"Comments were due last Monday on FRA Docket 2016-0023 Competitive Rail Passenger Service Pilot Program, which is a provision of the FAST Act to develop private operators for three of the 15 long-distance routes. Comments were filed by Iowa Pacific, Brightline, Amtrak, and others. There is a public hearing in Washington on September 7, then a further comment period."
While the regulation itself is mind numbing, Ellis' comments were quite interesting. They can be found here. You'll need to be able to open a PDF file to read it.
There were also comments from Brightline (AAF) and NC DOT dealing mostly with the language of the provisions. Ellis, however, took the opportunity to promote his IPH efforts with the Hoosier State (and other operations). It appears from his comments that Amtrak was making it as difficult as possible for it to succeed.
Let's hope Moorman takes a different approach. Now, which trains would you like to see a private operator work on to improve service. I'd vote for the City of New Orleans. The quality of service can only improve, lots of marketing opportunity for tourism in Memphis and New Orleans, and long ago the IC operated a fleet of trains for the heavy passenger loads out of the delta region. Also, perhaps a tie in to the proposed service along the gulf coast. And finally, both Ellis and Moorman are Mississippi boys. That's their briar patch.
Posts: 2397 | From: Camden, SC | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks, Palmland, for posting the Ellis observations. It appears that his operation is much more attuned to the customer experience than is AMTRAK. His marketing and services skills are far above AMTRAK's abilities. One would hope that Moorman will see this fact and work out some collaborative arrangement. Tom
Posts: 518 | From: Maynard, MA, USA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: IPH’s experience is that Amtrak has fought any introduction of private service into the national network. IPH recognizes and applauds the change in leadership at Amtrak, and is hopeful that Amtrak wil recognize the benefits of public-private partnerships in developing the passenger services that America needs.
Ouch! I hope the new leadership will arrive with a better attitude about implementing the Pilot Program and that common ground between Amtrak and service providers can be found.
I think the success of the Hoosier State has been because of the hands-on stewardship provided by the IPH team. Looking at the Monthly Performance Reports shows that ridership hasn't increased significantly but the train has been able to increase revenue dramatically by providing better service and ensuring on-time operations. I wonder how many of the lessons learned on the Hoosier State are transferable to the LD network. Surely improving service standards on the LD trains would be appreciated, but how many additional riders would be generated? The short distance Hoosier State is competing against the private auto and low cost buses. A LD train is competing against the airlines, not the auto/bus market.
I also question IPH's focus on the grey-haired cruiser market for the LD trains. There may be a market for the high-priced end-to-end land cruise package, but I think there's also a good case for marketing a value-added and dependable product that appeals to the younger demographics.
I also disagree with IPH's assessment of Amtrak's rolling stock. I think it would be much preferable to maintain a common railcar. Introducing a varied fleet of old railcars will only increase the maintenance burden. Superliners aren't perfect but neither are 50 year old single-level railcars.
On the issue of access to the host railroad's property it seems that the Pilot Program should mandate that either the host railroads should provide the T&E crews or Amtrak's existing personnel be retained. The on-board service crews could be provided by the independent company, but I would feel safer knowing that the people running the train were trained and supervised by either the host railroad or Amtrak.
The City of New Orleans would seem to be an excellent fit for the Pilot Program. Chicago, Memphis and New Orleans are all large and unique tourist destinations. Too bad the Amtrak train that connects them is a bland and spiritless operation.
Posts: 831 | From: Seattle | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:I would feel safer knowing that the people running the train were trained and supervised by either the host railroad or Amtrak.
This would not be a problem. The train is not going to run a railroad's tracks without having an operating crew qualified for the line to the satisfaction of the owning railroad company.
One thing that IPH could do would be to do things like mid route adjustments in consists. Both the City of New Orleans and the Crescent are poster children for this. Because of their overnight business on the northern part of their runs, south of Memphis for the CNO and Atlanta for the Crescent there is a lot of empty iron burning fuel and wearing wheels, etc. because of the current no mid route consist modifications mindset.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Vincent- good point about IPH equipment. I saw their heavy repair shop in Alamosa. Not too impressed. They will need to get a lot more resources to handle something more than a Hoosier type train.
Posts: 2397 | From: Camden, SC | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
5 coaches, 70 seats: 350 pax 1 diner 1 lounge 3 sleepers, 14-5-1-1 or 44 x 3=132
482 pax max per train.
Daily service on 5-6: WB 1 Leaving Chicago 1 west of Denver 1 arrived Oakland EB 1 leaving oakland 1 west of denver 1 arrived that morning.
6 sets, and let's credit 1 (1/2 against each of 2 LD lines) as a spare.
30 coaches 6 diners 6 lounges 18 sleepers
Is Amtrak going to lease the equipment out, or does someone have to buy it?
Who pays the trackage rights? (Disclaimer: IRA position in UNP). I cannot imagine the Class I railroads not demanding full price for time on the line, and fighting in court on the transferrance of the RPSA 70 rights of access...and if I hear UNP says "sure", I'm filing a shareholder suit for failure of due diligence before the ink is dry on the press release.
T&E crew: Engineman, head brakeman, Conductor, Assistant Conductor. That's not the 2 guys of a freight train.
When Jet-A becomes too expensive for Southwest, this idea might fly. Until then....
Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
