Why won't HSR be run by Amtrak?

[birdy]

Its becoming apparent that the new HSR lines won't be run by Amtrak. CEO of Amtrak made a speech last weekend dissing "true" HSR in favor upgraded conventional rail. Yet, administration officials are still speaking firmly of 220 MPH systems. I surmise from this that the plan is still to have true HSR, only Amtrak won't run it.

Why? It seems to me that 90% of Amtrak's problems are lack of money.

 

[RTOlson]

I don't think high-speed rail is worked out enough to determine who the operators will be. I kinda thought Amtrak would be in line for HSR, but it's fair if it has to compete just like other companies and agencies with HSR interests.

High-speed rail is currently envisioned as a superregional transportation solution, but short of a national one. For some regional markets, Amtrak bids to contract its services as an operator. I can imagine a similar situation here.

The other thing is that being an HSR operator/builder probably won't solve Amtrak's money woes. The initial investors in HSR will probably face considerable challenges. That includes investing a huge amount of money into building an infrastructure that might not turn a profit for decades, if ever.

If high-speed rail reaches its potential, I think it will be interesting to see the future of Amtrak. Will it evolve into something newer, faster, greater? Or will it be phased out for something new?

Edit - I think Amtrak's mandate is operate a national passenger rail system. Perhaps improvements made over the entire national rail network would immediately benefit more people and create a faster overall service than proposed HSR solutions.

 

[Steve4031]

Its becoming apparent that the new HSR lines won't be run by Amtrak. CEO of Amtrak made a speech last weekend dissing "true" HSR in favor upgraded conventional rail. Yet, administration officials are still speaking firmly of 220 MPH systems. I surmise from this that the plan is still to have true HSR, only Amtrak won't run it.
Why? It seems to me that 90% of Amtrak's problems are lack of money.

Was this the speech in Illinois on Monday? What were the details?

Can you provide a link?

Thanks

 

[Steve4031]

I just found the link to this story, and answered my own questions. It was from the Chicago Tribune.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/c...0,1724722.story

 

[VentureForth]

Why? It seems to me that 90% of Amtrak's problems are lack of money.

I think 50% of Amtrak's problems are lack of money and 50% is poor management - all the way to Congress. It's like asking the USPS to operate a new parcel service.

 

[VentureForth]

Its becoming apparent that the new HSR lines won't be run by Amtrak. CEO of Amtrak made a speech last weekend dissing "true" HSR in favor upgraded conventional rail. Yet, administration officials are still speaking firmly of 220 MPH systems. I surmise from this that the plan is still to have true HSR, only Amtrak won't run it.

What is the definition of "True" HSR? May be my naitivity but I consider 180 MPH (very possible on upgraded steel wheel technology) is "High Speed". We can't manage our current system very well. What makes anyone think that we can handle a new technology like MagLev? Hey, I'm a proud American through and through, and I relish the accomplishments that Americans have made consistently throughout history. But when it comes to operating a railroad - especially over long distances - we dropped out of the race in the 1960s and had a few runners up until the mid-70s.

If we could build JUST ONE 500-mile long high speed passenger rail corridor with no grade crossings and has an AVERAGE transit speed of greater than 150 MPH, then I think we've made the stepping stone advancement to the next study. There is no reason other than bureaucratic red tape that this can't happen on a - ha ha - fast track.

 

[Dakguy201]

I think Mr. Boardman is just being practical. You can achieve speeds of 90 to 110 mph on the freight right of ways of today with relatively minor improvements. To go much beyond that you need to purchase entirely seperate corridors, much of them in urban areas. Isn't California estimating $45 billion for just the LA/Bay area HSR segment? Even if you accept that number as realistic (I have doubts), what does that imply as the total for the 10 to 15 other corridors?

Sometimes the best is the worst enemy of the good. Amtrak has enough to do to get the corridor speeds and frequencies up without being concerned with HSR.

Just this week the Vice President seemed to make a federally funded college education for EVERY young person an administration goal. He didn't really mean that, of course; as it is we have many cities that have high school graduation rates of less than 50%. I think to say that true HSR is a goal of this administration is the same kind of a situation.

 

[VentureForth]

I don't disagree. Let's get ALL passenger routes up to 110 first then work on dedicated 180 MPH ROWs. A billionaire once said that success can be defined in the simple story, Tortoise and the Haire. The tortoise always wins - every time you read the book.

Baby steps. Slow and steady. But NOT must-complete-$10 B-over-30-years-study kinda slow...

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

The amount Congress gave to HSR is not nearly enough to get anything above what the NEC or Acela services offer-- if at all. IMHO if they can't get the track up to 110mph then they should just use Amtrak. Use Amfleets and the p42's and some new electro units for newly electrified track.

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

Actually, I think it is far better that Amtrak stays out of this.

I know this will upset many here, but I seriously doubt we will have a HSR which speeds along at 220MPH as a result of this current initiative. Therefore, I think this vision will either fail, or be ridiculed for not achieving its promises fully. Something, IMHO, that would be better if Amtrak was not associated with it.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Actually, I think it is far better that Amtrak stays out of this.
I know this will upset many here, but I seriously doubt we will have a HSR which speeds along at 220MPH as a result of this current initiative. Therefore, I think this vision will either fail, or be ridiculed for not achieving its promises fully. Something, IMHO, that would be better if Amtrak was not associated with it.

Very insightful, a valid point. I agree.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Actually, I think it is far better that Amtrak stays out of this.
I know this will upset many here, but I seriously doubt we will have a HSR which speeds along at 220MPH as a result of this current initiative. Therefore, I think this vision will either fail, or be ridiculed for not achieving its promises fully. Something, IMHO, that would be better if Amtrak was not associated with it.

Actually that's exactly why Amtrak should get in on this... if only as a back-burner. There's no way we'll get 220mph trains here, not yet anyway. And when this plan flops (as it will) it is best left to Amtrak to run the new 110mph corridors and upgraded tracks.

 

[volkris]

The political game will never fully fund incremental upgrades enough to get us there anytime soon.

HSR has a better chance of succeeding, I believe, if it's presented as a whole new generation of travel, on par with air and (seriously!) space flight. Divorce it from current rail as much as possible and propose a moon shot-style endeavor to get the US the newest, slickest, most high-tech HSR in the world. It doesn't have to actually BE that, just have the ring of that.

Part of that is giving the impression of leaving Amtrak behind with bus travel... hell, lump car travel in with that to make GML happy. Form a new brand to ostensibly oversee science and technology behind the new lines, and to manage the rollout and operation.

It can be actually managed by whatever individuals you want, but keep the Amtrak name far, far away.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

HSR has a better chance of succeeding, I believe, if it's presented as a whole new generation of travel, on par with air and (seriously!) space flight. Divorce it from current rail as much as possible and propose a moon shot-style endeavor to get the US the newest, slickest, most high-tech HSR in the world. It doesn't have to actually BE that, just have the ring of that.

With the concept of not actually having the best HSR in the world, just pretending, it sounds to me like you consider the existing Acela all the passenger rail improvement the US will ever need.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Let's get ALL passenger routes up to 110 first then work on dedicated 180 MPH ROWs.

Does this mean that until the Acela Express manages to reach 110 MPH in revenue service in Metro North territory in the existing alignment (which is generally assumed to be impossible) you oppose constructing new HSR alignments?

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

I think Mr. Boardman is just being practical. You can achieve speeds of 90 to 110 mph on the freight right of ways of today with relatively minor improvements. To go much beyond that you need to purchase entirely seperate corridors, much of them in urban areas.

On the New York City to Chicago (or just Gary IN, following the conventional rail ROW from Gary into downtown Chicago) as the crow flies route, are more than 10%-20% of the miles through urban areas?

 

[volkris]

With the concept of not actually having the best HSR in the world, just pretending, it sounds to me like you consider the existing Acela all the passenger rail improvement the US will ever need.

No, I don't think Acela is nearly shiny enough to hold up as the high tech travel method of the future. At most it and its popularity can be used as an example of success that slick bullet trains can vault past.

Anyway, my main point is that selling HSR to the public can, in my opinion, be best done not through incremental upgrades, but through the concept of a whole new program. For better or worse politics requires such theatrics, and it could be exactly the same people running the new system, but it should be presented as brand new and not just an addition to Amtrak.

The the minor point is that we don't necessarily have to be best in the world. Surely others have huge head starts, and it's not necessarily the prudent course to try to get ahead of them for the sake of getting ahead of them, especially considering different needs of different countries. No, Acela doesn't cut it. We should at least get into the same class as the others... we just don't need to insist on immediately setting the curve.

 

[GP35]

Why? It seems to me that 90% of Amtrak's problems are lack of money.

I think 50% of Amtrak's problems are lack of money and 50% is poor management - all the way to Congress. It's like asking the USPS to operate a new parcel service.

Already.... We should just pay the French to buiild it and maybe run it.

 

[Mark]

A few weeks ago I was on the EB returning to Chicago. I had a pretty nice attendant working my car, (the train was still running short from MSP at this point), so when I saw the opportunity I asked him how long he worked for Amtrak, etc., to break the ice. Eventually we wound up talking about the California High Speed Rail project. He was pretty adamant that it would happen and that Amtrak would be selected as the initial operator. He told me that he had heard through company circles that Amtrak and the State of California were already starting the initial negotiations. Now I know this is only hearsay but it did come from an Amtrak employee so we can take that for what its worth.

 

[birdy]

A few weeks ago I was on the EB returning to Chicago. I had a pretty nice attendant working my car, (the train was still running short from MSP at this point), so when I saw the opportunity I asked him how long he worked for Amtrak, etc., to break the ice. Eventually we wound up talking about the California High Speed Rail project. He was pretty adamant that it would happen and that Amtrak would be selected as the initial operator. He told me that he had heard through company circles that Amtrak and the State of California were already starting the initial negotiations. Now I know this is only hearsay but it did come from an Amtrak employee so we can take that for what its worth.

Well, that's good, but if so, why is Mr. Boardman so negative? I don't see why we have to restart the business plan with this thing, or somehow, someway, pretend that this is something that has to be run by a private concessionaire when it has to be built almost entirely with public money. Finding out that co-pilots of passenger jets might be paid as little as 16K per year makes unionized labor look better and better to me.

Still, I'm just amazed at the defeatist talk. Turkey now has HSR. The technology is 25 years old. We can build a 250-300 mile line anywhere outside of the coasts for the cost of our wars for a month. (I'm not expressing an anti-war sentiment here; I happen to support both of them. I'm just putting things in perspective). As a matter of fact, as I examine the recent budget proposals, the plan to raise capital gains tax to 20% for high income taxpayers would pay for a very aggressive build out, $117 billion over 10 years. Total transportation spending is only 3% of the federal budget anyway.

When did we just give up?

 

[Green Maned Lion]

A few weeks ago I was on the EB returning to Chicago. I had a pretty nice attendant working my car, (the train was still running short from MSP at this point), so when I saw the opportunity I asked him how long he worked for Amtrak, etc., to break the ice. Eventually we wound up talking about the California High Speed Rail project. He was pretty adamant that it would happen and that Amtrak would be selected as the initial operator. He told me that he had heard through company circles that Amtrak and the State of California were already starting the initial negotiations. Now I know this is only hearsay but it did come from an Amtrak employee so we can take that for what its worth.

After the beating Veolia Transportation took last year from the Metrolink disaster, Amtrak is the best known and most respected contract rail operator in the country. Obviously California, who is already pretty satisfied with how they operate CalTRAIN and Amtrak California, would look to Amtrak to operate the HSR. Unless they want to go the route people go in the east for running these things- doing it on their own.

 

[RTOlson]

^^

While Caltrans and various other agencies operating passenger rail in California contract with Amtrak, it's not all roses. There was a recent complaint and report where Caltrans alleged Amtrak was improperly using the Oakland maintenance facility paid with taxpayer dollars for third-party maintenance.

birdy - I don't think you're seeing people "give up" on high-speed rail. For all of its possibilities and likely advantages, there are a lot of questions about high-speed rail that need to be answered.

It could be a matter of "build it and they will ride," but I think it's going to require a little more deliberation than that.

 

[Tony]

HSR has a better chance of succeeding, I believe, if it's presented as a whole new generation of travel, on par with air and (seriously!) space flight. Divorce it from current rail as much as possible and propose a moon shot-style endeavor to get the US the newest, slickest, most high-tech HSR in the world. It doesn't have to actually BE that, just have the ring of that.

A moon shot style endeavor? You mean the tax payers pay to build a HSR, the train makes the run a just few times, and then we abandon it?

I guess the HSR could then be retired to the new Air, Space, and Rail museum in Washington.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

A few weeks ago I was on the EB returning to Chicago. I had a pretty nice attendant working my car, (the train was still running short from MSP at this point), so when I saw the opportunity I asked him how long he worked for Amtrak, etc., to break the ice. Eventually we wound up talking about the California High Speed Rail project. He was pretty adamant that it would happen and that Amtrak would be selected as the initial operator. He told me that he had heard through company circles that Amtrak and the State of California were already starting the initial negotiations. Now I know this is only hearsay but it did come from an Amtrak employee so we can take that for what its worth.

After the beating Veolia Transportation took last year from the Metrolink disaster, Amtrak is the best known and most respected contract rail operator in the country. Obviously California, who is already pretty satisfied with how they operate CalTRAIN and Amtrak California, would look to Amtrak to operate the HSR. Unless they want to go the route people go in the east for running these things- doing it on their own.

Well as for Veolia, in Alabama that name is strongly associated with garbage pickup, since Veolia Environmental, another sub-company in Veolia Inc. has majority market share. I think its just another instance of a big company eating up smaller companies and this weakens the ability for the company to always be in the loop and on-top of all the details.

I believe HSR will be open to bidding by operating companies, If Amtrak bids the best or no one else bids Amtrak will run it. I also believe if at any point there is some sort of failure in operations the systems will be dumped on Amtrak.

 

[birdy]

^^While Caltrans and various other agencies operating passenger rail in California contract with Amtrak, it's not all roses. There was a recent complaint and report where Caltrans alleged Amtrak was improperly using the Oakland maintenance facility paid with taxpayer dollars for third-party maintenance.

birdy - I don't think you're seeing people "give up" on high-speed rail. For all of its possibilities and likely advantages, there are a lot of questions about high-speed rail that need to be answered.

It could be a matter of "build it and they will ride," but I think it's going to require a little more deliberation than that.

Well, I respectfully disagree. The usage pattern is fairly predictable: HSR will kill off competing air traffic within about 320 miles. So you can just assume that the service will capture the passengers making those hour long 737 flights. In addition to that, you will see some informal use by affluent people for daily commuting for stations less than an hour apart. In addition to that you can expect some organic traffic growth in the mid to high single digits on average over the years. Little old half-baked Acela puts the lie to the "America is different" argument as it has captured over 60% market share.

Obviously, you want to avoid building marginal lines, but since we don't have any at all, that should be easy. If the top twenty lines would probably work, the top 8 lines would almost certainly work.