3 ms·

72% of the miles traveled by Amtrak trains are on tracks owned by other railroads. For example, Amtrak uses BNSF rail (your example) and pays for BNSF rail. Tha

72% of the miles traveled by Amtrak trains are on tracks owned by other railroads. For example, Amtrak uses BNSF rail (your example) and pays for BNSF rail. That amounts to about 6.8 million train miles for BNSF rail alone. https://www.amtrak.com/national-facts https://www.amtrak.com/national-facts Amtrak then overpays for this use which amounts to a government subsidy. http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060015115 http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060015115 We subsidize rail (freight+passenger) just as we subsidize airlines. Let's just be honest about it. BTW, your notion of the FRA over-regulating for unions is similarly malarkey. And envy of the world? Dunno if you've been to Europe (which is heavily regulated).

fennecfoxen 10y ago
> Dunno if you've been to Europe I live in Europe right now, thank you. European (freight) rail falls apart the moment you cross any internal border: differences in train control systems, electrification standards, signalling systems, loading gauges, and the like. France, Spain, and Germany alone have four different electrification systems among them. > We subsidize rail (freight+passenger) just as we subsidize airlines. Let's just be honest about it. Sure. Is this actually a point of contention? It'd be great if we could stop, anyway, and let various forms of transportation compete on true merit rather than on which one the politicians prefer. Especially for freight. There are various barriers to this happening, naturally. It'd be great if they could be reduced and any externalities mitigated. And the subsidies don't nearly approach the ~$25B/yr new investment. > BTW, your notion of the FRA over-regulating for unions is similarly malarkey. I refer you to 81 FR 13917, in which the agency itself admits in the filing, "FRA has no empirical evidence to suggest" that two-person crews are safer, admitting that "in fact, it is possible that one-person crews have contributed to the improving safety record". That's just a tiny piece of what they get to deal with, anyway.
- CalChris 10y ago
  >> Dunno if you've been to Europe > I live in Europe right now, thank you. Then I don't know if you've lived in the US. I've lived and worked both places. As for 81 FR 13917, you're mis-summarizing your source. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/03/15/2016-05553/train-crew-staffing https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/03/15/2016-05... Indeed, the previous sentence was: Finally, railroads have achieved an improving safety record during a period in which the industry largely employed two-person train crews. Maybe when Positive Train Control (which you refer to as a Comedy of Errors) is fully in place, you might be right and train crews could be reduced. Until then, you're essentially saying that 1 person crews are enough because Labor Unions. Calculate how much that labor is costing as a percentage of the train revenue and get back to me. I doubt Warren is looking that far past the decimal point. Basically, you sound anti-labor and anti-regulation. Just say it. BTW, outside of Spain's Iberian gauge, I'm not aware of any inter-country freight problems.
  - fennecfoxen 10y ago
    > BTW, outside of Spain's Iberian gauge, I'm not aware of any inter-country freight problems. Loading gauge, not track gauge. Here in Britain, Network Rail's standard W6a gauge is too small for standard shipping containers on standard cars. You need to get up to W8 for that, and W10 for High-Cube. They have that on certain corridors only. You can use special low-deck cars to get around it, of course, though those are heavier and more expensive to own and operate. Meanwhile in the US, all that investment cash has made double-stacked container transport the norm rather than the exception. Do not expect to see it in Europe in either of our lifetimes.
caminante 10y ago
Amtrak then overpays for this use which amounts to a government subsidy. http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060015115 Respectfully, you and I read different articles. Amtrak overpaid out of incompetence. Amtrak paying more due to incompetence isn't a government subsidy. FTA: Amtrak wasn't formally reviewing invoices, some of the alleged over-payments lack supporting documentation, and in general, it sounds like there's STILL disagreement over contract language. If anything, the taxpayers subsidized management negligence.

fennecfoxen 10y ago

> Dunno if you've been to Europe I live in Europe right now, thank you. European (freight) rail falls apart the moment you cross any internal border: differences in train control systems, electrification standards, signalling systems, loading gauges, and the like. France, Spain, and Germany alone have four different electrification systems among them. > We subsidize rail (freight+passenger) just as we subsidize airlines. Let's just be honest about it. Sure. Is this actually a point of contention? It'd be great if we could stop, anyway, and let various forms of transportation compete on true merit rather than on which one the politicians prefer. Especially for freight. There are various barriers to this happening, naturally. It'd be great if they could be reduced and any externalities mitigated. And the subsidies don't nearly approach the ~$25B/yr new investment. > BTW, your notion of the FRA over-regulating for unions is similarly malarkey. I refer you to 81 FR 13917, in which the agency itself admits in the filing, "FRA has no empirical evidence to suggest" that two-person crews are safer, admitting that "in fact, it is possible that one-person crews have contributed to the improving safety record". That's just a tiny piece of what they get to deal with, anyway.

CalChris 10y ago
>> Dunno if you've been to Europe > I live in Europe right now, thank you. Then I don't know if you've lived in the US. I've lived and worked both places. As for 81 FR 13917, you're mis-summarizing your source. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/03/15/2016-05553/train-crew-staffing https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/03/15/2016-05... Indeed, the previous sentence was: Finally, railroads have achieved an improving safety record during a period in which the industry largely employed two-person train crews. Maybe when Positive Train Control (which you refer to as a Comedy of Errors) is fully in place, you might be right and train crews could be reduced. Until then, you're essentially saying that 1 person crews are enough because Labor Unions. Calculate how much that labor is costing as a percentage of the train revenue and get back to me. I doubt Warren is looking that far past the decimal point. Basically, you sound anti-labor and anti-regulation. Just say it. BTW, outside of Spain's Iberian gauge, I'm not aware of any inter-country freight problems.
- fennecfoxen 10y ago
  > BTW, outside of Spain's Iberian gauge, I'm not aware of any inter-country freight problems. Loading gauge, not track gauge. Here in Britain, Network Rail's standard W6a gauge is too small for standard shipping containers on standard cars. You need to get up to W8 for that, and W10 for High-Cube. They have that on certain corridors only. You can use special low-deck cars to get around it, of course, though those are heavier and more expensive to own and operate. Meanwhile in the US, all that investment cash has made double-stacked container transport the norm rather than the exception. Do not expect to see it in Europe in either of our lifetimes.

caminante 10y ago

Amtrak then overpays for this use which amounts to a government subsidy. http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060015115 Respectfully, you and I read different articles. Amtrak overpaid out of incompetence. Amtrak paying more due to incompetence isn't a government subsidy. FTA: Amtrak wasn't formally reviewing invoices, some of the alleged over-payments lack supporting documentation, and in general, it sounds like there's STILL disagreement over contract language. If anything, the taxpayers subsidized management negligence.