• Eau Claire - Minneapolis Passenger Rail Proposal

  • General discussion of passenger rail proposals and systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.
General discussion of passenger rail proposals and systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1

  by Rockingham Racer
 
dgvrengineer wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2020 7:42 pm I think at least in the near term, we would be better off concentrating on the current route. Having multiple frequencies on one route should generate more ridership and have lower overall costs than spreading the trains over several routes, at least as far as St. Paul to Chicago.
Absolutely correct. Studies have shown that frequency--not speed--is the best builder of ridership. One has to look only at Illinois to bear out that.
  by BandA
 
What would be the cost of insurance that would protect the UP from significant liability (liability > annual fees UP would earn from the passenger vendor)
  by dgvrengineer
 
Amtrak assumes all liability even if they are not at fault. As an example, the Cayce, SC wreck where a switch was incorrectly lined for a siding. Amtrak had no apparent fault. The CSX crew left the switch improperly lined and reported that it was properly lined to the dispatcher. Amtrak still had to pay all liability claims up to a maximum set by Congress.
  by mtuandrew
 
dgvrengineer wrote: Fri Jun 19, 2020 6:46 pm Amtrak assumes all liability even if they are not at fault. As an example, the Cayce, SC wreck where a switch was incorrectly lined for a siding. Amtrak had no apparent fault. The CSX crew left the switch improperly lined and reported that it was properly lined to the dispatcher. Amtrak still had to pay all liability claims up to a maximum set by Congress.
Right, but Amtrak probably wouldn’t run this service. If Amtrak was chosen as the operator, even though it’s US Government-insurer it would send the bill for market-rate liability insurance along to the client - which brings us back to the original question of liability insurance needs.
  by eolesen
 
dgvrengineer wrote: Fri Jun 19, 2020 6:46 pm Amtrak assumes all liability even if they are not at fault. As an example, the Cayce, SC wreck where a switch was incorrectly lined for a siding. Amtrak had no apparent fault. The CSX crew left the switch improperly lined and reported that it was properly lined to the dispatcher. Amtrak still had to pay all liability claims up to a maximum set by Congress.
Yes, Amtrak assumes liability for customer lawsuits, but unless CSX is somehow indemnified, it's feasible that Amtrak (or their insurer) could go after CSX to recoup anything paid out.
  by mtuandrew
 
From the North Coast Hiawatha thread over in Amtrak:
bretton88 wrote: Mon Jun 29, 2020 2:04 pm
Tadman wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2020 5:58 pm I have no idea how they pay the property taxes on their storage area, let alone act like a viable business.
Stuff like this helps them stay in business: https://wqow.com/2020/06/25/passenger-t ... next-week/ Any bets on this operation ever happening? Or how loudly the UP will laugh when they get approached?