, outside of the northeast and certain other large cities, not so many people ride the trains, and so it's less of an issue that voters consider. But it is of some interest, or all of those senators from flyover states wouldn't have raised a stink about the plan for a bus bridge on the Soutwest Chief, and it was a lot easier for the senators to apply pressure to a public company like Amtrak than it would have been for them to do the same to, say, BNSF, if they were running the train.

Indeed with the public sector model the reps can rightly put pressure on management - unfortunately this has the added problem when disfunction at the congressional level trickles downward. Some of the stupid stuff Amtrak management has done like the Southwest Chief bus bridge is not at all detached from what has been described as the main problem with passenger rail in the US - lack of consistent commitment in a national rail system in general and ideologically motivated meddling in Amtrak affairs by certain reps and senators - things like the Mica amendment, amendments requiring Amtrak to operate like a for profit business with cutting expenses as the central focus, constant battling in appropriations fights over whether Amtrak should even exist etc. Amtrak management does not exist in a vacuum and act in what they feel is a politically expedient way to try to defend their subsidy dollars. How can we have a great rail system when we continue to have the debate whether Amtrak and the network in general should even exist at all and are having it again with this House vs. Senate budget debate. Now granted I think the cooler heads will prevail and that the house budget is a non starter but the point is if you didn't have this lack of consistency and ideological disfunction in our US politics (and other things we do in the US) you wouldn't have people like Richard Anderson being brought in to give the impression to a hostile administration and congress that Amtrak is tightening its bootstraps. Not saying that Amtrak board picks and management choices aren't important there's always advocacy when Amtrak itself makes dumb decisions but ultimately as Amtrak is a ward of the state disfunction is going to inevitably trickle downward without some superstar board and management which given what Amtrak can pay limits your candidate pool. Until we decide as a nation that we want and need a great passenger rail system it will always be mediocre at best - and that starts with a sufficient general consensus that we should even have one at all which sadly we still don't have.

 

[cirdan]

. At least government-owned enterprises in democratic countries have to consider facing the wrath of the voters. I imagine in a country like Switzerland, where most people ride the trains at least some of the time, the voters have a great interest in the successful operation of the railroad.

The problem is that to most voters in the US, even to those who agree in principle that a well run rail system is a good thing to have, there are so many other issues that are more important that this will hardly decide who they will vote for and politicians thus do not need fear the wrath of the voters every time a train runs late.

In Switzerland actually some years ago there was a social media sh@tstiorm when a senior member of the government was revealed to have used a helicopter for a trip on which there was a perfectly adequate train connection . I wouldn’t say this episode brought her down but it was one of a series of events that led to the good lady being made to step down

 

[JamesWhitcombRiley]

In Switzerland actually some years ago there was a social media sh@tstiorm when a senior member of the government was revealed to have used a helicopter for a trip on which there was a perfectly adequate train connection . I wouldn’t say this episode brought her down but it was one of a series of events that led to the good lady being made to step down

Helicopter trips were a big part of the press scandals facing the PANYNJ in the early 1990s. The MTA had some too, on a smaller scale. Surprisingly, the PA still has a slightly lower bond rating than NY State. Both are pretty good though, now. The early 1990s were rough.

 

[west point]

You cannot color all Amtrak trains the same for on time and amount of late times.
1. Acela =early - 0 - 9 minutes late = green: 10 -19 minutes late = yellow; 20 - ? black = ??
2. Short NEC Same as Acela
3. long NEC regional early - 24 = green; 26 - ? yellow
4. Michigan early - 14 = green; 15 - ? yellow
5. LD early - 29 = green 30 - 59 = yellow; 1:00 - 2:59 = red; 3:00 - +++ = Black/

So, do not judge all trains the same on the status map for Amtrak.--VIA = ????.

 

[Willbridge]

See Germany for an example of this happening in a government run system.

The German offer of super low fares was imposed on the rail and transit systems by the national legislature after a subsidy for fuel prices for motorists was hurriedly adopted. We've had a miniature counterpart in Colorado with transit systems that are still canceling trips due to the operator shortage and planned maintenance projects, while legislators are coming up with free or steeply discounted rides.

The attention to detail by politicians that resulted from the low fare fiascos may not be all bad. A DRAFT multi-modal transport bill has funding increases. Berliner Zeitung paraphrased from October 17th:

Billions in revenue from the truck toll are to flow into the railways for the first time. The rail network in Germany is partly dilapidated, resulting in train cancellations and delays. From the summer of next year until 2030, particularly heavily congested routes are now to be fundamentally renovated.

Federal Transport Minister Volker Wissing (FDP) had said in mid-September that the federal government wanted to make an additional 2027 billion euros available to the railways by 40. A large part of the funds is to come from the reform of the truck toll.

Stay tuned for legislative sausage making.

 

[Willbridge]

Attention to detail: I've read that Harriman at the UP had a status report telegram from the chief dispatcher on every day that the original City of Portland Streamliner operated. Other trains with meets were instructed to clear the time of the Streamliner by 15 minutes.