Every time (it seems) Amtrak brings up the subject of a new route, the host road throws a coniption (sp?) about the increased traffic. For example, some years back when the Vegas train was being planned, I remember Amtrak paid the UP something like 25M for track improvements to run a single train a day in each direction. Living in Bakersfield, I see the San Joaquin route and can't help but wonder why the BNSF doesn't seem to have much trouble fitting 12 trains a day on the busy valley line. The San Diago (grin) line is no slouch either. I'm not necessarily bashing the UP, they seem to do a decent job of running the Capitols, but it does make one wonder. Even more so when one looks at the CSX. Bottom line, is the traffic excuse valid or just that, an excuse? Also, with the forcast boom in freight traffic, what thoughts does everyone have on how that will impact the Big A?

P.S. I did have a BNSF employee tell me that with so many trains, Amtrak actually pays for ALL maintenance on the valley line!
 

You will see in this that there has been a lot of investment in each one of the major passenger corridors in the state, totaling well over a billion dollars. California has put a tremendous amount of money (compared to anywhere else) into developing passenger service in the state.

I would question that Amtrak is paying all the maintenance cost on the San Jonquin line. The State of California has been spending quite a bit on upgrades, additional tracks, eliminating speed restrictions, etc, but BNSF is also spending a lot on ordinary maintenance and freight-beneficial upgrades on the line. For exapmle, a few years ago BNSF replaced one of the through truss bridges to eliminate weight and clearance restrictions, which work was of no benefit to passenger service.