Town hall meeting

[Green Maned Lion]

These are the same concepts that the airlines use. Standardized fleet and maximum revenue space.

These are the same concepts anybody attempting to operate something with a modicum of cost efficiency uses.

The Ford Crown Victoria is an ancient design, its body dating to 1990 and its basic platform dating to 1979. It continues to make up the bulk of police car sales, and Ford has been considering extending its out-of-production date once again because towns have been offering signifigant premiums to continue its production. Why? Because they have a standardized fleet of Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptors which have not recieved even a slight mechanical revision since 2004. In fact, the only difference between a 2004 and a 2010 is the design of the electric window switches and the design of the fuel tank (and most 2004-2007 models have that fuel tank retrofitted).

Greyhound operates, more or less, a fleet of a few classes of identical busses. Taxi fleets usually compose of a fleet of the same brand of car- around here, most fleets are retired Crown Victoria Police Interceptors, a couple of companies use exclusively non-Interceptor Crown Vics and Grand Marquis, another pair use 1998-2003 Lincoln Town Cars, one uses a fleet of brand new Toyota Priuses, and one uses, bizarrely, a fleet of Nissan Quest/Mercury Villager minivans. Most of the big railroads have fleets of standardized diesels and standardized cars. The Commuter roads also have distinct fleets of standardized cars.

And Amtrak wants to standardize its fleet, probably using as many off-the-shelf components as possible. For example, do you think it is cheaper to acquire, say, car window frames if you have an odd dome car fleet of 20 cars using the design... or a fleet of 1800 railcars, all using the exact same window design? If the average rail car uses, say, 80 sheets of glass (20 windows, 4 panes per window), its an order of 1600 pieces of glass cut to specific size (medium batch order) and 400 frames (a small batch order) versus 144,000 sheets of custom glass (a large, mass producting order) and 36,000 window frames (probably also a large mass production order). The cost per unit goes WAY down.

In addition, by having as many components as possible be identical, Amtrak doesn't need to justify keeping a particular type of car on the road due to a repair. The Dome cars went off the road for several reasons. The main one was justifying to Congress the expense of repairing these luxury items of a time gone by.

Let me put it another way. As of now, the Viewliner shell is only being considered for an order of 125 cars with an option for an additional number (not large) of cars that I'd imagine the car builders don't expect Amtrak to take. Now, Amtrak has quoted the price per car as about 2.5 million a car. It doesn't cost 2.5 million a car to build, though. I'd say it costs more like 1.5 million. $125 million to set up the production for it, $187 million to build the cars. Ah, but lets say Amtrak decides to use the Viewliner shell to handle all single level conventional operations, ok?

Well, the short-distance modification will require adding production capability for second vestibule. And the additional car types of LD lounge, SD lounge, LD coach, and SD coach, and SD Cab-coach would cost some additional money, plus a small amount for an SD Business class car. So lets figure the total set up cost would be $200 million. (mostly for the second vestibule)

Well, reflecting a 10% increase in needed capacity, Amtrak needs about 400 short distance coaches, 100 SD business class cars, 110 SD food service cars, 50 SD cab-cars, 130 LD coaches, 30 LD food service cars, 30 diners, 70 baggage cars, 30 baggage dorms, and (considering by the time most of these are built, the Viewliner Is will be worn out) 80 sleepers. That works out to 1030 cars.

Just so we understand each other, after the Stimulus works out, Amtrak currently has 20 diners (19 H, 1 VL), 462 SD coaches (381 Am1, 81 Horizon), 18 cab-cars, 122 LD coaches, 100 SD food service (85 Am1, 15 Horizon), 25 LD food service, 50 sleepers, 65 baggage cars, and 17 "cabbage" cars assigned to non-Talgo trains, or a total of 877 cars. Keep in mind this would increase capacity a bit more than 10%, but we agree they are under capacity now, anyway.

So, with 1030 cars, it would work out to 1.75 billion, or $1.7 million a car. Whereas if we built, say, the additional order of 125+ options (total 150 cars), for $425 million, an order of SD coaches/food service/cab cars of a different design for 1.2 billion, a third order of 130 cars for LD coach for $395 million, 30 LD Dome/food service cars for (2 mil a piece) $260 million, and then replaced the 50 Viewliner Is some time later for $275 million, it would cost $2.56 billion, or $2.48 million a car.

For the same capacity. For the same basic services (all you gain is a cramped dome on top of the lounge). And with considerable more cost since they will vary more technically and thus cost more to maintain.

Plus, look at it from Congresses point of view, some of whom do not think Amtrak should offer sleeper and diner services. Do you think they are more likely to approve an order of 110 cars consisting of sleepers and diners if it costs $445 million or... $187 million?

Amtrak is held to profitability and politicability standards. They have come to accept that. I'd imagine they'd be irritated when a bunch of railfans completely ignored all standards of reason and asked for silliness like that. Its like a student council asking for free soda in the lunch room!

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Look at the sleeper cars VIA bought- the Renaissance cars carry 20 people in 10 rooms (Via SS cars cary the same number, by the way). The Viewliners carry a maximum of 33 in 15 rooms, the Superliners 46 people in 21 rooms. Same car length. The Renaissance LD cars carry 49 people, the Amfleet IIs 60, the Superliner Coach cars 75. While a little less blatant, the VIA LRCs carry 68 passengers, verses the Amfleet I's 70 and the Surfliner's 91.

Viewliner's rated capacity is 30, not 33. The new Viewliner sleepers will carry 2 less, bringing the total down to 28. Note: Does not include the attendant.

And comparing bi-level cars to single level cars is useless.

Amtrak will sell 3 people into the bedrooms with adequate explaination. Therefore, their capacity is 33, not 30. Furthermore, the decrease in capacity in total is 2. The Viewliner has a specific "Attendant room", which will go away and replace a single roomette. The decrease in capacity is 2. Period.

Meanwhile, if you consider the LD trains like the Ocean, well, a typical Ocean consist is baggage, 5 coaches, 8 sleepers, 3 lounges, a diner, a transition car, and a park car. 20 cars, 13 revenue, 6 non-revenue, 1 baggage. 68% revenue to 32% non-revenue, carrying 245 coach passengers and 160 sleeper passengers, 405 passengers total. An average of 20.25 passengers a car. This is the most Amtrak-like LD in VIA's fleet.
Amtrak's most service car intensive trains is the Coast Starlight. The Coast Starlight has 4 coaches, 3 sleepers, 2 lounge cars, a diner, and a baggage car, 11 cars long, 7 to 4, 70% revenue to 30% non revenue, carrying 300 coach passengers and 138 sleeper passengers, 438 passengers total, an average of 39.81 per car (nearly double).

Again, to make a fair comparison you'd have to pick a single level train.

Via ordered the Renn cars (or rather chose to buy them) with 20 person and 49 person capacity. They chose to rebuild their Budd cars to the Nth degree with the capacities they have. This was their choice. Amtrak could have chose to rebuild all of their cars or replace them with cars that have similar capacity. They did not. They chose to replace them with bi-level cars with much more capacity where possile, and with single level cars with some additional capcity where bi-levels did not fit. That was an operating choice. Amtrak chose to buy those bi-level cars and thus operate that train with great efficiency. They could have chosen to replace the heritage cars with similar designs, they could have chosen to replace them all with Viewliner-types that had 60 seats in the coaches and 4 bedroom, 1 handicapped, 9 single-person roomette sleepers holding 19 people. They did not.

The efficiency is the result of Amtrak's choice to order that equipment. If they did not order the bi-level equipment, the Coast Starlight would not be so efficient. And to doubly rebuke your point, I refer to the simple fact that the Cost Starlight's capacity is for 33 more people than the Ocean's. I thus say that the comparison is fair. It is not just current operations that matter. It is all the choices the organizations made of ther past 35 years. VIA's choices were towards luxury, Amtrak's towards financial responsibility.

Lastly, to counter your system loss argument, pfui. CP/CN had cut their service before VIA even came into existance. Just because it didn't happen so suddenly doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

"Green Maned Lion" nice broad side in your last paragraph.

""Amtrak is held to profitability and politicability standards. They have come to accept that. I'd imagine they'd be irritated when a bunch of railfans completely ignored all standards of reason and asked for silliness like that. Its like a student council asking for free soda in the lunch room!""

Amtrak set this town hall meeting up. Issue that were address.

Amtrak Photography and Videography Guildelines.

Amtrak Fleet Strategy.

Long Distance Service.

The reason this meeting was set up was the photography and videography issues. The rest was for the fan club information.

300 seats only 270 people show up. You were welcome to be there. People ask questions, they may not like the answer, but I had an enjoyable weekend.

 

[Erik]

superliner 1 transition sleeper 39023. This was quoted from a sign next to the car. It was dereailed 8/21/02. I thought the transitions were sl 2s.

All Trans/Dorms are Superliner II's, someone made an oops if they called it a Superliner I.

Could it have been one of the former ATSF transition cars (old El Cap coaches) Seems there were numbered in 39000 series.

 

[Steve4031]

superliner 1 transition sleeper 39023. This was quoted from a sign next to the car. It was dereailed 8/21/02. I thought the transitions were sl 2s.

All Trans/Dorms are Superliner II's, someone made an oops if they called it a Superliner I.

Could it have been one of the former ATSF transition cars (old El Cap coaches) Seems there were numbered in 39000 series.

Most definitely not. The Santa Fe hi-levels are one of my favorites. There are several distinguishing characteristics that would ensure that mistake was not made. The most noticeable difference is the Santa Fe cars are shorter than the superliners. Secondly, the hi-levels have fluted sides, the superliners do not.

 

[AlanB]

Look at the sleeper cars VIA bought- the Renaissance cars carry 20 people in 10 rooms (Via SS cars cary the same number, by the way). The Viewliners carry a maximum of 33 in 15 rooms, the Superliners 46 people in 21 rooms. Same car length. The Renaissance LD cars carry 49 people, the Amfleet IIs 60, the Superliner Coach cars 75. While a little less blatant, the VIA LRCs carry 68 passengers, verses the Amfleet I's 70 and the Surfliner's 91.

Viewliner's rated capacity is 30, not 33. The new Viewliner sleepers will carry 2 less, bringing the total down to 28. Note: Does not include the attendant.

And comparing bi-level cars to single level cars is useless.

Amtrak will sell 3 people into the bedrooms with adequate explaination. Therefore, their capacity is 33, not 30. Furthermore, the decrease in capacity in total is 2. The Viewliner has a specific "Attendant room", which will go away and replace a single roomette. The decrease in capacity is 2. Period.

The fact that Amtrak allows people to exceed the rated capacity of the bedrooms does not change its rated capacity.

As for the rest of your statement, I'm not even sure what you're arguing about. I said that the car's capacity will decrease by two and you're telling me exactly the same thing.

Meanwhile, if you consider the LD trains like the Ocean, well, a typical Ocean consist is baggage, 5 coaches, 8 sleepers, 3 lounges, a diner, a transition car, and a park car. 20 cars, 13 revenue, 6 non-revenue, 1 baggage. 68% revenue to 32% non-revenue, carrying 245 coach passengers and 160 sleeper passengers, 405 passengers total. An average of 20.25 passengers a car. This is the most Amtrak-like LD in VIA's fleet.
Amtrak's most service car intensive trains is the Coast Starlight. The Coast Starlight has 4 coaches, 3 sleepers, 2 lounge cars, a diner, and a baggage car, 11 cars long, 7 to 4, 70% revenue to 30% non revenue, carrying 300 coach passengers and 138 sleeper passengers, 438 passengers total, an average of 39.81 per car (nearly double).

Again, to make a fair comparison you'd have to pick a single level train.

Via ordered the Renn cars (or rather chose to buy them) with 20 person and 49 person capacity. They chose to rebuild their Budd cars to the Nth degree with the capacities they have. This was their choice. Amtrak could have chose to rebuild all of their cars or replace them with cars that have similar capacity. They did not. They chose to replace them with bi-level cars with much more capacity where possile, and with single level cars with some additional capcity where bi-levels did not fit. That was an operating choice. Amtrak chose to buy those bi-level cars and thus operate that train with great efficiency. They could have chosen to replace the heritage cars with similar designs, they could have chosen to replace them all with Viewliner-types that had 60 seats in the coaches and 4 bedroom, 1 handicapped, 9 single-person roomette sleepers holding 19 people. They did not.

The efficiency is the result of Amtrak's choice to order that equipment. If they did not order the bi-level equipment, the Coast Starlight would not be so efficient. And to doubly rebuke your point, I refer to the simple fact that the Cost Starlight's capacity is for 33 more people than the Ocean's. I thus say that the comparison is fair. It is not just current operations that matter. It is all the choices the organizations made of ther past 35 years. VIA's choices were towards luxury, Amtrak's towards financial responsibility.

How or why VIA decided not to order bi-level cars does not change the fact that comparing a bi-level train's capacity to a single level train's capacity is not a fair comparison.

And I'm not suggesting that the CS or any other Amtrak train's numbers aren't better than VIA's. I'm also not suggesting that you're wrong when you say that VIA's general capacity for passengers per car isn't lower than Amtrak's when comparing similar cars.

Lastly, to counter your system loss argument, pfui. CP/CN had cut their service before VIA even came into existance. Just because it didn't happen so suddenly doesn't mean it didn't happen.

This does nothing to counter my argument. We're not discussing cuts made by the freight RR's. We're discussing cuts made by VIA Rail and Amtrak. You said “VIA cut half its service over the years.” I showed that Amtrak too cut half of the service it inherited from the freight RR's. Amtrak just did it up front, while VIA has whittled away at it over the years.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

I find myself wondering if there would be advantages to building diners for the eastern long distance trains in the same shells NJT uses for their bilevel commuter cars. There's the argument against using such short cars for intercity coaches since there's inadequate space for a luggage rack, but nobody expects to find luggage racks in dining cars. A dwarf bilevel diner could probably sell more meals to coach passengers, which equals more revenue. (Whether that revenue covers a more expensive car and extra crew members, I don't know.)

 

[gswager]

I am curious if there are any stairs to climb from one car to another through the vestibule? In Viewliner and Superliner, it's a level floor from one car to another.

 

[Ryan]

I am curious if there are any stairs to climb from one car to another through the vestibule? In Viewliner and Superliner, it's a level floor from one car to another.

In the NJT bi-levels? There are no stairs in the vestibule, you enter on the "middle" level and then have to go up or down once you get into the car a bit.

 

[jis]

To GML and Alan....

I think it is generally true that in their LD trains VIA does run more non-rev space than Amtrak does in any of theirs, the Canadian of course being a poster child of that.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

How or why VIA decided not to order bi-level cars does not change the fact that comparing a bi-level train's capacity to a single level train's capacity is not a fair comparison.
And I'm not suggesting that the CS or any other Amtrak train's numbers aren't better than VIA's. I'm also not suggesting that you're wrong when you say that VIA's general capacity for passengers per car isn't lower than Amtrak's when comparing similar cars.

MY point was and is that Amtrak tends towards greater financial responsibility. Amtrak made the choice to go to bi-level thereby allowing them to offer similar capacity with less cars. Via did not. VIA chose to operate using single-level cars throughout its system, resulting in the need to run longer, heavier, and more heavily staffed trains for a given passenger load. As a result, because Amtrak went to higher capacity cars (and yes, Bi levels are higher capacity then single-level! WOW!), they can run a comparable train with about half the cars and 2/3rds the weight.

I can compare this fairly because the bulk of Amtrak's long-distance trains (5 single levels verses 9 bi-levels) are bi-level, while all of VIA's long distance trains are single-level. THEREFORE, the standard Amtrak train is carries people more efficiently then the standard VIA train.

Your point that the bi-level car is so much more capacity capable makes it almost on a different level as that of single-level cars doesn't rebut my point- it affirms it.

Yes, VIAs trains have to be longer because they are single level. And shame on them for it.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

The via rail dome cars are somewhat revenue cars.They do the same thing that the SSL cars that Amtrak uses does. They contain a snack bar so they kinda make money just like the PPC does buy charging for the wine tasting on some trains.

 

[gaspeamtrak]

So there was no Veiwliner order announcement? Mr. Boardman had said there would be and announcement in Feb. which didn't happen and now there was none at the town hall meeting. Is there trouble with the Viewliner order. I was hoping to here of some sort of order of maybe 100 to 150 viewliners? The cars they have are wearing out fast please get going Amtrak!!! PLEASE???

 

[Green Maned Lion]

The via rail dome cars are somewhat revenue cars.They do the same thing that the SSL cars that Amtrak uses does. They contain a snack bar so they kinda make money just like the PPC does buy charging for the wine tasting on some trains.

Definitionally, a revenue car is a car that holds revenue-producing passengers. You can not book a seat in a VIA dome, therefore it is not a revenue car. It is a service car. The revenue it produces is incidental. Like the Sightseer, it loses money.

So there was no Veiwliner order announcement? Mr. Boardman had said there would be and announcement in Feb. which didn't happen and now there was none at the town hall meeting. Is there trouble with the Viewliner order. I was hoping to here of some sort of order of maybe 100 to 150 viewliners? The cars they have are wearing out fast please get going Amtrak!!! PLEASE???

Amtrak has done what they could with regard to the Viewliner order- an RFP has been issued. Car makers have yet to submit bids. They can't act until the car makers respond.

 

[AlanB]

The via rail dome cars are somewhat revenue cars.They do the same thing that the SSL cars that Amtrak uses does. They contain a snack bar so they kinda make money just like the PPC does buy charging for the wine tasting on some trains.

Definitionally, a revenue car is a car that holds revenue-producing passengers. You can not book a seat in a VIA dome, therefore it is not a revenue car. It is a service car. The revenue it produces is incidental. Like the Sightseer, it loses money.

Actually we need to be careful about this.

As stated by Amtrakwolverine, if we're talking about the "dome" cars that only have a cafe downstairs, then yes you are correct. They aren't revenue cars by your definition.

However, the Park car which also has a dome, does indeed meet your definition of revenue car. One can book and pay for sleepers in the Park car.

 

[jis]

However, the Park car which also has a dome, does indeed meet your definition of revenue car. One can book and pay for sleepers in the Park car.

In short Sklyline Domes are not revenue cars. Park Sleeper/Domes are revenue cars, because as Alan mentions above, they have sleeping accommodation that can be occupied by revenue paying passengers. However, less than half the floor space of a Park car is revenue generating. The rest is service space, a lounge and bar under the dome and a observation lounge in the rear. The Canadian typically carries a Diner and a Skyline Dome for each group of 4 or 5 Manor and Chateau Sleepers. Plus it has a Skyline Dome for the 2 or 3 Coaches that it carries up front.

 

[had8ley]

PATH = Port Authority Trans Hudson, also known as the Hudson Tubes many years ago. It's a subway like train that runs from Newark's Penn Station to the World Trade Center. In fact one empty train was crushed by the falling towers. PATH also has a second branch that serves Hoboken, NJ and then runs over to NYC and up 6th Avenue to 34th Street.

It started as the Hudson & Manhattan Railroad but was sucked up by public authority when it hit rock bottom. The name Hudson tubes probably came from the fact that the first name of the original company and the fact that the vast majority of its routes are underground and under the Hudson River thus the "tube" designation. The only places I can think of off hand that it does see daylight is coming into Newark and near the World Trade Center area. The Hoboken terminal did a brisk business in the '50's and '60's but I seldom would ride it in lieu of the Lackawanna ferries named after major cities that the DL&W served. (Binghamton, Elmira, etc.) Towards the end, there was no ferry service on week-ends or at night so you're only alternative was the "tubes" or a bus that loaded near track 1. The ferry docks are still standing next to the magnificently restored depot and New York Waterways terminal still dressed out in an awful paint job that still exists 50 years later. The docks are not hard to spot even from the Manhattan side of the river.

Actually the trains run above ground from just before Journal Square in Jersey City all the way to Newark, a distance of about 5 miles. The trains even run on the NEC's ROW for about a half mile coming into Newark.

And for the moment, one does see daylight upon entering the bathtub at the WTC. But that won't last once all the buildings are fully under construction and the station gets rebuilt. It will go back to being a totally underground station like before.

Finally, they are busy restoring those old ferry slips. I'm not sure if they're done yet, but they should be getting close. Once they are finished, the plans are to once again use those historic slips for the NY Waterways service.

Hey thanks for the update on the ferry docks. It's been a couple of years since I visited Hoboken as I mostly try to ride the thru trains from Dover to NYP; that's a luxury that many would have loved years ago. I don't know who picked the ferry slips color scheme but he must have been as color blind as the guy who chose the original Penn-Central puke green...

 

[MikeM]

I think if Amtrak does this again, your going to have to write down your question. Editorial control.
Please note I did not take notes, I was in the back watching the show.

Again thanks to Amtrak for doing this. Thanks to Trains for helping out. Now If you all could tell me if my AC on my train was single and give me her phone # or get her my phone #. This will be an great weekend.

I think having people submit written questions would be best next time, if for no other reason than hopefully people would get tired of writing some of the epic questions. Also allow for screening out some of the wilder questions.

Agree with your comment about Denver Union Station question - I was on the right side of the room, and everyone near me, myself included, were shaking our heads and wondering what he was thinking, and when would he shut up. I think that was one of the three clear clunkers of the day - the other contestants in my mind were the "let's build dome cars and recreate a 1950's passenger train with viewliners", and "why doesn't Amtrak store an extra train set in ______ (?) to provide backup whenever the Empire Builder is late?". On the last question, I half expected Boardman to harpoon the questioner.

I think it'd be interesting to have a panel discussion with Don Phillips and maybe two other professional reporters asking the questions, allow participants to submit questions to the panel that they could selectively draw from or ignore as appropriate. I thought Don asked some very pointed questions, and would have cheerfully have given up some fan time to let him and others who live the subject do their thing.

 

[MikefromCrete]

I think if Amtrak does this again, your going to have to write down your question. Editorial control.
Please note I did not take notes, I was in the back watching the show.

Again thanks to Amtrak for doing this. Thanks to Trains for helping out. Now If you all could tell me if my AC on my train was single and give me her phone # or get her my phone #. This will be an great weekend.

I think having people submit written questions would be best next time, if for no other reason than hopefully people would get tired of writing some of the epic questions. Also allow for screening out some of the wilder questions.

Agree with your comment about Denver Union Station question - I was on the right side of the room, and everyone near me, myself included, were shaking our heads and wondering what he was thinking, and when would he shut up. I think that was one of the three clear clunkers of the day - the other contestants in my mind were the "let's build dome cars and recreate a 1950's passenger train with viewliners", and "why doesn't Amtrak store an extra train set in ______ (?) to provide backup whenever the Empire Builder is late?". On the last question, I half expected Boardman to harpoon the questioner.

I think it'd be interesting to have a panel discussion with Don Phillips and maybe two other professional reporters asking the questions, allow participants to submit questions to the panel that they could selectively draw from or ignore as appropriate. I thought Don asked some very pointed questions, and would have cheerfully have given up some fan time to let him and others who live the subject do their thing.

I thought things went very well with the questions. There were a few off the wall comments, but a lot less than I have seen at other railfan events. Boardman did almost jump out of his seat at the "Why don't you keep a makeup train at Minneapolis," and "why not take a spare locomotive or a couple of cars siding around the Chicago yards and run a Friday train to Indianapolis or Saturday train to Minneapolis" but other than that most of the questions seem to be well thought out. Some professional grilling from Phillips and other transporation journalists would have been interesting, though.

 

[Karl1459]

GML states a position that Amtrak needs to do to maintain passenger rail service. I think he (and Amtrak if following) are on the right track.

1. Become a serious (abeit niche market) transportation player.

2. Provide a reasonable level of comfort and enjoyment of the trip.

3. Be a frugal as possible while meeting 1 and 2 above.

Building a national reserve fleet of cars and locomotives allows flexibility so Amtrak can be proactive rather than reactive to markets. Standardization helps them be frugal. Dome cars would be a luxury and unneeded expense to the necessity of Amtrak being a serious player.

Oil prices are not going to go down. The costs of building (and maintaining freeways) is becoming more understood and prohibitive. Airlines are of only marginal profitibility and a few failures will raise prices, and leasing costs (risk of default). We are leading to a combination of factors where rail will be the cost effective for medium short to medium distance (150-500 mile) and may be a market specific best option for some true LD travel (Montana for example).

Obama and his relativly rail friendly administration will be gone in 3 or 7 years. A rebound administration will be looking very hard at areas to cut federal spending and without a very strong case for passenger rail being cost effective the subsidies may well disappear.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Obama and his relativly rail friendly administration will be gone in 3 or 7 years. A rebound administration will be looking very hard at areas to cut federal spending and without a very strong case for passenger rail being cost effective the subsidies may well disappear.

Yes, precisely. If Amtrak looks inefficient, it is an easy chopping block since it "loses money".

 

[railiner]

Hey thanks for the update on the ferry docks. It's been a couple of years since I visited Hoboken as I mostly try to ride the thru trains from Dover to NYP; that's a luxury that many would have loved years ago. I don't know who picked the ferry slips color scheme but he must have been as color blind as the guy who chose the original Penn-Central puke green...

Could the green color you are refering to be the oxidized copper structure?