New Rail Study

[MountainMan]

Some of you may find this of interest - a new study estimates $50 billion to update aging rail equipment and infrastructure, and another $6 billion per year to maintain it.

WASHINGTON - More than one-third of the trains, equipment and facilities of the nation’s seven largest rail transit agencies are near the end of their useful life or past that point, the government said Thursday. Many have components that are defective or may be critically damaged.

A report by the Federal Transit Administration estimates it will cost $50 billion to bring the rail systems in Chicago, Boston, New York, New Jersey, San Francisco, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., into good repair and $5.9 billion a year to maintain them.

Those seven systems carry 80 percent of the nation’s rail transit passengers, making more than 3 billion passenger trips a year. They also include some of the oldest subways and commuter railroads. Some of their facilities date back more than a century.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30502575/">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30502575/</a><!-- m -->

[Bigsteel]

doesnt surprise me,thats why i see the gov't consolidating alot of major railroads into amtrak freight,and shortlines being the only privately owned ones left.--josh

[MountainMan]

I hope not. AMTRAK is a heavily tax subsidized money pit.

[doctorwayne]

Sounds to me like someone is about to come a-beggin'. After nationalising the banking and auto industries, can the railroads be far behind?

Wayne

[MountainMan]

Sounds to me like someone is about to come a-beggin'. After nationalising the banking and auto industries, can the railroads be far behind?

Wayne

If we're lucky, though, we might ultimately get some benefit out of upgrading the railroads.

[sgtcarl1]

Can anyone say "socialism?"

[Herc Driver]

Sure I'd like rail service to thrive, with necessary regulation to protect the people while allowing for profit. And I'm no expert, but it doesn't take a lot to see that the infrastructure is in need of some major dollars spent for modernization. But please, I don't want the heavy hand of the Federal Gov't to regulate the life out of profitable (or potentially profitable) railroads. Take Amtrak or the Post Office...any time the government gets involved running something as a business, it gets really messed up and doesn't turn a profit. I'd rather see Norfolk Southern go back to its roots and restart the Southern Railway routes that Amtrak currently runs. Or why can't someone restart the PRR and Broadway Limited? There are too many terrific routes that a private company might see potential (and yes, profit) in running and maintaining.

As someone with an airline background, I can tell you that the airspace above our heads is congested...seriously congested. Without both pilots and controllers helping each other move planes safely, air travel would be a lot more delayed. More dollars for FAA improvements in traffic congestion are coming, but still years away from making a noticeable improvement. Passenger rail service (not necessarily high speed rail service) would help especially in the heavily traveled northeast corridor. The amount of time difference between rail service and airline service between...say...Boston and NYC or Wash DC is almost none when you add in all the time it takes to get through security, wait for the flight, baggage pickup etc. I've been on Amtrak trains, and they're no better than an airline seat. But here in North Carolina, the state runs and maintains a very small fleet of engines and totally refurbished cars that give a wonderful and inexpensive ride. They connect up with Amtrak to take people north to Washington DC, and believe me, you can tell when you're not sitting in a NCDOT-owned train car. So it seems a state can manage to run a relatively short line passenger service and offer a reasonably priced (controlled by Amtrak I'd guess) ticket along with a great seat, so I'd bet a private company could do the same thing.

I'd vote for tax payer funded infrastructure improvements, combined with more privatization of passenger rail service. Let CSX and NS, BNSF and UP (and any other companies that want) take a stab at running quality passenger service in the highly travel routes around our major cities. I'd rather see Amtrak tackle the coast-to-coast rail or longer haul passenger needs and leave the shorter city-to-city pairings to private companies.

And with that...I'll get off my soap box.

[Brakie]

I hope not. AMTRAK is a heavily tax subsidized money pit.

Let's not go that route..We all know Amtrak was started with the "Big Lie"* that everybody but,a few bought.


*That "Big Lie" was Amtrak would succeed in the passenger business where freight railroads failed and would be self sufficient in 15 years...

[doctorwayne]

Probably the only passenger-carrying trains in North America that actually make money are the so-called "cruise" trains. Even commuter lines are heavily subsidised, as a "necessary" service.

Wayne

[BR60103]

Didn't the federal government own Conrail? And wasn't it successful enough to have 2 railroads fighting over it?

Or you could have great private companies like Chrysler, General Motors, Enron ...

[Herc Driver]

As much as I hate to see government intervention...I know it is sometimes a necessary evil. From what I've read, there are no commuter rail lines in America that make money. But wouldn't it be great to see some of the famously named trains ply the rails again?

[Brakie]

Didn't the federal government own Conrail? And wasn't it successful enough to have 2 railroads fighting over it?

Or you could have great private companies like Chrysler, General Motors, Enron ...

David,In the last years of CR its was publicly owned and was on the stock market..I owned some stock but,sold out a mite to soon..

The reason 2 railroads went after CR is because CSX could not afford to have NS to merge with CR..So,it lead to a bidding war..Today CR exist in the Shared Access Areas.

[Catt]

Funny thing about AMTRAK,our Pere Marquette which runs from Grand Rapids,MI. to Chicago is one of the most sucessful AMTRAK ops ever and they still keep trying to shut it down.The PM has had a steadily increasing rider base for the last 5 years with no slowdown insite.AMTRAK and the state still want to shut it down.Fortunately the elected officials like their jobs so it stays in business and keeps growing at the rate of one more car a year and two for holidays.

[nkp_174]

Can anyone say "socialism?"

No more picking on our European and Canadian friends...they'll be the capitalists soon enough, and able to poke at us .

I'll give nationalism its dues...it helped keep steam engines steaming for decades beyond the iron curtain and in Cuba...

I've always found it fascinating that simply hauling people does not pay...and very few have argued that it does.

Hopefully a little bit of the cash hemorrhage/debt building results in some good for the Cumbras & Toltec, Hawaiian Railway Society, etc...rather than being thrown away.

[Bob C]

Just throwing another bit in...the Amtrak employees I knew told me that the Northeast Corridor was easily in the black, as were some few other well utilized routes. For various reasons, population density, passenger traffic levels, competition, schedule, most of the vast - by comparison to the oft-lauded European (Government subsidized/operated) systems - scope of the U.S. rail system won't/can't be serviced at a profit. As a business, Amtrak fails because it's expected service (take me where I want, when I want, cheap cause you aren't as fast as a plane) is nearly impossible without outrageous infrastructure, fares to pay for that, and intense utilization over the entire area served. The alternative (since nobody in the private sector seems to have an alternative) is government subsidy/operation. "High-Speed" rail - as a mass long distance transportation system is still science or political fiction, meant to line some folks pockets at government/taxpayer expense - for technical and all of the above reasons, ain't happening any time soon - certainly not without government/tax $$$. That's not socialism, it's the power of group purchasing based on a societal need/want that cannot be as economically attained by an individual or a smaller group !...he descends from soap box and awaits the shower of shoes (?)..... Bob C.