Can't blame them. In my opinion, it has been proven that ANY high speed rail operation should be on its own specific right of way, and TOTALLY isolated from the public, i.e. absolutely NO grade crossings nor access to the right of way.

I agree with Hot Water, the only way high speed rail would get its feet off the ground is with its own tracks, No grade crossings! then maybe people will get into riding trains. I do not think we will see new High Speed Rail in our lifetime. Here in NH we are still talking about extending the "T" into Nashua NH. The talk has been going on for over 10 years and it is at a stand still! We still have to drive our cars or take the buss  to Boston!

 

Rich in NH

Sadly we live in an era where everybody feels empowered to voice their opinion on everything... with the result being absolutely nothing ever gets done period, let alone productively.  We've gotten real good at that.    And when something does manage to squeak past the minutia of endless debating, it usually gets done the wrong way.  

 

David

David, Hot Water,

 

Both of you guys nailed it on the head.

Didn't the NYC run high trains such the 20th Century and Empire State Express at 100 mph + on segments of that line in the early 1900s?

 

There was just as much freight traffic then as now.  Perhaps there was more traffic because trains were shorter.

 

It could probably be worked out.   CSX is most likely looking for a significant infrastructure upgrade at tax payer expense.  This is going on everywhere high speed rail is proposed.

 

Joe

 

There are too many political and environmental hurdles to building a separate rail line, it would never happen. Using the CSX line is the best option. I'm sure there could be steps taken to protect CSX's interests.

 

Jeff C

This makes perfect sense (and probably costs too much). A good reason or two why they will probably do just the opposite!

What about the TGV line in France?  I saw it and a train from a distance, but the only

rail line I crossed there looked like abandoned meter guage in the Dordogne...

It is probably fenced off, as are not the Japanese lines, and etc. etc.

Even without beds on the tracks, people can't hear trains at today's speeds...

gotta be fenced....

And then comes the question of "Who pays for upgraded CSX track?"  CSX is suspecting they are going to be the stuckee, OR, as posted above, that they can

hit the taxpayers up for the cost.  I am against both options.

Big Brother should have kept other NYC-Chicago (Erie? Who else?)lines in reserve, rather than allowing them all to be yanked and developed, if they wanted to get off on this tangent.

From CSX's CEO Ward's 2011 interview with Bloomberg article ....

 

CSX Chief Says He ‘Can’t Be Part of’ Obama High-Speed Rail Plan 

 

... “I’m a corporation. I exist to make money, OK?” Ward said today in an interview at Bloomberg’s New York office. “You can’t make money hauling passengers, so why would I want to do that? That wouldn’t be fair to my shareholders.” CSX is the third-largest major freight railroad in the U.S. by revenue. ...

 

... CSX and New York are in a dispute over the state’s plan to provide passenger service between Albany and Buffalo with trains going as fast as 110 mph. CSX will not allow trains traveling faster than 90 mph on its tracks, citing potential damage. Railroads such as Union Pacific, the largest freight rail company by revenue, are working with states to upgrade their tracks for passenger trains traveling as fast as 110 mph. .....

 

 

Yes, they need to make a profit. They need to realize where their bread is buttered and be willing to give back a little once in a while. The passengers on those trains are also the consumers that make their freight hauling business possible. I don't think these folks always see the big picture, more like tunnel vision (no pun intended). Looks like UP is getting the big picture and a little more willing to try an improve things for all, not just their bottom line.

quote:

They need to realize where their bread is buttered and be willing to give back a little once in a while. The passengers on those trains are also the consumers that make their freight hauling business possible

 

I think the days of passenger service being a draw for freight business are long gone. CSX wouldn't be operating the passenger trains anyway, it would be Amtrak, using CSX track.

According to the article I linked above, CSX believes that increased passenger service would disrupt their freight schedules, costing CSX business.

The run between NYC and Albany seems to get plenty of customers. I rode that section many times for work. I don't think there is anywhere near the demand for travel between Buffalo and Albany. I rode part of that line many years ago. The trip seemed to take forever, largely because of all the stops between Rochester and Albany. I have no idea whether any of them have been eliminated.

Took a trip last August from Hinton West Virginia to Williamsburg Virginia with the Family it was horrible.   Amtrak was late coming into the station at Hinton because of Waiting on 2 CSX Coal Drags. then after departing we wound up being delayed again having to switch to a siding to let another CSX Coal Drag Pass us and this last one we were delayed over an Hour on the brecking Bridge line.  We finally showed up at WilliamsBurg  at around 8 Pm and wound up taking a taxi to the Golden Corral to get something to eat because at every stop we were unable to get any food on the way.  We barely made it to the Resturant before it was closing down. 

This was supposed to be a fun trip because my wife and my son had never ridden a Train before.  

Passenger service is up and coming due to the effects of the current Economic Situtation and Ridership is starting to climb in areas. 

I also agree to some of the above statements that  CSX bought out and took away Passenger service on the railroads that it merged with and I have experienced their Heavy Handedness in dealing with things personally.

CSX can afford to help High Speed Rail to a degree or come up with a plan to work it out instead of being of a Single mindset out for itself which is where 90 percent of the industrialized Nation preceives itself as The bottom line and Cares almost nothing for the Workers or how they impact the areas around them.

 

The days of a Company valuing its employees for keeping it in business is long gone The Business model at this point and time seems to be That there is always someone else out there who will do your Job.

 

 

Which railroads did CSX acquire and subsequently drop passenger service?

 

BNSF and AMTRAK can not share low-speed long distance rails in the West.

 

It seems unlikely that CSX can ever host High-Speed Passenger trains in the East.

 

Andrew

I agree.  I am a fan of high-speed passenger rail, but these lines earn a lot of money moving freight at slow speeds.  If I were CSX, I'd bring in a legion of lawyers to stop or at least delay this: no doubt they have. 

I suppose some of this depends on what is meant by "high speed" rail service.  The above posts imply that they are talking about 110 mph.  This is not really high speed service as defined by the rest of the world.  Trains in France, Germany, China, etc., routinely travel at 150 + miles per hour.  Some go at nearly 200 mph.

 

You are definitely going to need a separate track for service 150 + mph service.  You don't need it for 110 mph.  

 

You do need special signaling, train control, and banked curves for 110 mph service.  

 

Perhaps they could add back a couple of the tracks that the NYC / Conrail took out after passenger was cut or discontinued in the 70s.

 

Amtrak has been frustrated for years by freight railroads delaying their trains.  Amtrak is supposed to get priority over freight traffic by law.  Some of the major railroads ignore this requirement.  Union Pacific and BNSF seem to try to keep Amtrak on time.  Railroads that meet certain Amtrak time standards get a bonus.  It is easy money.   

 

Joe

I agree with CSX on this one. Don't even get me started on the "Browndoggle" out here in the People's Republic of California.

 

High speed rail will only be high speed rail if, and only if, it has dedicated trackage without grade crossings and minimal intermediate stops. High speed trains will turn into high-speed collisions with grade crossings -- there are too many people out there competing for the Darwin Award. Intermediate stops consume time for deceleration, boarding and acceleration to cruising speed. They can't share track with other trains as the traffic will require lower speeds and stops due to line problems or freights moving in and out of the line(s).

 

As for Amtrak, BNSF has been pretty friendly in many areas because there is a lot of double trackage. UP is less friendly in some areas, according to Amtrak people I've talked to while riding the trains -- the Sunset Limited comes to mind.

The operative word here is "higher speed rail" That's the somewhat-informal designation for 90-110MPH passenger rail.

 

In many places all of the above improvements cited by 'Joe Barker' PLUS a whole lot more double track, or at least more and longer passing sidings, is needed just to keep 79MPH passenger trains from getting gummed up. In a fair number of places, freight trains are longer than the average passing siding, so in the inevitable meet-ups,  passengers always end up with the short end of the stick, since their train is usually the only one that'll fit into the siding.

 

As for CSX and New York State, I remember something goofy-sounding about CSX's requirements. A long-winded set of search words crammed into Google uncovered this tidbit:

 

The part that sticks out is that CSX will grant NY a extra "higher-speed" track on its right-of way (ex NY Central ROW that used to host four tracks, but now only has two in most places)--but only if that track is at least 30 feet from existing freight tracks. Think about that for a little while how well that'll work out. According to the linked article, a fair number of NYS officials didn't think that out too well.

 

---PCJ

I'm not sure any of the railroads made a lot of money from passengers? Now the passenger service by Amtrak is more of a government funded public service than profit motivated operation. There are still a lot of people that depend on trains for transportation, and I believe that is on the rise. I don't know a lot about it but I think when Amtrak was formed the railroads were obligated to work with them to keep passenger service going where ever they thought it was needed.

 

My earlier point was that CSX seems only interested in freight profit as I'm sure UP is interested in as well seeing as they are a corporation hauling freight also. But UP was willing to work with others to promote hi speed rail travel and CSX was trying to get out of it. Sounds greedy on CSX's part to me. I would bet the passenger service provided on all the major roads disrupt their freight schedules, not just CSX's.

 

I didn't mean to imply  that CSX was making any money on the passenger service. I was trying to say the train passengers should be thought of little more highly by the railroads. In one way or another (the big picture) they are the end consumers for all the freight the railroads haul. Without their purchases, tax payments, etc. there would be no need for the railroads to be hauling anything. There are a lot of corporations (and individuals) that need to start realizing that without consumers, workers, (us grunts) etc. all of their big companies, yachts, fancy mansions and other riches would not be possible. They can't do it by themselves.

 

With a little research, you would find that there is not ONE passenger operation ANYWHERE that makes money. And I'm talking world-wide, not just the USA. Every last one is subsidized in some fashion.

I addition to the valid concerns stated above, won’t high-speed rail / trains require specialized in-cab signaling as in the European high-speed trains? I don’t think the train engineer / driver could be expected to watch out for & interpret line-side signaling when running at speeds over 150 mph. So CSX might have to upgrade signaling on their existing tracks that is suitable for the existing freight trains but insufficient for the proposed high-speed trains.

These are just my opinion.

Thanks,

Naveen Rajan

And this is a valid reason not to have any type of public transportation for some people. I don't happen to be one of them, because there are benefits over and above line-item profitability to having a strong, varied infrastructure.

 

Jeff C

As I have stated before Amtrak should stand on their own without our tax dollars. Time for them to make a profit or go to the dust bin of history. 

The freight railroads should not get subsidies either, nor should the marine operations or the airports or the highways  

Just build a separate R-O-W like the French did. CSX's Chicago Main is congested enough. 

Your right, no business should get subsidies. 

I don't think CSX likes any kind of passenger service moving over its rails. 

 

There are a few exceptions however. 

CSX recently began allowing the Florida SunRail commuter project to operate on its tracks through the Orlando area. This is not high-speed rail because the trains will never get over 80 mph. It also cost the state a lot of money to lease the line and assume responsibility for any and all accidents involving SunRail trains. 

Flash:

 

But it’s not a LEASE and now CSX has little to say about passenger service on that line because the State of Florida now OWNS the track and right-of-way from Deland to Poinciana (61 miles).  It was purchased from CSX for $432 million and FDOT now controls operations and dispatch along that portion of the route.  In a reversal of roles FDOT gives CSX trackage rights during nights and on weekends when Sunrail is not running.  CSX also shifted some of their freight traffic to the old Seaboard line through Ocala and Wildwood.  Amtrak still operates their regular schedules on the FDOT trackage. 

 

So the way to get CSX “onboard” with passenger service is to buy their right-of-way!

 

Bill

And that, I think, would be in ANY mode, not just rail!

Absolutely impossible. As I said above, there is NOT ONE passenger train operation ANYWHERE in the WORLD that makes a profit.

quote:

As I have stated before Amtrak should stand on their own without our tax dollars. Time for them to make a profit or go to the dust bin of history. 

 

How about airports?

Would any airline survive without government spending on things related to air transport?

The passenger train companies in Great Britain are making healthy profits. 

       
       


And buying r-o-w is quite a task.
Note that, in the Florida case, CSX had an alternate route.  Alternate route may prove cheaper.
When anyone buys r-o-w he/she also gets the leases.  Railroads may own the rails, ties, & ballast, but not all of the land beneath.  Many of these leases were with farmers 100 yrs ago.  You the new r-o-w "owner" will have to rework these leases.  Imagine if that old farm property is now subdivided.  You the new "owner" will be stuck while CSX's boys walk away laughing.

...After being relieved of the burden of maintaining the right-of-way, that is

 

---PCJ

But they have to pay for using the infrastructure. Network Rail, who maintain the R-o-W, are also making profits. 

If is a societal priority in a country to have a mass and/or high-speed rail system the government will subsidize or even pay for the entire thing. This is up to the government, and frankly appears to make sense.  I cannot imagine, for example, Japan functioning anywhere like it does without all its mass and high-speed rail systems.  I'm not sure how they would make their country and society work without that.  How they pay for it - tax dollars, fares, profit or loss for the poor blokes assigned to run it, is really sort of irrelevant overall - just acocunting for who and how pays, etc.,  Usually the company books for the owner is a very incomplete look at both the benefits and the costs of the system.  At some level - usually the country as a whole (e.g., Japan), the system works well enough and 'pays for itself.'

But is Network Rail paying its full, fair share of its taxes?  Or they just leasing the ROW from the UK government?