• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

USA vs UK Railroads?

Status
Not open for further replies.

gooeychopz

Member
Joined
10 Jul 2024
Messages
6
Location
New Jersey, USA
Greetings from across the pond.

I'm from the New York City metro area, I've been a train buff ever since I was a little kid. I have grown up to be a Rail Traffic Controller for one of the major railroads in the area, but I won't blurt out which one.

I took a vacation out to London and Bath in September of 2023, and I honestly had my mind blown by your rail system. It was affordable yet efficient, reliable and pretty frequent, I never really felt stranded anywhere at night. Between the trains, buses, the underground, it kind of blew my mind how interconnected and available everything was.

If I could pick the brains of some of you, I'd kind of like to compare our systems because I've been ranting and raving about how "they don't seem to have this issue over there" when something goes wrong here at work.

Trees coming down on catenary wires, not being able to accurately track trains [we use blocks created by circuits in the rail to track trains, I think you guys maybe use actual GPS?] especially when it rains a lot and flood water bridges the two rails causing a shunt to appear, stuff like that.

Is your rail infrastructure as perfect as it looks or are there hidden horrors that we don't see as outsiders? What do you guys think when you look at our rail infrastructure? I don't know I have so many questions about so many things.

Of course, if anyone has any questions about how things are operated over here, I'll gladly answer to the best of my ability without putting my railroad on blast or anything like that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

GardenRail

Member
Joined
26 Mar 2023
Messages
504
Its good to read, how you find our network over here. Its an unhealthy mix of passenger and freight, but I think we do ok.... When I look at US Railroads, it amazes me how dedicated to freight you are, something we have lost. Especially our ability to serve small business, with a couple of wagons at a time etc, like your Short-Lines do. All our freight now tends to be block trains of a certain load, we no longer really move coal because of the green agenda here, and we have lost our ability to serve small business. We do however, do passenger trains well, even though us Brits love a good moan about them. I am surprised in the US that you have not embraced high speed rail, given the size of your nation. Our signalling is a mix of systems. Where I work, Signalling Sheffield area in England, we are Track Circuit Block, using current through the rails, to in effect cause a short circuit to see where the trains are, and we also have Axel Counters, which count the wheels in and out of a section. To all intense and purpose, these two systems visually look the same on the workstation.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,876
Location
SE London
It's definitely not perfect here - reliability is an issue plus fares are generally quite high, and if you stick around on railforums, you'll find numerous complaints about the state of the railways. But I think you're right that rail specifically and public transport in general are much more developed in the UK (and indeed most of Europe) than the US. Lots of reasons for that including:

  • Higher population density makes public transport more viable.
  • The motoring lobby isn't as powerful here, and there's generally more public acceptance of the desirability of people avoiding cars.
  • That leads to that our cities are typically more compact and more walkable

Certainly when I go to the US, I find it intensely frustrating how hard it is to get around without a car, other than in a few urban areas.
 

railfan99

Established Member
Joined
14 Jun 2020
Messages
1,714
Location
Victoria, Australia
Even USA motels aren't typically located close to Amtrak stations, whereas in the UK (and Europe) there's more often than not a stack of accommodation close by. This is partly due to history since the railways commenced in 1825, but also because stations are usually close to central business districts. A Premier Inn, Travelodge or Leonardo's Hotel may not be far from a station.

The USA passenger rail network is sparse, and deficient in key cities such as Los Angeles, although some improvements have occurred.

UK cities often have limited road infrastructure, especially close in, so they're not ideal for motorists.
 

Envoy

Established Member
Joined
29 Aug 2014
Messages
2,804
I may be correct in thinking that most of the tracks in the USA are actually owned by freight companies? If that is the case, then surely this is one of the core reasons why your passenger train provision is way behind other advanced nations? I get it that you need to have freight trains transporting stuff across the country but the US needs to find a way of improving passenger train transportation.

In the more densely populated parts of the country with distances similar to western Europe, the government should build high speed lines from city to city, but in appears that both the Democrats and Republicans are not interested? If they built new high speed lines from city to city, they would still have the problem of reaching the city centres. To do that, the US government need to take control of tracks into urban areas by compulsory purchasing them off the freight companies with passenger trains taking priority. Where conflicts arise, a body needs to be set up to sort out the pathing issues.

Land prices in Britain are incredibly high and this has meant that we have lagged behind other nations - such as France & Spain in building new high speed lines. The former Conservative Government cancelled the northern legs of HS2 - our new high speed (like 200mph) line from London to the north. Now it will only go as far as Birmingham unless the new Labour Government puts in back on the building programme. Japan, with a similar sized land area but far more mountainous than Britain, has managed to build high speed lines to most regions.

When you travelled from London to Bath, you were travelling on the Great Western Mainline whose route - was mapped out by the great Victorian Engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel. So, what you travelled on was the much modified original route of the GWR which extends further into the south west and also into south Wales plus The Cotswolds and through to Hereford. When you reached Chippenham, the train would have switched to diesel power (under floor engines) as the money ran out to complete the electrification through to Bristol - although the line from Swindon to Cardiff did get electrified. (That’s another thing that north America lacks - widespread electrification of the railways). Hopefully, more electrification of the GWR lines will happen soon.

Hopefully, you can persuade some of your colleagues/politicians to take a trip to Britain & other European countries to how efficient the railways are? In the meantime, here are some websites/ You Tubers that may be of interest?

This one shows you the trains and are they keeping to time. Go back in time through the day to find out. Suggest you put Bristol Parkway in the location box for starters. Note that if you click on a train, it will show you the entire journey. https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/detailed/

How does the Amtrak website compare with the British one? https://www.nationalrail.co.uk or this websites' own version which you will find above.

Excellent site with rail travel advice:> https://www.seat61.com
See his video of London to Bath:>
 
Last edited:

gooeychopz

Member
Joined
10 Jul 2024
Messages
6
Location
New Jersey, USA
Our signalling is a mix of systems. Where I work, Signalling Sheffield area in England, we are Track Circuit Block, using current through the rails, to in effect cause a short circuit to see where the trains are, and we also have Axel Counters, which count the wheels in and out of a section. To all intense and purpose, these two systems visually look the same on the workstation.

Yeah our circuits work the same way, each circuit block is like a mile or so long. We have devices called Defect Detectors which sort of count axels, too... I'm sure you guys have something similar - a device on / around the track where, as a train goes over it, it scans and detects any dragging equipment or hot brakes or high/wide loads or anything of the sorts that could be a potential operational hazard... once the train crosses over the detector, it'll give a report over the radio of whether it found anything or not. Some detectors will say information about axel counts and length and speed, others will just say the location, track, and "no defects" before it cuts off. From what I've seen / heard, your radio channels aren't open frequency but more of a phone conversation type of deal? A lot of train buffs over here use radio scanners to listen to the railroad frequencies, and we also have websites like Broadcastify to listen as well.

I may be correct in thinking that most of the tracks in the USA are actually owned by freight companies? If that is the case, then surely this is one of the core reasons why your passenger train provision is way behind other advanced nations? I get it that you need to have freight trains transporting stuff across the country but the US needs to find a way of improving passenger train transportation.

In the more densely populated parts of the country with distances similar to western Europe, the government should build high speed lines from city to city, but in appears that both the Democrats and Republicans are not interested? If they built new high speed lines from city to city, they would still have the problem of reaching the city centres. To do that, the US government need to take control of tracks into urban areas by compulsory purchasing them off the freight companies with passenger trains taking priority. Where conflicts arise, a body needs to be set up to sort out the pathing issues.

Land prices in Britain are incredibly high and this has meant that we have lagged behind other nations - such as France & Spain in building new high speed lines. The former Conservative Government cancelled the northern legs of HS2 - our new high speed (like 200mph) line from London to the north. Now it will only go as far as Birmingham unless the new Labour Government puts in back on the building programme. Japan, with a similar sized land area but far more mountainous than Britain, has managed to build high speed lines to most regions.

When you travelled from London to Bath, you were travelling on the Great Western Mainline whose route - was mapped out by the great Victorian Engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel. So, what you travelled on was the much modified original route of the GWR which extends further into the south west and also into south Wales plus The Cotswolds and through to Hereford. When you reached Chippenham, the train would have switched to diesel power (under floor engines) as the money ran out to complete the electrification through to Bristol - although the line from Swindon to Cardiff did get electrified. (That’s another thing that north America lacks - widespread electrification of the railways). Hopefully, more electrification of the GWR lines will happen soon.

Hopefully, you can persuade some of your colleagues/politicians to take a trip to Britain & other European countries to how efficient the railways are? In the meantime, here are some websites/ You Tubers that may be of interest?

This one shows you the trains and are they keeping to time. Go back in time through the day to find out. Suggest you put Bristol Parkway in the location box for starters. Note that if you click on a train, it will show you the entire journey. https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/detailed/

How does the Amtrak website compare with the British one? https://www.nationalrail.co.uk or this websites' own version which you will find above.

Excellent site with rail travel advice:> https://www.seat61.com
See his video of London to Bath:>

Yeah freight companies pretty much own the nation when it comes to long-distance. There's rules in place that says freight carriers are SUPPOSED to prioritize passenger trains, but it's very rarely enforced. Freight companies only build their track in a way where it's rated for their speeds, they don't have any interest in upgading their tracks to be up to high-speed standards, and I believe once you build track up to a certain grade of high-speed freight traffic might not be allowed on it at all but I'm not 100% certain of that part. I think we're starting a revolution, though. Most of us aren't a fan of the two-party political system that we have, but the Republicans are the ones that moreso oppose funding rail infrastructure projects. We currently have very major and overdue infrastructure improvement construction happening between New York City and New Jersey because the three governments have FINALLY come to an agreement on it... it's all joint funding between the states of New York and New Jersey, and the Federal Government.

I honestly loved the London to Bath trip... your trains seem to have a bare minimum standard that we only get on luxury trains, and I don't remember that trip being extremely expensive or anything like that. Is that considered a "long distance" train ride, or is that considered commuter rail? Because the train crew even came through with snacks, which we don't even have on Amtrak - you have to go to the cafe car yourself and get food and drinks.

On the note of electrification... there are some areas that are electrified but get absolutely HAMMERED every time there's a storm that comes through. Trees come down and take everything down, takes hours to restore full service once all is said and done. What's your solution to that? Do you face these challenges too or do you mandate trees within x amount of distance from the tracks need to be cut down to a certain length? We go through some semi-mountainey areas where the trees are both tall and close to the property.
 
Last edited:

gooeychopz

Member
Joined
10 Jul 2024
Messages
6
Location
New Jersey, USA
Honestly the two websites seem to be pretty similar... I've navigated the Amtrak website more times than I can count, so maybe it's easier for me vs somebody that doesn't know what to look for, but as somebody that travels a lot especially by train I kind of know exactly whereabouts to navigate.
 

Envoy

Established Member
Joined
29 Aug 2014
Messages
2,804
Amtrak have certainly upgraded their website since I last looked.
 

Falcon1200

Established Member
Joined
14 Jun 2021
Messages
4,837
Location
Neilston, East Renfrewshire
It seems to me that the same factor which make US rail freight so successful (and fascinating to us over here!) is the reason US inter-city passenger services are so lacking, namely the huge distances involved, air travel being much quicker for many journeys. Whereas the small (comparatively) size of the UK mitigates against rail freight, because if transfer to and from rail at each end of the transit is needed, a direct lorry will be just as fast, and a lot cheaper.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,876
Location
SE London
It seems to me that the same factor which make US rail freight so successful (and fascinating to us over here!) is the reason US inter-city passenger services are so lacking, namely the huge distances involved, air travel being much quicker for many journeys. Whereas the small (comparatively) size of the UK mitigates against rail freight, because if transfer to and from rail at each end of the transit is needed, a direct lorry will be just as fast, and a lot cheaper.

I think that's true if you're thinking about intercontinental journeys, but less true within specific more densely populated parts of the US. One obvious (and I think, oft-quoted) example is that the distance between San Francisco and Los Angeles is about the same as the distance between London and Edinburgh. We manage two trains an hour London to Edinburgh taking about 4 and a half hours. Amtrak manages one train a day between San Francisco [*] and Los Angeles, taking 12 hours. I don't think there's any reason in principle why you couldn't sustain a much better and faster service along that corridor - it's just that the US Government has chosen not to make the investment in building the infrastructure to allow that to happen.

[*] Actually Oakland.
 

simonw

Member
Joined
7 Dec 2009
Messages
1,108
Greetings from across the pond.

I'm from the New York City metro area, I've been a train buff ever since I was a little kid. I have grown up to be a Rail Traffic Controller for one of the major railroads in the area, but I won't blurt out which one.

I took a vacation out to London and Bath in September of 2023, and I honestly had my mind blown by your rail system. It was affordable yet efficient, reliable and pretty frequent, I never really felt stranded anywhere at night. Between the trains, buses, the underground, it kind of blew my mind how interconnected and available everything was.

If I could pick the brains of some of you, I'd kind of like to compare our systems because I've been ranting and raving about how "they don't seem to have this issue over there" when something goes wrong here at work.

Trees coming down on catenary wires, not being able to accurately track trains [we use blocks created by circuits in the rail to track trains, I think you guys maybe use actual GPS?] especially when it rains a lot and flood water bridges the two rails causing a shunt to appear, stuff like that.

Is your rail infrastructure as perfect as it looks or are there hidden horrors that we don't see as outsiders? What do you guys think when you look at our rail infrastructure? I don't know I have so many questions about so many things.

Of course, if anyone has any questions about how things are operated over here, I'll gladly answer to the best of my ability without putting my railroad on blast or anything like that.
The British passenger system (and large parts of most continental systems) are heavily subsidised and The network is effectively publicly owned. If it wasn't it wouldn't exist in anything like it's current shape and we would be in a similar position to the US.
 

tjhux

Member
Joined
8 Jul 2024
Messages
24
Location
Watford
Greetings from across the pond.

I'm from the New York City metro area, I've been a train buff ever since I was a little kid. I have grown up to be a Rail Traffic Controller for one of the major railroads in the area, but I won't blurt out which one.

I took a vacation out to London and Bath in September of 2023, and I honestly had my mind blown by your rail system. It was affordable yet efficient, reliable and pretty frequent, I never really felt stranded anywhere at night. Between the trains, buses, the underground, it kind of blew my mind how interconnected and available everything was.

If I could pick the brains of some of you, I'd kind of like to compare our systems because I've been ranting and raving about how "they don't seem to have this issue over there" when something goes wrong here at work.

Trees coming down on catenary wires, not being able to accurately track trains [we use blocks created by circuits in the rail to track trains, I think you guys maybe use actual GPS?] especially when it rains a lot and flood water bridges the two rails causing a shunt to appear, stuff like that.

Is your rail infrastructure as perfect as it looks or are there hidden horrors that we don't see as outsiders? What do you guys think when you look at our rail infrastructure? I don't know I have so many questions about so many things.

Of course, if anyone has any questions about how things are operated over here, I'll gladly answer to the best of my ability without putting my railroad on blast or anything like that.
I remember going to NY about a year ago in 2022 and was surprised at how your metro works. Over here, our metro stops at every stop for every system I can think of (London, Glasgow and {mostly} Liverpool) but I noticed that over there there are alot of services that don't stop at every station which I thought was very interesting.

Anyways, I can say our system is far from perfect, but defiantly nothing to complain about. On the whole, it is a very good system e.g most places have upwards of at least 2 services an hour, but for every good feature there are little nit-picks which bring them down. One example I can think of is the toilets: on our trains our toilet doors are automatic and require you to push buttons to open, close, lock etc... but half the time they never work properly, forcing you to play a Russian roulette of if the door will open or not half-way through using them.
Another thing I can think of is the state of the infrastructure itself. (At least on my local network), there always seems to be a problem with either the track or the catenaries, which causes delays of often 30mins+. IDK if it's the same in the US, but the companies that operate on the rails are different to the one that maintains it, and, due to National Rail (the company that maintains infrastructure) being publicly owned, it means that there isn't alot of funding that goes towards keeping everything top-notch until something goes wrong.

Hopefully this gives you an insight, but just know this is my opinion and others might disagree :))
 

Sun Chariot

Established Member
Joined
16 Mar 2009
Messages
3,461
Location
2 miles and 50 years away from the Longmoor Milita
Welcome @gooeychopz to RailUK. :)

The posts above cover most points I had in mind. The UKs Train Operating Co's of "UK now", remind me of pre-Amtrak days, when competing carriers offered travel between the same cities. Albeit on their own routes, rather than - as here in UK - providing competing services along the same tracks.

A couple of other thoughts:
- UK's typical travelling distances make flying less feasible. Personal ownership of EVs has made short- and medium-distance UK travel cheaper as well as more flexible than rail travel here.
- Space and comfort. 2009, I rode Amtrak's "Heartland Flyer" from OK to FW. I am 6 feet 6 inches tall and those Superliner seats were perfect, compared to the cramped firm seating in modern UK trains.

Out of interest, what's Amtrak's intent once Superliners are retired?
 
Last edited:

eldomtom2

On Moderation
Joined
6 Oct 2018
Messages
1,914
Another thing I can think of is the state of the infrastructure itself. (At least on my local network), there always seems to be a problem with either the track or the catenaries, which causes delays of often 30mins+. IDK if it's the same in the US, but the companies that operate on the rails are different to the one that maintains it, and, due to National Rail (the company that maintains infrastructure) being publicly owned, it means that there isn't alot of funding that goes towards keeping everything top-notch until something goes wrong.
The private railroad companies are notorious pennypinchers, and have often been excoriated for this in the media when accidents are blamed on lack of investment. They're also now starting to get it from environmentalists due to this attitude making them publicly refuse to electrify.
Meanwhile Amtrak is continually scraping together whatever cash it can find, to the point where the Northeast Corridor (Boston-NY-Washington, effectively America's WCML), the primary piece of infrastructure it owns, uses three different types of AC electrification.
I think Network Rail beats both fairly handily!
Out of interest, what's Amtrak's intent once Superliners are retired?
The bidding process for the contract to build a new long-distance fleet for Amtrak is currently underway.
 

Envoy

Established Member
Joined
29 Aug 2014
Messages
2,804
I honestly loved the London to Bath trip... your trains seem to have a bare minimum standard that we only get on luxury trains, and I don't remember that trip being extremely expensive or anything like that. Is that considered a "long distance" train ride, or is that considered commuter rail? Because the train crew even came through with snacks, which we don't even have on Amtrak - you have to go to the cafe car yourself and get food and drinks.

On the note of electrification... there are some areas that are electrified but get absolutely HAMMERED every time there's a storm that comes through. Trees come down and take everything down, takes hours to restore full service once all is said and done. What's your solution to that? Do you face these challenges too or do you mandate trees within x amount of distance from the tracks need to be cut down to a certain length? We go through some semi-mountainey areas where the trees are both tall and close to the property.
Yes, it seems that the problem that the US has is that the freight companies own the tracks and are not interested in upgrading for high speed passenger trains. This is why I suggested that it might be better if new lines were built for high speed passenger trains with the freight companies being forced to allow these onto their tracks in congested urban areas.

The train ride that you took from London to Bath would be considered medium distance. Long distance would be say London to Plymouth and into Cornwall or London to Scotland. So, roughly anything over 2 hours. When you left London, you may have noticed 4 continuous tracks (until about half way) with the 2 on the northern side being used by slower stopping commuter trains as well as some freight trains. The high speed tracks that you were on would have meant your train would be continuously running (apart from two or three stops) around 120 to 125mph and a little slower on the approach to Bath.

You may have noticed when at Bath station, other trains on different routes. One of these routes is an hourly service from Cardiff to Bristol > Bath > Salisbury > Southampton & Portsmouth. These trains will not go faster than 90mph but like the train you were on, would at some stage have staff come through with a trolley offering tea/coffee and snacks. All of these different train routes are co-ordinated to avoid conflicts and provide connections if possible.

Some train companies offer dining to first class customers for additional payment. Some of the GWR trains are designated to offer ‘Pullman Dining’ to 1st class customers. Click the link to see a You Tuber review the 1st Class Pullman Dining on a GWR express. (Mention is made of a weather related problem).

 

eldomtom2

On Moderation
Joined
6 Oct 2018
Messages
1,914
This is why I suggested that it might be better if new lines were built for high speed passenger trains with the freight companies being forced to allow these onto their tracks in congested urban areas.
The problem is that if the freight railroads are resistant to passenger service on their track, they are outright hostile to electrifying it, even if someone else is paying for it.
 

gooeychopz

Member
Joined
10 Jul 2024
Messages
6
Location
New Jersey, USA
I think that's true if you're thinking about intercontinental journeys, but less true within specific more densely populated parts of the US. One obvious (and I think, oft-quoted) example is that the distance between San Francisco and Los Angeles is about the same as the distance between London and Edinburgh. We manage two trains an hour London to Edinburgh taking about 4 and a half hours. Amtrak manages one train a day between San Francisco [*] and Los Angeles, taking 12 hours. I don't think there's any reason in principle why you couldn't sustain a much better and faster service along that corridor - it's just that the US Government has chosen not to make the investment in building the infrastructure to allow that to happen.

[*] Actually Oakland.
The Northeast Corridor is really the peak of our pride when it comes to passenger railroading, and most of the corridor only gets trains up to 125 MPH [there are SOME stretches were you can hit 150, but not many]. Even along the NEC, though, infrastructure lacks - a catenary system that doesn't maintain constant tension, power and signal issues that'll sometimes shut down half of the corridor, plus we have a bottleneck just south of NYC where all trains are forced to take two tracks under the Hudson River.... and then when there's an issue in one of the tubes, now you're left with one track, which will ruin the entire rest of the day.

My whole thing is like... if you look at Texas, there are major cities that have absolutely no interconnectivity outside of cars. They're not a terribly great distance from one another, and the rest of the state is pretty much the country so it's not like we'd have to either demolish or work around a bunch of towns and cities to connect them. Again, though, Republican conservative governments don't want to put the money into it. The younger generations of adults are creating an outcry for feasible public transit that's louder than it ever has been, and every Amtrak train on the Northeast Corridor ends up being pretty much packed throughout the trip. I know Andy Byford has some big plans for the future, I just hope the governments work with him.

The only way we could really effectively navigate continental travel is if we were to build brand new tracks rated for high speeds dedicated to passenger rail. Maybe there could be four-track mainlines where the inner two tracks are high speed tracks and the outer two tracks are designated for freight traffic? I don't know what the solution is, really. I just know that when I came back from England I was all sorts of bitter and jaded :lol:


Also the thought of automatic button-powered bathroom doors on trains blows my mind.... some railroads, like SEPTA in the Philadelphia area, don't even have bathrooms to begin with, and those trips can stretch up to an hour and a half depending on the route. It's the little things like that, yknow? SEPTA's rolling stock is even relatively new, but no bathrooms at all.
 

gooeychopz

Member
Joined
10 Jul 2024
Messages
6
Location
New Jersey, USA
One thing I've been ranting and raving about a lot since I took this trip is the use of MU equipment, rather than engines and cars. There are plenty of passenger services around here that will only use trains that are six cars or less, sometimes even as little as three cars, which seem like it'd be easier to just have short MU sets going back and forth. Something that comes with that is the Scarfenberg Coupler, which is SO MUCH more streamlined and less hassle than the knuckle couplers we use. I've worked on a railroad that used Scarfenberg Couplers, it was so easy - takes all of a minute to split or combine trainsets. Train rescues with knuckle couplers can be so painfully time-consuming, and that's only the coupler itself and the air hose connection...there's still all the electrical connections, and those can only be done by mechanical forces and not train crews. I worked at a light rail prior to my current employer and it was all hydraulic brakes and Scarfenberg couplers and it was so seamless and easy. I know it's a pretty regular occurrence in Europe and Asia to see long-distance trainsets coupled up together to double capacity, or maybe even for two destinations, and that would benefit Amtrak so much... as long as, yknow, the platforms are extended to accommodate such an operation
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,876
Location
SE London
One thing I do find intriguing about the US is how Brightline, as a private company, managed to launch a brand new railway, including building new stations and track. That is something that would be unheard of in the UK, since conventional wisdom would be that the investment required to build anything would be too much for private companies to be worth doing, other than exceptional circumstances. I think the spur to Heathrow is the only privately built UK line in living memory, and Heathrow Airport had an obvious vested interest in getting that built. I'd be curious what's different about the US that can make building a railway a viable commercial proposition.
 

eldomtom2

On Moderation
Joined
6 Oct 2018
Messages
1,914
One thing I do find intriguing about the US is how Brightline, as a private company, managed to launch a brand new railway, including building new stations and track. That is something that would be unheard of in the UK, since conventional wisdom would be that the investment required to build anything would be too much for private companies to be worth doing, other than exceptional circumstances. I think the spur to Heathrow is the only privately built UK line in living memory, and Heathrow Airport had an obvious vested interest in getting that built. I'd be curious what's different about the US that can make building a railway a viable commercial proposition.
Real estate investments by the parent company. I'm not sure if Brightline has even turned a profit yet - it certainly hadn't before the Orlando extension (the only new bit of track) opened.
 

PGAT

Established Member
Joined
13 Apr 2022
Messages
1,806
Location
Selhurst
One thing I do find intriguing about the US is how Brightline, as a private company, managed to launch a brand new railway, including building new stations and track. That is something that would be unheard of in the UK, since conventional wisdom would be that the investment required to build anything would be too much for private companies to be worth doing, other than exceptional circumstances. I think the spur to Heathrow is the only privately built UK line in living memory, and Heathrow Airport had an obvious vested interest in getting that built. I'd be curious what's different about the US that can make building a railway a viable commercial proposition.
I think the difference with the US is that the railway network is less developed so there are a lot more low-hanging fruits for private companies to pick
 

eldomtom2

On Moderation
Joined
6 Oct 2018
Messages
1,914
A report from yesterday on just how shocking the state of Amtrak's Northeast Corridor is:
The answer is likely a toxic combination of deferred maintenance on a fraying and ancient power supply. The catenary — the overhead arrangement of poles and wires that supplies electricity to moving trains — on the Northeast Corridor was inherited from the Pennsylvania Railroad, which went out of business in 1970. Most of the catenary system is about 80 years old. Fifty years ago, federal officials were already saying that they needed to replace it wholesale with a modern setup, only to shelve the program amid budget overruns. Attempts at incremental upgrades, in turn, have been beset by mismanagement and poor accounting at Amtrak. To make things all the more maddening, the decrepit power system is also one of the biggest reasons that Amtrak’s bullet train, the Acela, is so slow.

Amtrak’s own regulatory filing from last year states that not one inch of the overhead wiring between Washington, D.C., and New York’s Pennsylvania Station — zero percent — is in a state of good repair. On a scale of zero to five, with zero signifying that the system is so decrepit that it cannot function, Amtrak rates the electrical system a 1. In that document, called the Infrastructure Asset Line Appendices, Amtrak’s Electric Traction unit, which manages the catenary, acknowledges that it’s getting worse: Electric Traction “acknowledges that preventive maintenance activities are not consistently completed due to limited resource availability and a need to provide ET staff to support other asset classes … or capital projects. This has resulted in a growing maintenance backlog, which is becoming a major priority.” That backlog, which measured less than $100 million in 2018 according to Amtrak charts, now sits at an estimated $829 million. Another $2.9 billion is needed to replace or repair poles and other structures that hold the wires. Amtrak’s figures say that each of the three units in its Electric Traction division is understaffed, and the group that keeps up the wiring in the mid-Atlantic states is in the worst shape. (A spokesman for the railroad said it has has hired more than 300 trainees across the division.)

That lack of planning and maintenance, said a source who is knowledgeable about the extent of the problem, extends to Penn Station, where power went out several times over the past several weeks. Amtrak is backing an unfunded $16 billion program to build a giant new extension of the rail hub immediately to the south of the existing station but has no plans to upgrade what’s there now. “You’re going to do this $16 billion thing and just leave all these s***ty tracks and signals and catenary in place,” said a person familiar with the plans. “As far as I know, nothing has changed with that.”

The wiring that Amtrak and New Jersey Transit rely on is a bespoke system that was built by the Pennsylvania Railroad nearly a century ago, then run by its successor Penn Central, then handed over to the public after the railroad went broke and was nationalized. In the 1970s, the federal government plotted an aggressive set of upgrades meant to revive train service along the Northeast Corridor by substantially increasing its speed and reliability. They identified several major problems, including — according to a report completed in 1975 that I obtained as part of a fellowship investigating rail modernization at New York University — that, unlike those on high-speed rail systems elsewhere, the wires are not constantly tensioned. Instead they just hang.

That has a threefold effect. First, it makes the whole system vulnerable to heat, because as the temperature goes up, the wires expand and sag. When they do, Amtrak and NJ Transit have to slow their trains down. Second, the drooping power lines increase the risk that the wires get tangled up in the pantographs, the linkages atop of the trains that slide along the catenary and draw power from it. If that happens, a moving train can rip the whole business down, causing major damage. (Amtrak and NJT have traded blame over who’s responsible for snagged wires.) Those reliability and speed worries are a big reason why the Connecticut Department of Transportation and the MTA spent $912 million on a couple of projects between 1993 and 2021 to methodically replace all of the wiring between Pelham and New Haven with tensioned wires. So far, this summer, Metro-North’s New Haven Line has avoided the meltdowns plaguing the other side of the Hudson.

Third, the old catenary limits the speed of trains, even at middling temperatures. As many Amtrak observers have noted over the years, our “high-speed” rail from New York to Washington, the Acela, is far slower than the bullet trains that other countries run. That 1975 document determined that the catenary we have on that line is good up to about 110 miles per hour, well below the corridor’s then-target speed of 150 miles per hour. “Above 110 mph, the only way to obtain good and stable dynamic characteristics is through a constant tension system,” the engineers wrote. An updated assessment in 1986 found that the wiring between Washington and New York was “in relatively good condition” and shows that Amtrak had managed to use tweaks and upgrades to reliably squeeze speeds up to 125 miles per hour out of the system. But it reported that faster speeds would require major upgrades.

Those upgrades proposed in the 1970s were included in the new power system Amtrak built northeast of New York, between New Haven and Boston, in the 1990s. It took Amtrak two decades to get the White House and Congress to fund its construction, and until then the line ran on pokey diesel-powered trains. The tensioned cables overhead let the Acela trains race at up to 150 mph on stretches through New England, although they slow down through Connecticut owing principally to sharp curves. Those same trains could likely reach 150 miles an hour for most of the run to Washington, which is straighter, with a new catenary. Instead, they are throttled to a peak of about 125 to 135 miles per hour by the fragility of the wires above. A colleague of mine at NYU, Alon Levy, calculates that upgrading the archaic power system alone could cut ten or 11 minutes off each trip between New York and Washington. That would mean an Acela trip journey making the usual stops — Newark, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore — down to about two hours and 50 minutes, finally getting it below the long-sought benchmark of three hours. That’s fast enough to finally get the Acela’s top speed into the same Zip Code, if not the same ballpark, as the EuroStar that links London to Paris, topping out at 186 miles per hour. Put it together with greater reliability and lower maintenance costs, and it’s unquestionably worth doing.

We have, it turns out, paid for this upgrade, or at least a partial one. Despite a slew of attempts by conservative lawmakers and the Bush administration to privatize the railroad, Amtrak finally scored the funds from Congress to upgrade a segment of the wiring between New York and Washington in 2011. The $450 million grant — part of the economic stimulus package backed by then-President Barack Obama — was supposed to pay for replacing a 23-mile stretch of the Northeast Corridor between Trenton and New Brunswick. But the program was a mismanaged disaster that resulted in two probes by Amtrak’s inspector general, including one that determined that an unnamed Amtrak executive engaged in “improper hiring, indications of favoritism, conflicts of interest, and gross mismanagement of resources.” Amtrak cut back the tensioned catenary program from the 23 miles to 14 miles, and a subsequent report in 2017 by the IG showed that only seven miles’ worth was actually built.

In the aftermath of this summer’s meltdowns, Amtrak and New Jersey governor Phil Murphy announced they would step up inspections and maintenance of both trains and power systems and would attempt to find new grant money to finally replace and upgrade the catenary. “The performance of late, across the board, has been unacceptable,” Murphy told reporters in Newark on June 27. “People don’t care why it happened. They want to get home.” Amtrak declined to comment for this story but pointed to statements issued by railroad executives, including a letter from its president, Roger Harris, to Northeast Corridor customers after the recent outages. It reads, in part: “We are reviewing each incident with the goal of improving future travel, while continuing to advance unprecedented investments that are modernizing and strengthening the NEC.”

But 50-odd years after the federal government took over the Northeast Corridor, and even though the Gateway Tunnel has finally been funded, there’s still no holistic overhaul plan for the busiest railway in North America. Instead, it’s piecemeal and patchwork. The Federal Railroad Administration’s 2024 Northeast Corridor Project Inventory includes a $611 million proposal to replace — but not upgrade — the overhead wiring from the New Brunswick to Newark, and even that project is $101 million short of full funding. “The frequent inspections are reactive, not proactive,” said Liam Blank, a former staffer at the MTA’s Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee, who’s the author of an extensive report on Penn Station modernization for transit group Tri-State Transportation Campaign. “They should be focusing on the long-term answers, which is replacing,” he continued. “Without the actual solutions, upgrading the catenary and the pantographs, you’re not actually fixing the problem.”
 

gooeychopz

Member
Joined
10 Jul 2024
Messages
6
Location
New Jersey, USA
One thing I do find intriguing about the US is how Brightline, as a private company, managed to launch a brand new railway, including building new stations and track. That is something that would be unheard of in the UK, since conventional wisdom would be that the investment required to build anything would be too much for private companies to be worth doing, other than exceptional circumstances. I think the spur to Heathrow is the only privately built UK line in living memory, and Heathrow Airport had an obvious vested interest in getting that built. I'd be curious what's different about the US that can make building a railway a viable commercial proposition.
I think a decent chunk of brightline is still federally funded, but they'll get their share of business for sure 100%. Plus the project they're starting between the Los Angeles area and Las Vegas, it definitely has its place, I hope they end up in the green in the long-run. Are your railways like SWR and whatnot considered government or are they companies?
 

DelW

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2015
Messages
4,733
I don't think there's any reason in principle why you couldn't sustain a much better and faster service along that corridor - it's just that the US Government has chosen not to make the investment in building the infrastructure to allow that to happen.
There is substantial federal funding going into a high-speed rail route between the San Francisco and Los Angeles conurbations. But as with (what's left of) HS2, only about half the route is currently being built, the cost is controversial, and the routes into the cities at each end are still undecided.
 

eldomtom2

On Moderation
Joined
6 Oct 2018
Messages
1,914
There is substantial federal funding going into a high-speed rail route between the San Francisco and Los Angeles conurbations. But as with (what's left of) HS2, only about half the route is currently being built, the cost is controversial, and the routes into the cities at each end are still undecided.
No, the routes into the cities have all been signed off on. The problem is funding.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,876
Location
SE London
Are your railways like SWR and whatnot considered government or are they companies?

That's complicated. Most of the companies like SWR and the GWR that you would've used to get from London to Bath are private companies (Train Operating Companies or TOCs), but they operate under Government contract (so-called franchises) under which the Government specifies what services they should run - and often subsidises them. On the other hand, the tracks and other infrastructure are publicly owned. In a way it's almost the exact opposite to the USA where I believe the tracks are often privately owned but the passenger trains are run by the Government. The trains themselves are normally owned by entirely separate companies and leased to the TOCs. It's quite a complicated system and has attracted a lot of cricitism.

And the system is changing. Over the last few years, several TOCs have lost their contracts and seen the Government take over their services because of various contractual failures by the TOCs, and the new Labour Government is committed to returning all train services (except open access ones - see below) to being run by the Government as soon as the existing contracts end.

The only place where you'll see genuine real-competitive private stuff on the railways is the so-called open access operators: We have a system where if there is spare capacity on the lines after the Government has specified all the services it wants to run, it's possible for private companies to apply to fill those spaces with services of their choice. There aren't many trains operated that way, but there are a few, particularly running from London Kings Cross up the East Coast Main Line to Newcastle/Edinburgh/etc.
 

Oscar46016

Member
Joined
15 Jan 2018
Messages
544
Location
Cardiff
I've seen that Amtrak do a similar ticket to interail - 10 sections for $500 in 30 days.

I was wondering what the best value for money route to take would be?

I presume using some of the longer journeys such as California Zephyr, Coast Starlight & Silver Meteor would be the ones to go for.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top