INSUFFICIENT ALTERNATIVES? Congress won't use the Highway Trust Fund to build roads, and the resulting congestion, along with rising gas prices
piques interest in high-speed trains.
Congress is considering a six-year Amtrak funding bill co-sponsored by 40 senators that would provide the first matching federal grants for rail projects.
The measure proposes $100 million in first-year grants, paltry considering that California alone needs $40 billion for a mammoth bullet train project that would link San Francisco and Sacramento with Los Angeles and San Diego.
Some argue federal money would be better spent to research electric-powered cars and other cutting-edge travel alternatives, rather than the ribbons of steel that triggered America's westward expansion in the 1800s.
"Solutions to our current problems have to be found, not imposed from previous centuries. High-speed rail is just a polished version of 19th century technology," said William Garrison, co-author of "Tomorrow's Transportation" and a retired civil engineering professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
But supporters contend high-speed trains could be an important alternative, rivaling even air travel once home-to-airport travel times and delays cause by airport security measures are taken into account.
The preceding paragraphs suggest the only choices are an update of the
Overland Limited, complete with Buffalo Bill pluggin' bison from the rear platform, or a souped-up Europeanized
Electroliner. There is a simpler solution: amend or repeal the speed restrictions the Federal Railroad Administration inherited from the Interstate Commerce Commission holding train speeds to 79 mph (125 km/h) on signalled tracks. The regulation requiring the use of automatic train stop and cab signalling to run at higher speeds reeks of cartel-management in which railroads that made such investments sought a return on their investment that was being undercut by railroads that had not made such investments. But safe operation at speeds in the 110-125 range was
possible on jointed rail protected by automatic block signals and
regularly done with steam locomotives.
To accomplish something similar today involves cost overruns and implementation delays.
Illinois has sunk about $80 million into track and crossing improvements over a decade, but has finished less than half of a planned high-speed route from Chicago to St. Louis that would shave 90 minutes off the current 5 1/2-hour train ride.
Completing the estimated $400 million project will take years, but is projected to boost ridership from 300,000 last year to 1.2 million, said George Weber, chief of the Illinois Department of Transportation's passenger rail division.
Weber said trains could begin running at 110 mph by 2009 on 120 miles of the 280-mile route after the state recently settled on safety technology that will ensure faster trains can coexist with cars and slow-moving freight traffic that shares the line.
"To think this state (Illinois) has known for 10 years how to get Chicago-to-St. Louis to three hours and 45 minutes, and we kind of languish at five and a half to six hours," Harnish said. "Imagine what difference that would make to the St. Louis economy if you could get to Chicago by train (that much quicker)."
Humph. It used to be called sharp dispatching and disciplined railroading, including ascertaining whether all superior trains due on the schedule had arrived and left, and perhaps a provision that inferior trains would clear the scheduled time of superior trains by fifteen (rather than five or ten) minutes to preclude signal checks. Meanwhile, politicians have a chronic case of
Shinkansen envy.
The massive project, which would lay all new track, could complete its first phase from San Francisco to Los Angeles within 15 years if voters approve a $10 billion bond issue scheduled for next year. But the vote has been pushed back twice and could be postponed again because of worries that it could hinder the state's bonding authority for roads, schools and other projects.
"How can we say we can't afford this in California, the biggest state in the country, when these systems are being built all over the world? ... It's a matter of priority," said Dan Leavitt, deputy director of the California High-Speed Rail Authority.
John Spychalski, a transportation expert and professor at Penn State University, says high-speed rail will continue to languish unless lawmakers provide the same financial backing as highways and air travel. He said some could be swayed if high-profile projects such as California's succeed.
"I don't think there's any question that it would help build momentum for making this kind of service a reality where it makes sense to have it," Spychalski said. "There just needs to be a political will, and right now not enough elected officials see it as a viable alternative."
I repeat: there are simpler reforms that will make improved running times possible almost immediately, and at much lower first cost. With
greater domestic interest in the rail network, it's the right time to consider them.
The Illinois cornfields whizzing past Mark Hardacre's view from the Amtrak cafe car had nothing on the memorable splendor the Australian had already taken in on his trans-America adventure - the Pacific Ocean so vast and blue off California's coast. The emerald green of the Northwest forests. The majesty of the snowcapped Rockies.
But the cheery man from New South Wales was impressed with a couple of things he'd not seen in three previous Amtrak treks across this nation's rails over the past two decades - Americans seeming to outnumber tourists, and far fewer empty seats.
"It's good to see the Americans starting to use their trains, because if they don't use them they'll lose them," Hardacre, 53, said recently as Amtrak click-clacked its way from St. Louis to Chicago, one leg of his monthlong sightseeing trip with his wife, Janice.
Yes, the continued political (not necessarily partisan, read the full article carefully) wrangling over Amtrak funding makes the carrier's job more difficult, but the loss of institutional memory over such things as ascertaining that superior trains have arrived or left or of the discipline of keeping to time contribute.
Amtrak says the lack of stable funding holds it back, leaving it unable to commit to infrastructure improvements. It still uses some equipment dating back half a century and cannot add new rail cars it says it can easily fill on some routes.
The service also continues to be nagged by travel delays, mostly because it must share the tracks with freight haulers that own the rails and charge Amtrak a modest fee - $90 million in the last fiscal year - for using them. With freight traffic soaring in recent years, Amtrak's on-time performance slid to an average of 68 percent last year, its worst showing since the 1970s.
Poor on-time performance is probably a bigger killer of repeat business than slow running times. A mile-a-minute train that isn't laid out by"freight train interference" is probably a better option than a 90 mph version that is (and do the math: over a 200-300 mile corridor, there's not that much time advantage anyway.)
Between last October and March, Amtrak's riders numbered 14.3 million, up 5 percent over the previous year and sailing toward another record.
At least some of that growth might be tied to the investment by Illinois and 13 other states in short-distance corridors Amtrak otherwise wouldn't offer, essentially paying for service where they see a need.
Last fall, Amtrak added two state-financed roundtrips between St. Louis and Chicago and one apiece between from Quincy and Carbondale to the Windy City. Ridership spiked by 189,823 for the first two-thirds of this fiscal year, bringing the total passenger count in the state to 670,605.
Amtrak chalks it up to convenience.
Before adding the trains between St. Louis and Chicago, for example, the day's first Amtrak reached St. Louis about 2:30 p.m., just 45 minutes before the last train out, commonly forcing riders to spend the night.
But since last year's expansion, Amtrak's first arrival in St. Louis from Chicago is about noon, and the last train leaves for Chicago five hours later, enabling Chicagoans to attend a St. Louis Rams or Cardinals game or visit the cultural sites for an afternoon and head back the same day.
Before the expansion, the only departure times out of Carbondale for Chicago were 3 a.m. and 4 p.m. The state added a breakfast-time departure, and ridership blossomed.
To William Rechtenwald, it's a real bargain. The journalism teacher at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale takes Amtrak several times a year to Chicago, finding the service comfortable enough, roughly $100 per round trip cheaper than driving and less hassle than maneuvering through congested freeways.
"I'm a fan of Amtrak," he said. "It's a much wiser choice than driving."
Route connectivity also matters. That Lincoln Service allows St. Louisans to attend a Bear or Cub game or visit a museum and go home, and there are
options for going on to Milwaukee as well, although those work less well as a day excursion.