Virgin appointed to advise US Congress on Amtrak priv.

[WatcherZero]

Virgin Rail has been appointed by the US Congress transportation and infrastructure committee to advise it on the possible privatisation of the high subsidy but Amtraks most lucrative 457 mile North East Corridor between Washington and Boston. Virgin are interested in possibly bidding to operate it should it be privatised.

Congress and Republicans in particular are looking at the privatisation as a way of financing the future high speed lines and are introducing a bill to transfer the line from Amtrak ownership directly to Government ownership as a first stage. Amtrak is against itself being broken up and is looking towards private markets to raise the money itself for the 210mph high speed line.


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7c36c1b0-aaf8-11e0-b4d8-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1RjtJLJP0

Bill Megginson, professor of the University of Oklahoma and author of “Privatisation Barometer”, a yearly report, said: “The principle of opening up Amtrak to private capital is very sound. It seems wise to bring Virgin in to consult on US passenger rail privatisation.

“The British rail privatisation of 1996 is widely perceived to have been a failure initially, though most problems were worked out over time under private ownership. Since Virgin is a big provider of rail services in the UK, it should be able to discuss both the promises and pitfalls of private management of passenger rail.”

 

[stanley T]

If Virgin are advising and they want to bid, a conflict of interest, surely?

They would certainly run it better than Amtrak - almost anyone would - but it needs further investment, especially between NYC and Boston. Oh, and Virgin might sort out the tilting Acela trains, which seem to be a lot less reliable than Pendolinos, although basically the same train.

 

[Old Timer]

This of course being the Company which completely failed to meet any of its franchise committments ?

 

[scotsman]

I guarantee that the US Gov't would make more money from it but, much as I'd love to see red Acelas, state ownership is better for passengers

 

[185]

Virgin West Coast's reason for success is down to one thing.

Subsidy from our taxes. Nothing more.

Involving the private sector in something we all pay for is both wrong and stupid.

 

[WatcherZero]

Virgin West Coast's reason for success is down to one thing.

Subsidy from our taxes. Nothing more.

Involving the private sector in something we all pay for is both wrong and stupid.

So make the government manufacture weapons, run the shipyards, grow food and run supermarkets? No more opticians? where exactly does public spending mean no profit can be made?

 

[shinkansen1966]

Virgin Trains are rubbish. Back in 1995 when they asked to run the West Coast Main Line they were going to share their profits with us, the taxpayer. Instead, we've had to give them loads of money each year in subsidies.

US govt beware: avoid Virgin.

 

[WatcherZero]

They were going to share the profits of the WCML linespeed being increased to 140mph, which the government never carried out.

 

[Wyvern]

Does Amtrak have any control of the infrastructure over which it runs?

 

[scotsman]

Does Amtrak have any control of the infrastructure over which it runs?

No, the tracks are almost exclusively run by private sector freight operators. The FOCs tend to hold them to ransom - despite legislation against it, Amtrak have to follow temporary speed restrictions because of poor maintenance of the lines. The wikipedia page details all that and a hell of a lot more - you think Virgin are pirates (I don't, but that's for different reasons)? Check out those guys
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Virgin West Coast's reason for success is down to one thing.

Subsidy from our taxes. Nothing more.

Involving the private sector in something we all pay for is both wrong and stupid.

Hear, hear.

 

[schwa]

No, the tracks are almost exclusively run by private sector freight operators. The FOCs tend to hold them to ransom - despite legislation against it, Amtrak have to follow temporary speed restrictions because of poor maintenance of the lines.

An example!

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=951_1310514608

 

[Zoe]

They were going to share the profits of the WCML linespeed being increased to 140mph, which the government never carried out.

It was Railtrack that failed to deliver though, floated on the stock market in 1996 and not owned by the government.

 

[WatcherZero]

Yes my point is that it was a franchise agreement, the government promised infrastructure improvements and failed to deliver so the deal had to be renegotiated.

 

[b0b]

As an ex-pat now living in the US I have a lot of mixed feelings:- Amtrak does really suck and I think its very convenient of them to be able to blame the freight companies that own the lines.

I took the Amtrak for a 2 and a half hour trip last week. 66 minutes late. There's a site that tracks delays, and the average for the trip I made is 53 minutes.

However, I commute daily on Chicago's Metra service. On my line, the trains are operated by Union Pacific on Union Pacific owned tracks on behalf of the regional transportation authority, and they generally keep excellent time. And the fares are extremely reasonable when compared to UK fares.

So it does make me wonder why Amtrak can't get it together.

And as for a private company "advising" Congress on how to best operate a service, well that's also very common. Won't be surprised if somehow Virgin is selected should it happen....

 

[Zoe]

Yes my point is that it was a franchise agreement, the government promised infrastructure improvements and failed to deliver so the deal had to be renegotiated.

I can't find the original franchise agreement anywhere but the agreement to upgrade the line was between Virgin and Railtrack.

 

[LE Greys]

An example!

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=951_1310514608

I wouldn't have stood where that cameraman was for all the tea in China! That looks like a serious derailment waiting to happen, and he would have been right in the firing line.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As an ex-pat now living in the US I have a lot of mixed feelings:- Amtrak does really suck and I think its very convenient of them to be able to blame the freight companies that own the lines.

I took the Amtrak for a 2 and a half hour trip last week. 66 minutes late. There's a site that tracks delays, and the average for the trip I made is 53 minutes.

However, I commute daily on Chicago's Metra service. On my line, the trains are operated by Union Pacific on Union Pacific owned tracks on behalf of the regional transportation authority, and they generally keep excellent time. And the fares are extremely reasonable when compared to UK fares.

So it does make me wonder why Amtrak can't get it together.

And as for a private company "advising" Congress on how to best operate a service, well that's also very common. Won't be surprised if somehow Virgin is selected should it happen....

To be honest, I'm just glad Amtrak is still there. It's a decent way of getting around the country, albeit late. Some things remind me of how things were on our railways once, with everything loco-hauled and such low speeds, but long trains and good on-board service.

Still, I would change a few things with Acela. There would be no premium fares, which should increase passenger numbers and make it easier to recoup the investment (something our railways have failed to learn). There would also be a clockface timetable, ideally reaching half-hourly at some point. The next big target for a faster service would be Cleveland, followed by Detroit and Chicago, with extensions down the coast to following that, Miami being the eventual target there.

In some ways, Acela is closer to my ideal model of high-speed rail than the Shinkansen. It uses classic lines in many places, and can operate on and off the route. However, it's mismanaged and timetabled very slackly. If it sharpened up, it would be one of the best services in the world. As it is, an Electra could keep time on the same schedule.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

that American track is in positively good condition compared to the track in this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiIzUZUGROY&feature=youtu.be which also graphically illustrates the chaos caused by unrestricted private operator open access movements on the line...

 

[shinkansen1966]

I can't find the original franchise agreement anywhere but the agreement to upgrade the line was between Virgin and Railtrack.

Virgin should have taken to Railtrack to court for failing to deliver on their side of the contract.

 

[WatcherZero]

The increased franchise payments from the Dft was their compensation for slower services and lost potential revenue.

 

[shinkansen1966]

The increased franchise payments from the Dft was their compensation for slower services and lost potential revenue.

Why did the DfT (and therefore the taxpayer) have to compensate Virgin ? After all, Virgin asked to run the service. No-one forced them.

Why didn't Railtrack (supplier) compensate Virgin (their customer) for the lost potential revenue. Why did the government need to get involve ?

 

[ACL]

No, the tracks are almost exclusively run by private sector freight operators.

The Northeast Corridor, the electrified track from Washington DC to Boston, is owned by the US Government. There's one more portion of track owned by the US Government out in Michigan.

 

[Via Bank]

The Northeast Corridor, the electrified track from Washington DC to Boston, is owned by the US Government. There's one more portion of track owned by the US Government out in Michigan.

Yes, the Northeast Corridor is mostly owned by Amtrak and other public rail authorities--incidentally, the NEC is also where Amtrak's two most (and only) profitable routes, the Northeast Regional semifast service and the Acela Express run.

 

[Mr Spock]

I can't find the original franchise agreement anywhere but the agreement to upgrade the line was between Virgin and Railtrack.

Surely the Virgin franchise agreement was with the government and it was them who contracted NR to upgrade the track for 140mph.

As for why the franchise payments became a mess was for more than the inability to provide the 140mph track. The DFT (or other body) changed the way track access costs were apportioned from the original "jam spread" way and said the the cost of the WCML upgrade should be paid by the users. This resulted in Virgin and others having to pay RT a lot more money which threw all calculations out the window. This meant that as it was a change to the original franchise agreement the DFT had to cover the costs of the extra access costs resulting in Virgin being paid a "subsidy" a lot of which was passed staright to RT.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This of course being the Company which completely failed to meet any of its franchise committments ?

Virgins franchise agreement was to provide 140mph tilting trains which they did but the government through RT failed to provide the track for these trains to perform to their full ability.

As for payments etc. see above.

 

[Zoe]

Surely the Virgin franchise agreement was with the government and it was them who contracted NR to upgrade the track for 140mph.

The franchise agreement was with OPRAF but the PUG2 agreement was between Virgin (West Coast Trains) and Railtrack.