What A Real Transit Rail System Looks Like: The Station

[Ocklawaha]

maybe we could hang chandeliers and make it look a little nicer! By the way, the Moscow station is nice, but did anyone notice the train that was sitting at the platform? looked like a Soviet era one.

That is changing as we write. There has been a great deal of activity on the Russian Railways, including new engines and all types of wagons (cars). Here is a small story about just one of them.

The Russian Railways AG has ordered 200 modern sleeping cars from Siemens and the local coach builder Tverskoy Vagonostroitelny Zavod AG. The Siemens scope of supply has an order value of about EUR 320 million. The new coaches can be operated in the Russian and standard gauge European railway networks. They are thus suitable for cross-border service as operated by RZD as well as for operation across Central and Western Europe.

Corresponding agreements were signed between Mr Vladimir Yakunin president of RZD, Mr Alexandr Vasilenko president of TVZ as well as Mr Hans-Jörg Grundmann CEO of the Siemens Mobility Division. Mr Grundmann upon signing the contract said “We are definitely committed to becoming the main foreign partner of RZD. With the order won and we have taken another step toward that goal.” The contract was signed during a VIP trip on the Siemens supplied high speed train Velaro RUS which will be in regular passenger service very soon.

Starting in 2010, the coaches will be built in the Siemens plant in Vienna, Austria, and in the wagon factory of TVZ in Tver, northwest of Moscow. Siemens will supply TVZ with the standard-gauge bogies that are required for the European railway network, as well as major parts of the car body and components for the interior furnishings. TVZ will handle the manufacturing of the bogies for service on the Russian broad gauge and will build the bodyshells for series operation. The new sleeping cars are part of the range of passenger coaches of the RIC type that are designed for international service. As such, they are allowed to travel in the networks of all operators that are covered by this agreement without requiring special approval.

TVZ with headquarters in Tver is a leading Russian vehicle builder that has specialized in the mass manufacturing of different types of coach compartment coaches, sleeping cars, open saloon coaches as well as the supply of components. The company belongs to the Russian ZAO Tansmashholding the country’s largest railway technology group with more than 60,000 employees.
SOURCE:  http://www.steelguru.com/russian_news/Russia_Railways_orders_200_rail_wagons_from_Siemens/107016.html

[wsansewjs]

You know what is really sad?

The only way for JTA to really get their asses moving IF someone was standing there for the bus shelter, then got a heat stroke and die from it. There would be a lawsuit, and a massive public backlash which cause JTA to put shelters for all bus stops with no exceptions.

Welcome to the city of Build it And Forget It Attitude!

-Josh

[Ocklawaha]

You know what is really sad?

The only way for JTA to really get their asses moving IF someone was standing there for the bus shelter, then got a heat stroke and die from it. There would be a lawsuit, and a massive public backlash which cause JTA to put shelters for all bus stops with no exceptions.

Welcome to the city of Build it And Forget It Attitude!

-Josh

I have photographs of just such an incident on Philips Highway a couple of years ago. If I find them, perhaps I'll post them, but I don't know if the poor fellow died.

OCKLAWAHA

[BackinJax05]

The problem is Amtrak is managed by the government. And as we all know, anytime the government tries to correct a problem they only make things worse.

Unlike, say, the privately-managed airline industry which has been so profitable...

Touche' 

However, in recent years the privately mangaged airline industry has been quite profitable. But flying sucks. Thats why I wont do it.

[Horologium]

In fairness to Amtrak, they are expected to fulfill a dual mandate of providing affordable, timely long-distance travel and simultaneously maintaining service to podunk locations on routes which cannot be profitable. Congressional funding is contingent on both, as the congresscritters from rural states won't approve funding if East Nowhere's 15-riders-a-week service is cut, and urban congressional reps won't stand for reductions in service (or price increases) for the large interurban routes.

Amtrak would probably function better if it were split up into regional rail lines (which is essentially what is was created from) which were allowed to make the hard choices about which routes need to be discontinued, freeing up money for upgrading track and increasing service where it is warranted. Big city service and service out to the suburbs can be funded, instead of anachronistic historical routes which date from a time before interstate highways, low-cost airlines, and widespread automobile ownership.

As for transcontinental travel, leave that to the airlines; they can get people across the country for about the same cost in a few hours, instead of a few days. People who want to see the country from a train window can do it on their own dime, rather than at rates which exist only because of massive subsidies from everyone else. There will always be a market for boutique "scenic America" trains, which can be operated by private companies at rates which reflect their real cost.

Rail travel has its advantages, in areas where population density and ridership potential justify its cost, but most of the postwar boom towns in the United States (Jacksonville included)  are not ideal candidates for in-city rail lines, because they were not developed with that in mind. Unlike Europe and Japan, where the postwar reality was that few were able to own cars, and rail travel was the only way to move people around, the US ended the war with an unprecedented level of prosperity, and the realized dream of car ownership for a majority reduced the need or the desire for train travel, unless one lived in a place with well-established city lines. (By 1960, there were 1.16 cars per household in the US, compared with 0.69 per household in 1945. The current figure is 1.87 vehicles per household, still the highest in the world.)

[finehoe]

Amtrak is proposing a $7 billion to upgrade Union Station in Washington to turn it into a high-speed rail hub for the Northeast.

The Washington Post (http://wapo.st/MlYPTw) reports that a plan to be unveiled Wednesday afternoon calls for doubling the number of trains the station can accommodate. Amtrak would add new platforms, tracks and stores. Six tracks for high-speed rail would be added. There’d also be a 50-foot-wide, 100-foot-long glass-enclosed main concourse.

A developer is also planning a $1.5 billion complex of offices, residential towers and a hotel that would be built on a deck over the tracks behind the station.

Union Station, which opened in 1907, is the second-busiest station in the country.

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/919/171/Washington-Union-Station-Master-Plan-201207.pdf

[Ocklawaha]

In fairness to Amtrak, they are expected to fulfill a dual mandate of providing affordable, timely long-distance travel and simultaneously maintaining service to podunk locations on routes which cannot be profitable. Congressional funding is contingent on both, as the congresscritters from rural states won't approve funding if East Nowhere's 15-riders-a-week service is cut, and urban congressional reps won't stand for reductions in service (or price increases) for the large interurban routes.

You are correct that Amtrak has a oft conflicting mandate to both maintain a national long-distance network AND to turn a profit, as a result Amtrak does neither very well. While congress sat up Amtrak with a list of 'end-point cities,' it doesn't work for a railroad.

Amtrak would probably function better if it were split up into regional rail lines (which is essentially what is was created from) which were allowed to make the hard choices about which routes need to be discontinued, freeing up money for upgrading track and increasing service where it is warranted. Big city service and service out to the suburbs can be funded, instead of anachronistic historical routes which date from a time before interstate highways, low-cost airlines, and widespread automobile ownership.

Rail passengers are rarely going beyond 250-500 miles, so the question becomes  which chunk you want to eliminate to 'make money.' New Orleans - Birmingham, Birmingham - Atlanta, Atlanta - Charlotte, Charlotte - Washington, or perhaps Washington - New York? All of these are currently covered by a single Amtrak train daily running end to end. Pulling plugs out of the system will only INCREASE the cost of operating the remaining trains, start turning trains at Charlotte or Birmingham and your costs will go up exponentially. You are parroting the 'studies' by the Heritage Foundation or the Cato Institute, both of which are hostile to rail and enjoy funding from the oil and automobile companies. The real solution is actually the exact opposite of such slash and burn mentality.

As for transcontinental travel, leave that to the airlines; they can get people across the country for about the same cost in a few hours, instead of a few days. People who want to see the country from a train window can do it on their own dime, rather than at rates which exist only because of massive subsidies from everyone else. There will always be a market for boutique "scenic America" trains, which can be operated by private companies at rates which reflect their real cost.

So what do we do with the huge subsidies handed out to the highways and airlines? Shall we level the playing field? Highways are subsidized at rates of hundreds of billions of dollars, and 'essential air services' at rates approaching $1,000 dollars per ticket. Like the other modes, it's time to quit holding up this straw argument that 'Amtrak doesn't make money,' quite frankly, neither does the road in front of your house and YOU are driving on MY dime.

Rail travel has its advantages, in areas where population density and ridership potential justify its cost, but most of the postwar boom towns in the United States (Jacksonville included)  are not ideal candidates for in-city rail lines, because they were not developed with that in mind. Unlike Europe and Japan, where the postwar reality was that few were able to own cars, and rail travel was the only way to move people around, the US ended the war with an unprecedented level of prosperity, and the realized dream of car ownership for a majority reduced the need or the desire for train travel, unless one lived in a place with well-established city lines. (By 1960, there were 1.16 cars per household in the US, compared with 0.69 per household in 1945. The current figure is 1.87 vehicles per household, still the highest in the world.)

So your point is? We own automobiles and thus there should be no alternative? BRILLIANT! FYI, Jacksonville isn't a post war boom town, we were put on the map by railroads and remain the only rail hub in the state of Florida. From 1919 onward we had the largest railroad station south of Washington DC, a station that averaged 15 million passengers per year. For a short time during the Great Florida Boom, our station hosted over 250 trains a day, many operating in up to 24 sections (each section is a separate train running under the same name/number, advance number 75, 75, 2nd 75, 3rd 75, 4th 75 etc.)

Jacksonville's neighborhoods and additions, from Mayport to Yukon, and from San Jose to Moncrief, were built on streetcar and commuter rail. We were one of the first large operators of streetcars to abandon the system and swap those tracks for auto lanes, ignorant of the fact that each streetcar track could easily handle the traffic of 2.5 auto lanes. Our density is well above that of Charlotte, Tucson, Tacoma etc. and they already have urban rail. A return to rail is coming to Jacksonville, the study is ongoing as we discuss this topic. We need to educate our population that if we start eliminating everything in our lives that 'don't make money' then you will have to say goodbye to JTA, JPA, city parks, libraries, police, fire, rescue etc., obviously NOT the way to go.

America needs more passenger rail not less, and Jacksonville needs to return to it's foundation and rebuild the rail network that built our city.