west point wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 6:19 pm It is time for some of the $28B going to freight RRs to get rid of some of the bottlenecks.I think a fresh look at the lines being used would be well in hand to set policy on how that $28B is to be spent.
Railroad Forums
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman
west point wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 6:19 pm It is time for some of the $28B going to freight RRs to get rid of some of the bottlenecks.I think a fresh look at the lines being used would be well in hand to set policy on how that $28B is to be spent.
west point wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 6:19 pm It is time for some of the $28B going to freight RRs to get rid of some of the bottlenecks.The taxpayer should be dismayed at the notion that they pay to reinstate the track capacity that PSR zealots ripped out, surely?
eolesen wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 8:41 pm Uh no. The bulk of multi track mainlines was pulled up and single tracked decades ago. Not as part of PSR.We've passed the threshold for picking up the track. If we haven't passed back over it for putting it back down, we're damn close to passing it with PSR.
Track, signaling and switching plants cost money to maintain, and there's a tipping point where it's cheaper to pick up the track and re-lay it when it's not going to see regular use.
dowlingm wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:02 pmBoth over the road and air cargo companies could build or acquire their own roadways or airports, just as existing or a newly formed railroad company could build a new rail line. They chose not to do so, but if they did, they would be entitled to control use of those road and airport facilities and expand or contract at will, similar to those decisions made by private company freight railroads such as the US railroads that have implemented PSR.west point wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 6:19 pm It is time for some of the $28B going to freight RRs to get rid of some of the bottlenecks.The taxpayer should be dismayed at the notion that they pay to reinstate the track capacity that PSR zealots ripped out, surely?
In what other mode of transportation is the hauler permitted to determine the capacity of the road/mode it runs over, and scheduling of itself AND any other user of said road/mode? FedEx aren't permitted to operate air traffic control to shunt competitor or passenger flights onto taxiways or in flight holding points so their planes may take the shortest route (or close runways they deem unproductive but demand state funds to reopen), or UPS to own national highways where they pick and choose who may use the onramps, and yet this pernicious carry on is permitted in rail, and the number of players is even proposed to shrink even further.
STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Wed Jun 16, 2021 11:03 am We've passed the threshold for picking up the track. If we haven't passed back over it for putting it back down, we're damn close to passing it with PSR.Amtrak is paying Happy Meal rates and expecting Porterhouse service levels...
eolesen wrote: ↑Thu Jun 17, 2021 3:31 amDo you actually know what they are paying , and how it compares to other running rights between railroads?STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Wed Jun 16, 2021 11:03 am We've passed the threshold for picking up the track. If we haven't passed back over it for putting it back down, we're damn close to passing it with PSR.Amtrak is paying Happy Meal rates and expecting Porterhouse service levels...
If Amtrak were paying market rates for access (e.g. something that reflected the cost of providing and maintaining the track), perhaps Class 1's might be a little more willing to work with Amtrak and add capacity where it's justified.
eolesen wrote: ↑Thu Jun 17, 2021 3:25 am The closest non-railroad corollary are companies who've launched their own satellites and/or laid down fiber to built out their own dedicated communication networks.Comcast, Google, Zayo, Level 3... won't be surprised if Facebook bought/laid fiber... But nobody questioned it because it wasn't as regulated as trains are, and many companies have cross-traffic agreements to let traffic flow for cheap (if not free).
Nobody seems to question the decision those companies made to keep it all to themselves or charge others market rates for access...
Can you imagine the government trying to force AT&T, Sprint or Verizon to give them below-market access to bandwidth?...Yes, I can, because my company is in that space. And I bet there's government contracts that do, because sales people want to get paid and the companies can provide the service.
STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Thu Jun 17, 2021 6:10 am Yes, I can, because my company is in that space. And I bet there's government contracts that do, because sales people want to get paid and the companies can provide the service.Nah, a contract is consensual. You want government business? Great.
eolesen wrote: ↑Thu Jun 17, 2021 6:20 am Railroad Passenger Service Act of 1970 grants priority access at the incremental cost associated with accommodating Amtrak. They do not pay the access fee that another railroad would be charged under trackage rights, which are cost-plus-markup.You misunderstand my request. Let me make it clear: What dollar amount is Amtrak paying for running their trains on freight lines?
Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 17, 2021 9:18 am Mr. Wolf, Amtrak's remuneration to each road, as Mr. Olesen immediately notes, holding a bilateral Operating Agreement is exempt from public disclosure under FOIA. But, considering my 40 year "absence" from industry affairs, I can only affirm what I read that such is "Bargain Basement".It sounds a lot like in order for that info to be released, I'd have to write a Congress critter or three. I forget what committee is starting to investigate PSR...