FY14 Budget, FY15 Budget Request, FY14-18 5Yr Plan Documnt

[Paulus]

A couple notes: Very roughly, the marginal costs of running a train (counting only fuel, T&E and OBS crew and labor, host RR MoW, host RR performance incentives, commissary, car and locomotive maintenance and turnaround, and MoW support) come out as follows: For long distance trains: $47.08 per train-mile, for the NEC $45.05/mile, and for state supported services $30.74.

I'm a bit surprised that fuel and power are higher on the NEC than for state supported services, ($9.87 for LD, $6.12 for NEC, $5.29 for state supported), but the AEM-7 is a power hog and I strongly suspect that the Acela is as well; hopefully we should see those numbers decline as the ACS-64 and Acela II enter service. Long distance trains will trend high due to the Auto Train if no other reason, though I don't think that's the sole reason for such a sufficiently higher sum.

Ignoring the Auto Train, using FRA data for train miles (unfortunately rounded to the nearest 10,000), the best performing long distance train in terms of ticket revenue per train-mile for the first quarter of FY2014 is the Coast Starlight, edging out the Lake Shore Limited ($39.52 vs $39.23). Again discounting the Auto Train, the average revenue was $30.44. I'm a bit surprised at how close the Palmetto is to the Silver Star in terms of revenue though.

Palmetto $28.46

Silver Meteor $37.74

Silver Star $32.16

For comparison's sake, the Acela earned $176.71/mile, the Regionals $166.07 (I think, numbers might be wonky on this one), Auto Train $109.47, the Pennsylvanian $39.90, the Surfliner $39.67, the Carolinian $38.98, and the San Joaquins $29.65.

 

[neroden]

I'm a bit surprised that fuel and power are higher on the NEC than for state supported services, ($9.87 for LD, $6.12 for NEC, $5.29 for state supported), but the AEM-7 is a power hog and I strongly suspect that the Acela is as well; hopefully we should see those numbers decline as the ACS-64 and Acela II enter service.

The ACS-64 should have huge improvements in net power usage, particularly over the AEM-7-DCs. Reports are that the regenerative braking can bring the train down to 1 mph. The headlights are LED.

Let's hope that the "125 mph corridor diesels" also give large improvements in net fuel usage. Of course, this will leave the so-called LD trains hampered by the oldest and least efficient engines.

Long distance trains will trend high due to the Auto Train if no other reason, though I don't think that's the sole reason for such a sufficiently higher sum.

(1) "LD" trains are longer than corridor trains (often 3 times as long or more), so heavier, so more fuel usage

(2) Idling, or starting-and-stopping, while waiting for bad dispatching, is a good way to waste fuel. The persistent delays on the "LD" trains cost money on the expenses side as well as on the revenues side.

(3) Mountains. Can you get separate numbers for the different routes? I'd expect costs to run higher on the mountain crossing trains than on the "Water Level Route".

It's also worth noting that most of Amtrak's rolling stock probably has pretty awful HEP usage. The A/C is obsolete and so is the lighting. Either the Amfleets or the Superliners are likely to be the worst.

Ignoring the Auto Train, using FRA data for train miles (unfortunately rounded to the nearest 10,000), the best performing long distance train in terms of ticket revenue per train-mile for the first quarter of FY2014 is the Coast Starlight, edging out the Lake Shore Limited ($39.52 vs $39.23).

Culturally speaking, this doesn't surprise me. California/Oregon/Washington seems fairly fertile ground for a lot of people to pay a lot for train tickets, as does NY to Chicago.

Again discounting the Auto Train, the average revenue was $30.44. I'm a bit surprised at how close the Palmetto is to the Silver Star in terms of revenue though.

Palmetto $28.46

Silver Meteor $37.74

Silver Star $32.16

the Pennsylvanian $39.90, the Surfliner $39.67, the Carolinian $38.98, and the San Joaquins $29.65.

So the "better" LD trains are in line with the state-supported corridor trains on ticket revenue per train-mile. This does not surprise me. Let me guess, the transcon trains are bringing the average for LD trains down?

 

[Paulus]

I'm a bit surprised that fuel and power are higher on the NEC than for state supported services, ($9.87 for LD, $6.12 for NEC, $5.29 for state supported), but the AEM-7 is a power hog and I strongly suspect that the Acela is as well; hopefully we should see those numbers decline as the ACS-64 and Acela II enter service.

The ACS-64 should have huge improvements in net power usage, particularly over the AEM-7-DCs. Reports are that the regenerative braking can bring the train down to 1 mph. The headlights are LED.

The AEM-7 is ridiculous on power usage, it's ≥50kWh per mile if I remember right, which is first generation Shinkansen levels.

(3) Mountains. Can you get separate numbers for the different routes? I'd expect costs to run higher on the mountain crossing trains than on the "Water Level Route".

The only one I've ever seen it broken out for like this is the Zephyr in its PIP.

So the "better" LD trains are in line with the state-supported corridor trains on ticket revenue per train-mile. This does not surprise me. Let me guess, the transcon trains are bringing the average for LD trains down?

Revenue per train mile

Auto Train $109.47

Coast Starlight $39.52

Lake Shore Ltd $39.23

Silver Meteor $37.74

Crescent $34.64

Capitol Limited $34.01

Silver Star $32.16

Empire Builder $30.29

City of NO $29.84

Palmetto $28.46

Texas Eagle $28.19

Southwest Chief $25.87

CA Zephyr $24.81

Cardinal $22.10

Sunset Limited $19.27

Averages out to $30.44 not counting the Auto Train. This is only October through December however.

[Edit]

Ok, here's the entirety of FY2013. Shuttles and Norfolk aren't counted revenue wise, I've no idea where the Buffalo trains are getting counted revenue wise so they're a blank, and the Amtrak VA Regional extensions have their entire train miles counted but the revenue is only passengers who have some portion of the trip south of DC. There is some degree of error inherent to the numbers because they are all rounded to nearest ten thousand train miles.

fy13revenuemile.pdf

 

[neroden]

Ah, so it's the three-a-weeks which have really awful revenue per train-mile. Of course it is. Three-a-week *has to end*.

There's got to be some way to get CSX to agree to daily Cardinal service.

I poked around at the ridership on the Cardinal and found some interesting results: for one thing, nobody is going from Indianapolis to Cincinnati or vice versa. All of the Indianpolis ridership is going to Chicago, basically. Cincy ridership divides into two groups: half is going to Chicago; the other half is going east, divided between Charlottesville, DC, and NY, with bits going to WV, Newark, etc. The cities in West Virginia are similar: people go to Chicago (perhaps to connect to other trains there), or they go to various points east. They don't go to Indianapolis.

In ridership terms, the Cardinal is two corridors, stitched together somewhat uncomfortably. If there were an express route from Cincy to Chicago which bypassed Indianapolis, I'd say use it. (There isn't.)

The eastern corridor is the Cincinnati-East Coast corridor, and I think it has real potential as a route. I don't see a *better* way to get from Cincy to the East. (On second thought, I do -- via Columbus and Pittsburgh -- but I understand that might be quite difficult to get established over CSX, Columbus & Ohio River Railroad, Wheeling & Lake Erie Railroad, and just within Pittsburgh, the Pittsburgh & Ohio Central Railroad and NS. A huge number of upgrades and agreements would be necessary for that.)

As GML noted, Cincy is outperforming Houston in riders / population, and both are served by a mere 3/week each way. There has got to be some way to get daily service on this route.

---

The California Zephyr doesn't seem to be the source of the very high average fuel usage on the "LD" average: from the PIP it only comes out to $6.83, so that means mountains can't be a huge source of the problem (it runs through two sets of mountains). Could the high numbers be coming entirely from the Auto Train? Or maybe it is delays or something similar, in which case you'd expect high numbers from whichever trains were delayed most last month.

 

[Paulus]

Note that I updated while you were posting to include information for (almost) all trains for the entry of Fiscal Year 2013. For the long distance trains, they come out as such:

Auto Train $111.37

Coast Starlight $41.95

Lake Shore Limited $39.66

Silver Meteor $38.78

Capitol Limited $37.50

Empire Builder $36.23

Crescent $32.89

Silver Star $31.57

City of New Orleans $31.53

Texas Eagle $29.73

Palmetto $29.39

California Zephyr $28.01

Southwest Chief $27.02

Cardinal $21.48

Sunset Limited $19.18

 

[neroden]

I've no idea where the Buffalo trains are getting counted revenue wise so they're a blank,

All NY-Niagara Falls services are counted as "Maple Leaf". Further confusing the issue, Niagara Falls-Toronto services AREN'T counted as "Maple Leaf" because the revenue goes to VIA.... (as do the train-miles of operation, I would assume)
This means they're actually getting revenue of $23.56 / train mile. (Not counting whatever VIA is getting.)

 

[afigg]

Ah, so it's the three-a-weeks which have really awful revenue per train-mile. Of course it is. Three-a-week *has to end*.

There's got to be some way to get CSX to agree to daily Cardinal service.

I poked around at the ridership on the Cardinal and found some interesting results: for one thing, nobody is going from Indianapolis to Cincinnati or vice versa. All of the Indianpolis ridership is going to Chicago, basically. Cincy ridership divides into two groups: half is going to Chicago; the other half is going east, divided between Charlottesville, DC, and NY, with bits going to WV, Newark, etc. The cities in West Virginia are similar: people go to Chicago (perhaps to connect to other trains there), or they go to various points east. They don't go to Indianapolis.

In ridership terms, the Cardinal is two corridors, stitched together somewhat uncomfortably. If there were an express route from Cincy to Chicago which bypassed Indianapolis, I'd say use it. (There isn't.)

The eastern corridor is the Cincinnati-East Coast corridor, and I think it has real potential as a route. I don't see a *better* way to get from Cincy to the East. (On second thought, I do -- via Columbus and Pittsburgh -- but I understand that might be quite difficult to get established over CSX, Columbus & Ohio River Railroad, Wheeling & Lake Erie Railroad, and just within Pittsburgh, the Pittsburgh & Ohio Central Railroad and NS. A huge number of upgrades and agreements would be necessary for that.)

With regards to a daily Cardinal, the Buckingham Branch situation will be improved when the VA funded improvements are completed. Whenever that will be. Changing to a more reliable route into CHI appears to be the only other route improvement on the horizon between Orange, VA and CHI.

Looking at the NARP stats for CIN and IND, it is striking how many in IND are just going to CHI. However, those stats include the 4 day a week Hoosier State which distorts the Trips by Length bar chart distribution because there are 3 days where trips east of IND are an option. Even accounting for that, yes, there are not many in IND or in Lafayette, IN taking the Cardinal eastward.

As for a different route between CIN and WAS, the current route is getting pretty good financial support for track improvements from VA for both the NS and BBRR segments and has political advocates for a daily Cardinal service in WV. The current political leadership at the state level in Ohio, of course, is not going to provide any assistance at all towards a re-route from CIN for restored stations or track improvements for better CIN-NEC service. Stick with the route that has support and provides WV-VA-NEC service.

If the Cardinal somehow goes to daily service sometime in the next few years, it will be interesting to compare the ridership numbers and patterns before and after to see the effect of a more available daily service.

 

[Caesar La Rock]

Guys, I don't want to take this off topic, but has Amtrak been using grant money to install LED lights on it's diesels? Reason I ask is because of this video taken by Youtube user, Ken Ramp Jr.

 

[neroden]

Probably not, but who knows? Those are strobes. There's no easy way to tell whether they're LEDs or not from a video, since LED light doesn't look particularly different.

LEDs are generally brighter than whatever they replace (for silly reasons related to how lumen ratings are calculated). LEDs usually don't "dim" up and down easily, but they can be made to..

 

[Caesar La Rock]

They look a whole lot brighter then the strobes found on the P40s in the 90s, which originally had strobes. Kind of surprised to see those on 205 there.

 

[neroden]

It's hard to determine brightness from a video because so much depends on camera settings.

 

[Caesar La Rock]

It's hard to determine brightness from a video because so much depends on camera settings.

Can't argue with that.