Passenger Trains > More Amtrak in Virginia study?

A study has been funded to explore extending passenger train service beyond Roanoke (service to start on 10/31/17) to the Blacksburg and Christianburg area in the New River Valley area of Virginia. Article is here: http://www.roanoke.com/news/amtrak-to-the-nrv-state-gives-for-feasibility-study/article_76522530-46bc-583f-9a22-83ea5a5fdb01.html

Boy, the "study" and consultant lobby must be the strongest one in the country. $350G for a 67 page all-color booklet with about 18 pages of actual info....that a college business class could put together for a few thousand bucks.

I wish I could patent the "Capt. Obvious pie chart". Here's the number of ppl living there, and the # who commute to DC, and # who would the the train....and the cost of operating the train...startup, and sustaining...and time to get it together.

The only number never there is the # of $ for featherbedding favorite son contractors in exchange for votes.

I'm a democrat, and even I have gotten disgusted with the how everything is just so blatently "money for votes" any more... Its probably always been this bad. I just see it clearer now. $350,000 for a study. Really.

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Boy, the "study" and consultant lobby must be the
> strongest one in the country.
>
Often I would largely be in agreement with what you said, but this time the $350K is for an operational analysis to be conducted by NS. This is a necessary step in the planning process that will identify the impact on NS' operations if the proposed passenger service were to be introduced. This is not something that NS does as a commercial offering and I am certain they would really prefer to have their people doing other things.

Gordon

How to save $350,000: Ask your best first and second trick dispatchers if they can handle another train at whatever time they figure the schedule might put it on their territory, and tell them what parameters it has to live up to. They will probably have an answer for you before their shift is over, along with suggestions on what they would recommend is needed to make sure it meets its goals. I bet they don't do study after study after study after yet another environmental study if UPS wants to run another train on their railroad.

Hell, why not take it to Knoxville, it will only be one trip in each direction, far larger market.

Why stop there? Knoxville-Atlanta-Savannah. Well, I'm kidding but all these routes have a finite limit.

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why stop there? Knoxville-Atlanta-Savannah. Well,
> I'm kidding but all these routes have a finite
> limit.

Blacksburg is a natural rail extension, with Virginia Tech generating traffic. How's the current bus connection to 176 / 19 / 20 making out?

irhoghead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How to save $350,000: Ask your best first and
> second trick dispatchers if they can handle
> another train at whatever time they figure the
> schedule might put it on their territory, and tell
> them what parameters it has to live up to. They
> will probably have an answer for you before their
> shift is over, along with suggestions on what they
> would recommend is needed to make sure it meets
> its goals.

That's how I wound up being a consultant.


> I bet they don't do study after study
> after study after yet another environmental study
> if UPS wants to run another train on their
> railroad.

Actually, depending upon the nature of the new train, they do. Most railroads have a permanent department assigned to doing exactly that. In the instant case, those folks will be doing the work.

TAW

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ctillnc Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Why stop there? Knoxville-Atlanta-Savannah.
> Well,
> > I'm kidding but all these routes have a finite
> > limit.
>
> Blacksburg is a natural rail extension, with
> Virginia Tech generating traffic. How's the
> current bus connection to 176 / 19 / 20 making
> out?

Yes, Christiansburg (Blacksburg) is a natural extension. Lots of VT potential travelers. Taking the Northeast Regional any further runs into a few problems such as slow running and low population density. Also you would no longer be able to make a same-day turn with the equipment on the current schedule - you would need another train set.

The connecting bus is a good news/bad news story. Ridership has been good and helped make the case for the Roanoke train extension. With the October 31 extension from Lynchburg, Blacksburg will get a daily connection to the train at Roanoke instead of the present three day a week service. But the current daily bus between Roanoke and Lynchburg will be discontinued effective that date so there will no longer be a connection to 19 and 20, which was a side benefit of having the bus, and Bedford will will not have service.

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Boy, the "study" and consultant lobby must be the
> strongest one in the country. $350G for a 67 page
> all-color booklet with about 18 pages of actual
> info....that a college business class could put
> together for a few thousand bucks.


Usually, what you are referring to is the public presentation part of the work. The detail is may be available to those interested, the amount depending upon how the work was conducted, which depends upon the budget. There is generally too much of that for the interest of most folks including, unfortunately, the folks making decisions. Actually, it it is all put in a single report, folks will be afraid of the page count and not even look (been there, done that, got the badge).

There are a couple of approaches to such a study, providing differing levels of detail (and, guess what, costing different amounts of cash).

* Heuristic: Run a simulation, read the statistical output (basically the amount of delay per 100 train miles). If the result is unacceptable, try something to fix it, repeat until acceptable results. Make a decision/assessment/pronouncement and publish the overview. There isn't a lot of detail to publish.

* Analytical: Assess the infrastructure and the traffic, determine the problems analytically, develop solutions, run a simulation and inspect the movement of individual trains. Determine whether the anticipated solution works. If not, do another detailed analysis to find out why. Repeat until the desired results. This generates a lot of detail: speed, why the speed zone, running time, grades and their effect, road crossings and their effect, the signal system, terrain, and so on. The report on such work (or an appendix to such work) will typically provide a discussion of what infrastructure is proposed and why, what speed limit changes are proposed and why, what schedules are proposed and why. Reports for work conducted in this manner typically have more appendices than basic report content. I know for a fact that when it's all in one volume, nobody will even look at it.

The same applies to the economic side of the work. The ridership study might be a general assessment: so many folks live here and work there. It might be as detailed as walking around through business areas getting license plate numbers and looking them up.

Construction costs are similar. One can use unit costs of track per mile, signals per mile, etc. or one can enhance unit costing with specific knowledge of miles of cut, fill, wetland, number of bridges, potential utility relocation, etc.

The more detail, the greater the cost. $350k sounds right for an initial assessment. Done right, if will provide the basis for filing in more detail and getting closer to a final plan. The final plan may take not only more than one study, but more than two.


>
> I wish I could patent the "Capt. Obvious pie
> chart". Here's the number of ppl living there,
> and the # who commute to DC, and # who would the
> the train....and the cost of operating the
> train...startup, and sustaining...and time to get
> it together.


That's what most of the public wants to see. If you want to see the backup, insist on it. If there is no backup, THEN be suspicious of the work.

>
> The only number never there is the # of $ for
> featherbedding favorite son contractors in
> exchange for votes.


That is contract management, not feasibility study. If an architect designs a $100k house for you and you wind up paying $200k, it's probably your fault.



>
> I'm a democrat, and even I have gotten disgusted
> with the how everything is just so blatently
> "money for votes" any more... Its probably always
> been this bad. I just see it clearer now.
> $350,000 for a study. Really.

Funny thing. I used to line my pockets as a towerman. Then I lined my pockets as a train dispatcher. Then, like others with a similar background, I lined my pockets figuring out how to make the present work better and the future work better than that. One of the three is not socially acceptable. Perhaps folks need to understand a bit more and pontificate a bit less.

TAW

Former consultant checking in here.

$350K for a study of this complexity is not out of line. The engineers (civil, not locomotive) that do this kind of work are licensed professionals, figure the junior guys at $70,000 a year, the principals who review the estimates for track work and station sites are well over $100K.

If you want a study conducted by ignoramuses, you can indeed have a bunch of business school grad students do the work. But don't expect anybody who controls funding at DOT, or anybody at NS's operating department or engineering department, to believe what it says. If you want a study that actually has some credibility, you will have to get people who know what they're doing. Those folks have other things to do with their time, so they expect to be paid.

I can't count all the bargain basement consultant reports I've seen that weren't worth the paper they were printed on. In many cases, the client gets to do them all over again.

You don't always get what you pay for. But you almost always end up paying for what you get.

Jimbo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
(SNIP)
>
> The connecting bus is a good news/bad news story.
> Ridership has been good and helped make the case
> for the Roanoke train extension. With the October
> 31 extension from Lynchburg, Blacksburg will get a
> daily connection to the train at Roanoke instead
> of the present three day a week service. But the
> current daily bus between Roanoke and Lynchburg
> will be discontinued effective that date so there
> will no longer be a connection to 19 and 20, which
> was a side benefit of having the bus, and Bedford
> will will not have service.


Thanks for that info, I didn't realize the Roanoke to Lynchburg bus would be discontinued.

Any idea about the # of passengers on and off 19/20?

gbmott Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pdt Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Boy, the "study" and consultant lobby must be
> the
> > strongest one in the country.
> >
> Often I would largely be in agreement with what
> you said, but this time the $350K is for an
> operational analysis to be conducted by NS. This
> is a necessary step in the planning process that
> will identify the impact on NS' operations if the
> proposed passenger service were to be introduced.
> This is not something that NS does as a commercial
> offering and I am certain they would really prefer
> to have their people doing other things.

There is a lot at stake for the public AND the railroad. The Washington state program was developed as a collaboration of experts working for Washington State and for BN. That encourages both sides to be professional railroaders rather than trying to get the most from the other guy. When the Washington program started, I was working for BN. There was an ex-SP guy working for the state. The professionalism went to the point of when I couldn't be at a meeting, he would represent what I had to say and if he couldn't be there, I would represent what he would say. That relationship continued when I left BN, went to work for Washington State, and my late colleague MEP took over the BN role I had. That approach is not too popular with the railroad industry, however.

TAW

march_hare Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Former consultant checking in here.
>

> I can't count all the bargain basement consultant
> reports I've seen that weren't worth the paper
> they were printed on. In many cases, the client
> gets to do them all over again.

I can't count the number of those I have been hired to fix. That also applies to EIS work. Usually, there is very little if any of the original work that can be salvaged.

TAW

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ctillnc Wrote:

> Blacksburg is a natural rail extension, with
> Virginia Tech generating traffic. How's the
> current bus connection to 176 / 19 / 20 making
> out?

Actually I would think Bristol would be an even better extension. That of course would be two trains leaving Washington and Bristol around mid morning. The problem there is finding two more sets of equipment. Just about all of the Virginia trains are extensions of NEC trains that formally terminated in Washington.

Extending the train past Bristol would require help from Tennessee .... good luck with that. The station in Bristol BTW is just north of the VA/TN boarder -

https://goo.gl/maps/NXHkNdvKCQU2

3rd_Raton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ctillnc Wrote:
>
> > Blacksburg is a natural rail extension, with
> > Virginia Tech generating traffic. How's the
> > current bus connection to 176 / 19 / 20 making
> > out?
>
> Actually I would think Bristol would be an even
> better extension. That of course would be two
> trains leaving Washington and Bristol around mid
> morning. The problem there is finding two more
> sets of equipment. Just about all of the Virginia
> trains are extensions of NEC trains that formally
> terminated in Washington.
>
> Extending the train past Bristol would require
> help from Tennessee .... good luck with that. The
> station in Bristol BTW is just north of the VA/TN
> boarder -
>
> https://goo.gl/maps/NXHkNdvKCQU2

That's certainly possible, although Blacksburg claims a daytime population of over 50,000 people. Big college, lots of economic activity driven by engineering and tech operations.

Bristol VA is a small fraction of that, and the TN (changed from NC) side of town doesn't carry a lot of weight in Richmond.



ETA: Bristol is the location for one of the GEICO Gekko commercials. The little guy orates on the town / state line



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/17 13:49 by Lackawanna484.

All kidding aside, extending trains has merit. However, Amtrak strongly prefers not to run a train "backwards", meaning that there must be a wye within reasonable distance of the new endpoint. Unless the equipment turns same-day, there must be a storage track. There may have to be cleaning and/or restocking. Crew costs and assignments must be reevaluated. Additional station(s) or Amshack(s) must be readied, and there's a question of staffing those. And all other other costs of extending the train must be taken into consideration. My point is, it's a complex decision. Maybe it's a good idea to extend this train. Can't say until the numbers are calculated and published.

Lackawanna484 says:

>>>Bristol VA is a small fraction of that, and the NC side of town doesn't carry a lot of weight in Richmond.<<<

Considering that the NC side of town is at least 50 miles away I suspect it doesn't carry a lot of weight. But the Tennessee side of town probably doesn't carry much either.

There is a wye, at Walton, just south of Christiansburg. The layover and service facility, however, is currently in Roanoke. So, it would either need to be relocated, or there will be deadhead moves.

Paul Wilson
Arlington, VA

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jimbo Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> (SNIP)
> >
> > The connecting bus is a good news/bad news
> story.
> > Ridership has been good and helped make the
> case
> > for the Roanoke train extension. With the
> October
> > 31 extension from Lynchburg, Blacksburg will get
> a
> > daily connection to the train at Roanoke
> instead
> > of the present three day a week service. But
> the
> > current daily bus between Roanoke and Lynchburg
> > will be discontinued effective that date so
> there
> > will no longer be a connection to 19 and 20,
> which
> > was a side benefit of having the bus, and
> Bedford
> > will will not have service.
>
>
> Thanks for that info, I didn't realize the Roanoke
> to Lynchburg bus would be discontinued.
>
> Any idea about the # of passengers on and off
> 19/20?

There were very few passengers on 19 and 20 that used the connecting bus. It was never advertised, and the connection was not guaranteed, which doesn't work well now that 20 is often late.