Passenger Trains > All Aboard Florida forecasts 5.3 million riders by 2020

At last, some financial projections.

[www.progressiverailroading.com]=14pxRail News: Passenger Rail
All Aboard Florida forecasts 5.3 million riders by 2020
 All Aboard Florida's (AAF) ridership would reach more than 5.3 million and annual ticket sales would total $293.6 million (in 2012 dollars) by 2020, according to a ridership and revenue study the railroad released this week.


Florida East Coast Industries Inc. (FECI), which owns AAF, commissioned The Louis Berger Group Inc. to develop the ridership and revenue forecast for the proposed service, which would operate between Orlando and Miami starting in 2017.

AAF plans to run about 32 trains a day, or 16 round trip, between Miami and Orlando. The Orlando-to-Miami trip is expected to take about three hours.

According to the report, starting ticket prices would range from a low of $11 for a "non-business", short-distance fare for travel between Fort Lauderdale and Miami, to $130 for a "business," long-distance fare for travel between Orlando and Miami.

By 2030, the service is anticipated to serve about 7 million riders, with annual ticket sales of nearly $400 million.

The service will complement existing modes of travel between core locations in the state, with AAF locations in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach and Orlando. After the initial ramp up, the railroad service will serve about 10 percent of the long-distance travel market between southeast and central Florida, and about 1.2 percent of the overall short-distance market, the study said.

The study's key findings include:
• AAF's "addressable market" for intercity service amounts to more than 110 million annual trips.
• AAF will address a "challenging intercity trip." At 230 miles, the trip between Orlando and Miami is relatively too short for the time involved to fly, and is relatively long for an auto trip where congestion can make the four- to five-hour trip "unpleasant and unreliable." Travel volume on highways between central and southeast Florida is expected to exceed capacity by 2030.
• Population growth is expected to continue in the region. Within 1 mile of proposed AAF stations, annual population growth has ranged from 2 percent to 5 percent since 1990, "indicating strong growth in the urban core at the heart of the AAF alignment."
• AAF would provide travel-time savings of 25 percent to 50 percent when compared with other surface transportation modes.
• Fares compare favorably with existing travel modes when time, tolls and other travel costs are factored.

The full report can be read here.

If AAF can do it, the ridership will compare favorably with the NEC. FY 2014 for the NEC was 11.65 million I believe, but the length of AAF will be about half of the NEC. Given the distribution of ridership along the NEC, I would guess that AAF would beat the NY-Boston half, but fall short of NYC-DC's totals (including intermediate stops).

This is indeed good news because in fact tif those nnumbers pan out, the real numbers will be higher when the additional stations along the coast, specially in Brevard County come on line in the early '20s. I know that Brevard County is already working with AAF in deciding possible station locations and who is going to pay for what, for stations in the county.

I believe opponents to AAF are presenting their arguments to a federal judge today.  I don't think they have a leg to stand on, but we'll see.

Does this proposal call for total grade crossing elimination along the current FEC main?  That's a whole lot of high speed trains for towns with lots of grade crossings (and a fair number of elderly drivers).

sums007 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe opponents to AAF are presenting their
> arguments to a federal judge today.  I don't
> think they have a leg to stand on, but we'll see.

All that the opponents are trying to do is block the bond issue. In the last few weeks AAF has said that they will go ahead even if they do not get the bond money. It will just cost them a bit more.

march_hare Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does this proposal call for total grade crossing
> elimination along the current FEC main?  That's a
> whole lot of high speed trains for towns with lots
> of grade crossings (and a fair number of elderly
> drivers).

Nope...

DTrainshooter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> march_hare Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Does this proposal call for total grade
> crossing
> > elimination along the current FEC main?  That's
> a
> > whole lot of high speed trains for towns with
> lots
> > of grade crossings (and a fair number of
> elderly
> > drivers).
>
> Nope...

There are a lot of grade crossings in Martin County alone. Adding the second track will consume space that could level some of the humpback crossings, so that creates even more headaches.

(I'm not sure I buy into the hype over grade crossings. I know the local opponents are making a big deal of it, but I dunno. A six cars plus engine train traveling at 100 mph will put the gates down for about 90 seconds. Compared to a 40 mph 100 car train which will be a three to four minutes delay.  The real buster is a 15 mph 150 car train in downtown Stuart tying up four crossings simultaneously.)

Jishnu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sums007 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I believe opponents to AAF are presenting their
> > arguments to a federal judge today.  I don't
> > think they have a leg to stand on, but we'll
> see.
>
> All that the opponents are trying to do is block
> the bond issue. In the last few weeks AAF has said
> that they will go ahead even if they do not get
> the bond money. It will just cost them a bit more.

Yup.  Sorry for not being clear on that piece of it.