How much are Class I and II railroads paid by Amtrak?

David Benton wrote: ↑Sat Dec 16, 2023 1:43 am

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 9:26 am Mr. Red Wing, I think you will find that Amtrak funded improvements to the roads are the nature and scope of that recently appropriated for Malta MT..

I "drove" the Googlemobile through there, and from what I could see, when Amtrak makes a station stop there, the Great Northern is effectively tied up. There does not appear to be a second track through the station. What if Amtrak is early (it can happen) and needs to "wait for time"?

I'm not sure what is planned there, but if it's a betterment being made because Amtrak is there, and for which would not otherwise be needed, then so be it they should pay.

How hard is it to build a 2nd track through the station?

turns out there is a 2nd track passing the amtrak station in Malta , MO , anyway.

Mr. Benton, possibly such was visible from a Sat/view of Malta. Then, if such be the case, I would like to ask what are the improvements that have been Federally funded?

Most of the $38b is maintenance. There is a per-mile cost to maintenance and the rest is largely caused by tonnage, so Amtrak’s share should be dramatically lower. That doesn’t mean Amtrrak us paying its own way, not least bc opportunity costs are real. But it’s a misrepresentation to put out a low Amtrak spend and say “See!”

The fact that some roads now move Amtrak fast for the money is a sign Amtrak is pretty close, and that “all observers” atre not in fact in agreement.

David Benton wrote: ↑Sat Dec 16, 2023 6:59 pm turns out there is a 2nd track passing the amtrak station in Malta , MO , anyway.

LOL

ryanwc wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2023 7:53 am Most of the $38b is maintenance. There is a per-mile cost to maintenance and the rest is largely caused by tonnage, so Amtrak’s share should be dramatically lower. That doesn’t mean Amtrrak us paying its own way, not least bc opportunity costs are real. But it’s a misrepresentation to put out a low Amtrak spend and say “See!”

The fact that some roads now move Amtrak fast for the money is a sign Amtrak is pretty close, and that “all observers” atre not in fact in agreement.

It's the opportunity cost that counts. You could move one or more extremely high dollar priority trains in an Amtrak slot. You could probably move 3-5 slow freights. Their contribution to that $38b is positive and significant. Although a passenger train probably puts very litle wear if any on the track, it (a) blocks 1-5 positive revenue contributors from helping defray that $38b and (b) there are some specific capital and maintenance costs that have a big tie to passenger trains. Platform tracks require switches that wouldn't exist otherwise, and all the heavy freight train wear on those switches allocates to passenger trains as it wouldn't exist otherwise. Also how much fuel is used to start a heavy freight moving after waiting for a passenger train?

Also, the definition of maintenance versus capital/new money is a bit different at a railroad. A consumer-focused business like Amazon might buy new delivery trucks every few years, but the Freights replace their rails every fifty years. That only works if maintenance is heavily prioritized, which keeps the system from sinking into utter ruin quickly. As we saw with Penn Central and Rock Island, deferred maintenance is a collosal mistake.

>>Also how much fuel is used to start a heavy freight moving after waiting for a passenger train?

I don't know, but the freights do, and the fact that they do sometimes stop their freights to keep Amtrak trains on time, in order to earn the incentives, suggests that the incentives are generally close to the costs, including the opportunity costs, and sometimes higher.

It isn't 1973 anymore, and some of the moaning about Amtrak getting a free ride is a) freights jawboning the umps, and b) outsiders who don't know the costs who have chosen a side rather than analyzing the situation.

ryanwc wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2023 4:26 pm >>Also how much fuel is used to start a heavy freight moving after waiting for a passenger train?

I don't know, but the freights do, and the fact that they do sometimes stop their freights to keep Amtrak trains on time, in order to earn the incentives, suggests that the incentives are generally close to the costs, including the opportunity costs, and sometimes higher.

It isn't 1973 anymore, and some of the moaning about Amtrak getting a free ride is a) freights jawboning the umps, and b) outsiders who don't know the costs who have chosen a side rather than analyzing the situation.

The fact is railroads all start and stop freight trains, even in double track divisions. One reason is the slower or less critical train makes way for the higher priority auto parts or container train.
Another reason is crews do die on the law. If Amtrak is running late, and is no longer in position on the train masters and dispatchers schedule, one train or the other may have to take siding to clear single track mainline.

It’s not 1973 anymore, but until Amtrak steps out from their privacy curtain, we won’t know for sure.

Using local examples Does CSX get a nice road up to Portland, ME, their nifty double stack route to Worcester on the B&A, or anywhere on the MN and MBTA territory? Also I remember our vocal stockholders here giddy with joy that UP was upgraded from Chicago to Urbana. All I'm saying is your calculations are off when you just go by slot payments. When you look at it as a whole Amtrak is directly or indirectly paying more than you would think for the use of rails of others.

UP doesn't go from Chicago to Urbana..... CN does, and any upgrades on that route were pad for by CN, not the FRA or Amtrak.

The UP between Chicago to St. Louis was upgraded as a pet/pork "Almost High Speed Rail" project done under the Obama Administration as payback for political favors and support.

Neither UP or Amtrak solicited this -- it was the Peoples' Republic of Illinois who "asked" for it.

eolesen wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 12:23 am The UP between Chicago to St. Louis was upgraded as a pet/pork "Almost High Speed Rail" project done under the Obama Administration as payback for political favors and support.

It shames me that "my railroad" is part of this pork.

It seems as if the whole charade of "High Speed Rail" was an excuse to get the UP a publicly funded second route into the Chicago area. Part of the project was to build an intermodal facility at Elwood (10mi or so South of Joliet) which would bring jobs....Jobs....JOBS to the region. Never mind that these were low paying stevedoring non-union jobs, but they were jobs. Lest we forget that the '08 financial meltdown was far more severe than that COVID era from which we are now emerging. The recovery took as long as Obama was in office (critics say he should have been more aggressive with stimuli) but it was accomplished without inflation.

OK; the single track is FRA Class 6 (P 110mph) and the Lincoln Service trains do attain that velocity...well, from time to time. No sooner than "getting up there", there's a 50mph freight ahead so that becomes the speed until it can be run around. Or how about the practice of having a, say, Southbound passenger pull into a siding behind a freight, wait for the northbound traffic, freight or passenger, to clear, then back out of that siding to run around the SB freight.

If the "benefactors", i.e. you and I, were serious about high speed passenger rail, the line would have been double tracked. After all, the grading for such was there as until 1969, when the GM&O chopped it up, it was double tracked.

So UP, give thanks unto the taxpayers for giving you a second line (other; the C&EI shared with CSX) to access the Chicago gateway from same at St. Louis.

disclaimer: author Long UNP

eolesen wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 12:23 am UP doesn't go from Chicago to Urbana..... CN does, and any upgrades on that route were pad for by CN, not the FRA or Amtrak.

The UP between Chicago to St. Louis was upgraded as a pet/pork "Almost High Speed Rail" project done under the Obama Administration as payback for political favors and support.

Neither UP or Amtrak solicited this -- it was the Peoples' Republic of Illinois who "asked" for it.

Thank you for the correction but the point still stands, the line was improved UP didn't pay for it and they benefit from it as it was a project to improve passenger rail.

I think times have been changing as well as politics and Amtrak and some of the freight roads have realized it’s in both their interests to try to move on from the adversarial relationships and instead be cooperative. There is no reason why both cannot coexist. Passenger rail has also become more bipartisan on Capitol Hill. All one has to do is look at how the issue of Amtrak derailed the recent attempt to pass a partisan transportation appropriations bill in the house. While many of the votes were just show votes it shows that Capitol Hill has a very different attitude about Amtrak and passenger rail in general today than in the ‘70s/‘80s/‘90s. You are not going to see a successful vote in Congress to defund Amtrak in 2024. A vote to defund the national network account and eliminate the long distance service as part of that appropriations bill failed by a wide margin in a GOP majority house.

One must admit times have changed - whether one supports passenger rail and Amtrak or not.

Red Wing wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 7:31 am Thank you for the correction but the point still stands, the line was improved UP didn't pay for it and they benefit from it as it was a project to improve passenger rail.

Nah, this was never free to UP nor is it free to operate.

UP had their own costs related to traffic disruption while the construction was underway, and bear the higher cost of maintaining the line to Class 6 standards.

Then there's the lost opportunity cost of having to accommodate Amtrak on a daily basis.

You can argue that the line was improved, but that's like giving someone a "free" pony... the recipient is on the hook for having to feed it and clean up after it, and pay the veterinary bills...

Agree with a few 3rd track sidings

eolesen wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 12:46 am Then there's the lost opportunity cost of having to accommodate Amtrak on a daily basis.

Do any of you harping on "opportunity cost" have any evidence the private freight railroads are telling shippers, "NO, we refuse to accept your carload shipment because Amtrak has tied up the line." ???