2018 Midterms and Rail

Here are my rapid fire responses to the midterms and their impact on passenger rail.

West Coast
CA: The incoming governor may shift which segments of CAHSR get built next. When it comes to the main opponents of the project, two out of the three are gone—Valadao and Denham lost their House races but McCarthy will become the new House Minority Leader.

Southwest
NM: Here’s to hoping that Michelle Lujan Grisham is vastly more pro-rail than her predecessor.

Midwest
MN: Maybe the second Chicago-Twin Cities frequency will accelerate now.
WI: Governor No Train is finally ousted and he lost based on a rule that he created that prevented a recount by a certain margin. Serves him right.
IA: Kim Reynolds holding onto the governor’s mansion and soon to be serving a full term means that a Quad Cities-Omaha extension will be off the table for at least another four years.
IL: Once the Quad Cities route gets up and running, the question is which route will be next on the agenda. The Black Hawk revival? Rockford service? Something else?
OH: Oh dear, Mike DeWine had the most ambiguous position out of the four gubernatorial candidates in regards to transit needs, which may mean the status quo in Columbus.

Southeast
AL: Earlier this year, Kay Ivey passed on providing money to reviving the Mobile-New Orleans Gulf Coast Limited route. That seemed to conclude a spat between the governor and the Southern Rail Commission but a couple of weeks later, advocates pressed forward with building a new station in Mobile. Ivey got elected to a full term but is less inclined to even support any type of passenger rail than her predecessor, who at least explored the possibility of a PPP before an impeachment threat forced him to step down.
GA: As to what the new governor will do in advancing passenger rail, your guess is as good as mine. If anything, Georgians may be better off hoping that Sir Richard’s venture serves the Atlanta-Charlotte market in the interim.
FL: It will be up to the public to push Ron DeSantis to implement a statewide rail system to connect Floridians. Over the past six or so years, region after region has expressed its interest in reviving rail service in some capacity. Now is the time to not only provide a system but to also prove that a state can develop on without Amtrak. Don’t just leave everything to Brightline/Virgin.
NC: Roy Cooper can now veto rail-unfriendly legislation, which would be a sigh of relief for mass transit.

Northeast
CT: We shall see if the new governor is more open to funding the Housatonic and New England Central routes now that the Hartford Line is finally up and running. 
MA: Conversely, we’ll also see if Charlie Baker and the legislature are able to produce any new routes in the Bay State.
ME: Hopefully, the Pine Tree State will move out of its neutral position and develop more routes.

Winter Magazine Rants and Raves

Iron and Fire: Iowa Pacific's Ed Ellis (4th Quarter 2015)
The Passenger Train Journal article covered a slew of topics with Ellis but largely talked about the Hoosier State.The author of the PTJ article seemed to lament the fact that Iowa Pacific and Amtrak managed to just coexist rather than cooperate when it comes to the Hoosier State and the Cardinal. The testings and cancellations of the Hoosier State were just two things covered. The major thing that I paid attention to was how Amtrak handled itself on November 23. The westbound Cardinal lost more than 5 1/2 hours in Indianapolis due to a locomotive that ran out of fuel. Amtrak said that the loco wasn't properly fueled in D.C. when #51 switched from electric to diesel but rather than loaning an engine from IP, it decided to wait for a CSX engine. Since IP equipment was attached to #51, the Hoosier State for that evening out of Chicago was also affected While Ellis may not see IP as a rival to Amtrak, someone at Amtrak's headquarters in D.C. surely does--even if it isn't the outgoing CEO himself.

Towards the end of the article, the planned Rutland-Burlington service in Vermont was mentioned and Ellis told PTJ that he was keeping a close eye just in case that state puts the operation of the route up for bidding. It would be water cooler material if Vermont contracts trains service to not one but two operators.

Finally, Ellis is right on by saying that the focus on high speed rail "is totally misplaced" and that there should be hourly service.

Maine Eastern Finale (Railfan & Railroad, February)
As it turns out, the circumstances surrounding the demise of the Maine Eastern excursions are even worse than I feared. ME DOT spokesman Ted Talbot told the Portland Press Herald that the state had no interest in subsidizing any new passenger service. 

So rather than either extending the Downeaster to Rockland or the DOT dropping the ball, the state went out of its way to curtail summer service to an area not served by Amtrak. Paul LePage is even worse than Scott Walker because at least the latter wants to add frequencies between Chicago and Milwaukee. The Pine Tree State's Tea Party executive isn't even interested in expanding the Downeaster by either mileage or frequency. It may very well turn out to be a blown opportunity because if a Democrat succeeds LePage in three years,the new governor may only be focused on extending Downeaster service to Rockland and Augusta and pay no attention what I proposed almost four years ago.

Tackling the Headlines 77

The future of Brunswick-Rockland service
Last week, the state of Maine decided to award the Brunswick-Rockland line to Central Maine & Quebec, and the new operator has no plans to operate passenger service. The two railroads were the only bidders on the state-owned line.

Upon losing the route, MERR owner Morristown & Erie put out a press release announcing that Halloween will be the last day for its excursions (Maine Eastern actually has it as October 25). Afterwards, M&E will receive the passenger equipment back in New Jersey to be used for excursions in that state.

Take: There has to be some kind of endgame here or the ME DOT really dropped the ball here. As some posters on Railroad.net have suggested, perhaps the move to dump Maine Eastern may very well coincide with extended Downeaster service to Rockland. 

I don't find it coincidental at all that Amtrak did a test run along the route last fall and all of a sudden, a number of railfans brought up the possibility of a Downeaster extension. For the last three-plus years, I have recommended that the state of Maine consult the Class II and Class III railroads and pay them to operate passenger service on the METRA model. Furthermore, if a Tea Party governor is relying on Amtrak to expand service in the Pine Tree State, then, it's very unlikely that a Democratic governor in 2019--given the typical political patterns--will think outside of the box by utilizing my suggestion, let alone inviting AIPRO members to run expanded service in Maine in lieu of Amtrak.

L.A. Metro rebranding
The people behind the Los Angeles mass transit system will dump colors in favor of letters by 2024.

Take: I don't know about this because it screams West Coast knockoff of New York's MTA subway lines.

NEC extension?
I stumbled onto this under the radar story a couple of days ago.

Take: When rail advocates talk about extending the Northeast Corridor south to Richmond, what Mr. Wilner mentioned is not what they have in mind.  It looks like the only thing the Senate has learned from its 2012 debacle is to make sure that absolutely no one say anything that could be seen as granting Amtrak special favors. Why does the Senate believe that Amtrak can manage extra trackage when most of the NEC is wear and tear from decades of neglect by the former Pennsylvania and Penn Central Railroads and Amtrak is constantly begging Congress for cash? So Donald Trump can build a hotel and casino next to an expanded Union Station? If this is more about a power play to get back at Keolis for winning the VRE contract as some suggest, then the U.S. Senate would be doing a disservice to Virginia riders.

Marks, MS station to open
Back in 2000, the buzz was about the City of New Orleans stopping between Memphis and Greenwood, MS. For whatever reason, it looked as though the Marks stop was as dead as then-Amtrak president George Warrington's expansion plan but that was until this news item.

Take: Spring 2016, huh? In any case, it's about time.

Tackling the Headlines 55

More curveballs in the Pine Tree State

Just when it looked as though passenger rail was entering a stage of stagnancy in Maine, these reports seemed to contradict previous stories.

Take: Two, count 'em, two operators who want to provide Montreal service are not waiting for D.C. to hand out more money to passenger rail. Given that they would operate at opposite ends of the day means that Northern New England travelers will have a really interesting choice that doesn't even involve the federally designated Boston-Montreal HSR corridor that will serve the heart of New Hampshire.

Raleigh gets $10 million federal grant to help build Union Station

Take: It's better than nothing--and the Amshack idea that was floating around early summer.

Orange Blossom Express update

It seems that Orlando's other commuter train service will take longer to launch.

Take: I thought that the railroad responsible for eventually dispatching the trains would have its ducks in a row.

Rail advocacy in Ontario

Three areas in Ontario--the northern, eastern (operating as one) and southwestern regions--that have seen passenger service reduced or eliminated have developed advocacy groups to promote increased train travel.

Take: This is a good idea given the negative impact of Canadian train service at the national and provincial levels over the last 15 months.

Tackling the Headlines 54

NYC City Council tells MSG to get out--in 2023

Late last month, Big Apple lawmakers finally weighed in on the touchy topic of separating Penn Station and Madison Square Garden.

Take: By nearly unanimously voting to give MSG the door, the city is telling the world that it is committed to building a world-class train station. The vote also means that we will never hear about using an abandoned post office again.

Private carriers interested in passenger service in Maine

Even though things are pretty static in the Pine Tree State now, it may not remain that way for long.

Take: These private carriers just may be the boost that's needed to get frequent train service going in the state.

Out west, they are also looking forward

Meanwhile on the other end of the country, Montanans are not giving up their efforts to have the North Coast Hiawatha restored. Nearly four years ago, a group was formed in response to Amtrak's study and like the groups who responded to the Pioneer study, they vehemently disagreed with the results.

Take: Rail activists and Montana politicians should not only continue to push for restoring the route, but they should also be talking to members of the AIPRO to see how much less it would cost to run the service and to see if their members could use the old CNW route between Chicago and Milwaukee.

Tackling the Headlines 51

Via strike averted
Take: Really good news for Canadians as the summer season is about to get into full gear.

Brunswick-Rockland line's future to be decided soon
Take #1: This is a bit troubling and unfortunate for Maine Eastern. I hope that the passenger requirement remains in place if another operator runs service between the two cities.

Take #2: Depending on who gets the 59-mile line, the ME DOT should partner the new freight operator (not named Pan Am Railways) with an independent passenger entity. The problem with this model is that it would be better off being done with regional routes or in a large state like Texas (and it's something that Congress may want to consider).

Take #3: This brings me to my final point on this topic, if a shortline holding company like Iowa Pacific or Watco bids, then, there would be no need for the previous scenario to take place since the new railroad would simply take over for Maine Eastern. Otherwise, it just makes sense if the Pan Am-Amtrak partnership is further extended east.

Miami's airport station further delayed
Take: This is what a lack of communication can do to a grand project. Besides costs, All Aboard Florida's plan to build a downtown station may force Central Station to take a backseat--even if corridor service and/or additional Amtrak trains call it home.

All Aboard Florida clears another hurdle
Take: Good to see that the controversy with the Mormon Church is behind AAF. The real final hurdle is finding a way to enter Orlando International Airport.

Tackling the Headlines 49

UK government delays awarding of new franchises

Take: This series of botches makes the entire concept of franchising look bad. True Believers and others competition-averse rail watchers are watching, and could use the British government's blunders as reasons to stifle competition on this side of the Atlantic. Given Amtrak management's stated goals to primarily focus on the Northeast Corridor in the long term and the upcoming PRIIA guidelines for states, travelers need more options, not less.

Finally, a layover structure will be built in Brunswick

Take: Hopefully by 2016, Maine Eastern will have solved its financial issues so some guaranteed connectivity can be in place as part of a future Maine passenger rail system that provides seamless transfers between operators.

Texas (finally) gets serious about conventional rail

Take #1: That’s great and all, but what about Houston and College Station? As a matter of fact, the entire concept of the Texas Triangle is ignored when it should be part of the discussion. The Texas DOT should not be punting the Dallas-Houston segment to JR Central because the proposed 220 mph route will serve a different constituency. 

Take #2: Despite its shortcomings, the proposed Texas-Oklahoma plan seriously looks at expansion to cities that either lost Amtrak service in the carrier's early days or haven't had any passenger service since the 1960s. Since Texas politicians nowadays talk about how much of a hindrance the government is, this expansion of rail service is the perfect opportunity for them to use the private sector to its advantage if and when these routes are implemented. Finally, the long-term expansions to Mexico are a nice touch.

Tackling the Headlines 46

For now, very limited Amtrak-Maine Eastern connections 

As it was reported in the February issue of Trains Magazine, connection and funding issues have put a dent in the Downeaster's extension to Brunswick. The preliminary plan by MERR is to cut the number of roundtrips in half from two to one, keep the train overnight in Brunswick, and to connect the afternoon westbound train from Rockland with Downeaster #688/698. MERR's director of operations Gordon Page told Bob Johnston "We have to be careful not to cannibalize our excursion product." The 30-minute rule has been cited as a likely reason for the potential lack of connections between the two railroads.

When it comes to funding, the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority applied for federal grants to leverage state bond money for a shop and for an enclosed three track layover building in a little used railyard near Brunswick, but was unsuccessful on both counts. As a result, the authority is still in search of a funding source.

Take: Oy vey!

Massachusetts is serious about additional trains

Governor Deval Patrick wants to beef up the Bay State's passenger service (go to page 19). He wants the following funded:

• Restoration of the Inland Route (Amtrak)
• Commuter service on the South Coast Route (MBTA)
• Restoration of Cape Cod Service (Iowa Pacific's Cape Rail Line)
• Pittsfield-Berkshires route upgrades (Housatonic)

Take: At least Patrick's a proactive governor. There's a lot to like about the plan because the governor is getting other railroads involved. However, New England Central Railway's Central Corridor Route was omitted. This route will serve Palmer (where it will connect with the Inland services), Millers Falls and Amherst (which will lose Amtrak service next year).

Lynchburg yesterday, Norfolk today, Roanoke tomorrow

Outgoing Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell wants to extend the Lynchburg route west to Roanoke.

Take: This is essentially building the Trans Dominion Express in increments.

Random thoughts #5

1. Some of the ideas Noel Braymer raised in this article were similar to the California Networked Transit concept. The most important thing is CLOSING THE BAKERSFIELD-L.A. GAP! Anything that fails to accomplish this end will undermine a true California rail network.
2. If Portland & Western ever operates passenger service on the Oregon Electric Line, then it would have to find a new station because the old OE Station is currently a restaurant. My suggestion is for the railroad, the state, and the University of Oregon to extend the route to UO's North Campus.
3. In states with multiple Class II and Class III railroads--I'm specifically looking at you, Maine--it may be beneficial for these DOTs to partner with them to produce intercity service. Such an arrangement would resemble METRA's commuter deal with the Class I railroads.

Tackling the Headlines 24

Mica gives up on spinning off NEC

So the uproar worked. Just today, the House Transportation Committee chairman waved the white flag on spinning off the 457-mile line to the USDOT.

Take: Too bad since Amtrak will continue to be saddled with the infrastructure costs along the Boston-to-Washington route. It also shows how difficult it is to wrest away the rights of the line from Amtrak to USDOT. Thanks, Ford Administration. I also think that with Mica's about face, we can forget about any competitors along the route, so, shortline and regional railroads are likely to be the only alternatives to Amtrak in the northeastern United States.

CAHSR's costs almost triple vs 2008 estimates

Ninety-eight and a half billion dollars?!? Yep, that's the latest cost estimate for the planned San Francisco-Los Angeles route, with full completion pushed back to 2033!

Take: While I still support the project, there are a lot of things that the Authority is doing wrong. First, is the lack of blending with Caltrain in the Bay Area. There is no reason for separate rights of way in San Jose when the HSR route should be sharing the tracks with an electrified Caltrain. 

Second, as Drunk Engineer and Mulad have pointed out, these viaducts invite urban blight. I mean, there's no reason why there should be a viaduct that is FOUR TIMES AS TALL as the Caltrain bridge near the San Jose train station. 

Finally, as people openly question whether this project should be built, the Authority has to take costs into account. Building 60 foot viaducts burns--rather than saves--money. Why no one with any pull listens to more rational people like Clem is baffling to this East Coaster. With most people in a cost-cutting mood, this project is in jeopardy of being a missed opportunity. The Authority should fire the firm that is responsible for advocating the South Bay blight.

A screwup in Maine

Because of a delay in the maintenance facility in Brunswick, Amtrak will only extend two of its Downeasters from Portland to the new northern terminus next fall.

Take: Oh, boy. With NIMBYs and cost issues, the southbound runs are in a tighter time span than the northbound. The lack of evening southbound and morning northbound trips will initially make the extension a bit unmarketable. The problem needs to be fixed ASAP.

A Rational Passenger Rail Policy Before a National HSR Network

Intro
“…[R]ailfans could contribute much expert knowledge, based on the maxim ‘What man has done, man can do.’ But first their goals have to be realistic. Universal high speed rail is not one of them.”



I remember retired Metro North engineer Olaf Olsen uttering the above quote in 1999 regarding a realistic rail policy. Back then, he praised advocates in Northern New England for reviving Boston-Maine service but he was miffed at the idea of high speed rail in small towns with limited transportation options, being tourist trains, and serving shacks disguised as stations.

Let's Have a Little Logic Here
As the years have gone by, I just shake my head every time a region with infrequent rail service jumps on the fast train bandwagon. The more I think about it, the more I tend to agree with him. It’s laughable for Colorado to talk about HSR when the state sees a total of four trains daily. The state’s leaders should be trying to provide more roundtrips between Denver and Salt Lake City as well as a conventional speed Denver-Albuquerque route via Pueblo and Trinidad. And don’t even get me started on the Gulf Coast Corridor. When the Sunset Limited is upgraded to daily status and it has a complementary route, then talk to me about Gulf Coast HSR.

Some railfans have also made the push for a nationwide HSR system. It’s the wrong approach that is the result of the Asians and Europeans running laps around America with bullet trains while Amtrak operates with antiquated equipment that it can’t wait to get rid of. Now, I’m not opposed to a nationwide network of high speed rail per se, but we in the rail community have to look before we leap. In order to have a national network of fast trains, we must improve the skeletal rail system Amtrak has now. William Lind has a point about the negative effect the push for nationwide HSR has had on conventional rail travel.

In order to have a productive rail system, we need more long-distance routes. If a heavily traveled segment of an overnight route has the ridership, then corridor service will result. Overnight trains should have at least one or two other roundtrips along its route (the URPA plan is an example of this), and corridors will relieve overcrowding and serve more local destinations. Once the latter has been implemented, then high speed service planning should take place, leading to true high speed service. The corridors would remain in place as regional trains since the fast trains would make even fewer stops within the given region than the long-distance trains.

Last year, I proposed an interstate passenger rail system. This would mean that heavily traveled routes and any intercity segments that Amtrak shuttered will be preserved as America’s Rail Highways. This means that some routes would follow Gil Carmichael’s Interstate II vision where passenger trains would operate on double and triple tracked rights of way while other routes would run on dedicated passenger-only ROWs. This post from the Midwest HSR blog is an idea of what a rail highway could look like.

In an era where there will be multiple operators, stations need to be upgraded, so get rid of the Amshacks! Seriously, there is no excuse in this day and age for a train station to look like a city bus shelter or worse.

Who Really Deserves HSR?

The only areas that can logically support HSR are the Northeast, Southeast (D.C to Hampton Roads/Charlotte only), Midwest, California and the Northwest. A caveat is that funding for the Empire and Keystone routes would be given special consideration in Amtrak’s budget. Every other region not listed would start out at the 79 mph level and then build up.

I’d rather have a limited number of regions with true HSR instead of the scramble currently going on where everybody is demanding 150 mph service or bust while true connections to corridors remain scarce. JR Central is free to develop an Express route between Houston and Dallas while the private Triangle Railroad Holding Company can plan the Texas Triangle, but if Texas DOT officials get in the rail game, they would have to plan their service as Emerging HSR routes.

Onward to the Future...At Last

Once enough corridors have been upgraded to Regional status, then a national HSR network will be developed. Since passenger trains will be on their own tracks along the busiest routes, the transition will be relatively easy. These operators will then build special tracks for Express HSR routes. For corridors that share tracks with freights, the operating entity will build its own tracks to keep up.

When it comes to ownership, either the FRA or the USDOT would own the tracks of the passenger-only rail highways. Federal ownership would serve two purposes. First, it would guarantee that someone will maintain the tracks at all times. So, when there is an infrastructure issue, the governing body would fix the problem rather than a company only pays lip service to faulty materials due to Wall Street peer pressure or another company that may find repairing tracks and bridges prohibitively expensive. Second, as long as there are multiple operators using these rail highways, compatibility and ownership issues will arise. Putting the feds in charge means that no operator will have an unfair advantage on the tracks.