The Virginian-Pilot
©
NORFOLK
Norfolk Southern Corp. projects the cost of putting conventional passenger rail on its freight tracks between Petersburg and Norfolk at $75 million, far less than the state's estimate.
State estimates released in July show that slightly faster trains, 90-110 mph versus 79 mph, in the same corridor would cost $262 million.
Chip Badger, Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation director, said the state numbers include passenger stations and other costs not counted in Norfolk Southern's estimate. Pricing details will not be released for possibly several weeks, he said.
High-speed rail has become a hot topic in Hampton Roads with the impending release of a state study into the costs and ridership of bringing trains to the area and with the Obama administration's $8 billion in federal stimulus money set aside to build a high-speed train network.
The state is seeking stimulus money to build higher-speed rail between Washington and Richmond and between Richmond and Hampton Roads. The projects are among $102 billion worth of projects nationally vying for the federal money.
Deborah H. Butler, the railroad's executive vice president of planning and chief information officer, told a gathering of the Urban Land Institute on Wednesday that the $75 million for improving the corridor that roughly parallels U.S. 460 is about half the company's early estimate.
Butler said the time savings of 79 mph trains versus 90 mph trains on that stretch is less than five minutes. At 110 mph, it's 11 minutes.
Trains that run at up to 90 mph are considered conventional service, and anything faster is generally referred to as high speed. However, federal definitions indicate higher-speed, or emerging high-speed, trains run between 90 mph and 110 mph. High-speed rail runs above 110 mph.
Norfolk Mayor Paul Fraim, who advocat es for South Hampton Roads high-speed rail, said the price difference between conventional and higher speed "doesn't sound very effective" when considering the time savings.
Still, he said Norfolk Southern's lower cost estimates are encouraging.
Butler said Norfolk Southern supports sharing its railroad right of way with passenger trains. However, the Norfolk-based company would help pay for the improvements only if its freight hauling service stood to benefit.
In the Petersburg -Norfolk corridor, Butler said, "we have all the capacity we need" and therefore the company would not contribute financially.
Badger said a state study of the costs and ridership for bringing passenger rail and high-speed rail to Hampton Roads could be ready for release shortly. It's under review by the Federal Railroad Administration. Once the report is made public, he said, the state will examine Norfolk Southern's numbers and compare them to the state's.
Badger said five options were studied, with price tags ranging from $330 million to $844 million. In July, Badger said the state study will show the Norfolk -Petersburg route extending all the way to Richmond at a cost of $412 million. Other options include upgrading the current Amtrak service between Richmond and Newport News.
A rift has developed in the region over whether the faster trains should come south of the James River into South Hampton Roads or north of the river on the Peninsula.
The heads of the seven Southside cities and counties agreed to push for a route south of the James River. Virginians for High Speed Rail, the state's leading rail advocacy group, supports expanding higher-speed service to both sides.
Daniel Plaugher, executive director of Virginians for High Speed Rail, said the region will need to speak with one voice or else jeopardize funding. He said Federal Railroad Administration officials "stated clearly they are not going to get in the middle of a regional fight."
He added, "If Hampton Roads does not come together, you will get left out."
Debbie Messina, (757) 446-2588, debbie.messina@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
little know factoid
The auto industry leaders, in the infancy of their empire, bought as many rail lines as they could, including tracks in Norfolk, Richmond, and other cities, as well as freight lines. They knew that trains would be their greatest competition and biggest obstacle to putting everyone behind the wheel of their very own automobile. Harley Earl and company weren't the only ones to see the potential market, the Rockefeller's and Carnegie's had their eyes on the future as well. US Steel and Standard Oil gained handsomely from the auto industry's success.
Unfortunately, the rails are gone. Replacing them is another disjointed and convoluted process littered with politics, that faces a steep road of challenges and heavy opposition. It is likely to be less than perfect, less than efficient, and our children will probably pay for it the rest of their lives. I still want it. We need regional transportation options beyond sitting in traffic. Most tidewater commuters are saying the same things, the leaders just aren't listening.
I wish some of those trains
I wish some of those trains crossing Hampton Blvd moved at 70 MPH.
time of trip
I beleive that the people that are calculating the time saved from the different speeds are missing the most valuable point, not the speed of the train but the time saved over driving the same distance!. Why don't they calculate the total time the train will take, then the driving time and let every one know the difference. Do it for 79 mph and HIGH speed. everyone that has driven that route knows that it takes a couple hours.
Two different animals, two different requirements
Freight trains and passenger trains are two different animals. Freight trains beat the heck out of the rails and don't have to be as precisely maintained as those for passenger trains. High speed trains required perfectly aligned tracks that are adjusted to the smallest degree. Heavy freight trains knock fine alignments out of place with just a few passages. As long as passenger trains are operated over the same lines as freight trains, REAL high speed passenger trains approaching 200 MPH or higher isn't possible.
Price and times.
Just checked prices to compare and see what we are looking at.
Amtrak, Richmond to NYC roundtrip $220 6.5 hours each way.
Continental, $110 round trip 1.1 hour each way.
There was a slightly cheaper train fair but it took over 8 hours.
I would use the train if it were cheaper and more feasible than flying or driving.
Air fare versus Amtrak Fares
I agree that Amtrak fares are too high when compared to Airline fares. Question I have is WHY?
Travel infrastructure funding in the USA is a very involved and politically charged issue. The cost of your airline ticket does not reflect much of the actual cost of running the nations air travel sector. FAA Controllers, Maintenance Inspectors, navigation aids, AIRPORTS, airport fire departments, airport and passenger security costs, the list just goes on and on. Most of these items are funded from other sources except passenger tickets but we are lead to believe that the ticket funds the entire cost. Highway funding is much the same way. For decades the smoke screen has been that all roads were funded by the gas tax paid at the pump. I believe the facts are that the "at the pump tax" only pays about 30% of federal funding of highway costs. State and local funding of highways not even mentioned here.
Does your Amtrak ticket fund all of the cost of your train trip? No, but if the playing field was leveled and all costs and how paid were know to the citizenry combined with rails ability to move large numbers from city center to city center (and to small country towns also) with
Airlines are even more subsidized
Very true. What many people don't realize is how much the airline industry is subsidized by the U.S. government. The airlines do not come close to playing on an equal playing field with Amtrak. Airports and all their services for airlines and operating are funded separately by the federal and local governments with the airlines paying relatively small fees for operating out of them. Then there is the entire air traffic control system which is completely funded by the federal government. Amtrak's total budget is quite small in comparison to all the tax dollars the airlines benefit from. If the airlines actually had to pay for all that they use and need to operate, airline tickets would be at least four times as high if not higher. Such high prices would be the end of passenger air travel here in America.
What is missing
What is missing from those figures is the drive to and from the airport which is a good distance away from the downtown area. Amtrak puts you into the downtown areas of different cities, making for shorter cab rides. Depending on where you are going, in some cases people can even walk to where they are staying from the railroad stations. That is one convenience that airlines can't beat.
Also, trains are more comfortable: the seats are much larger, you can get up and stretch any time or even walk around on the train if you need to. They also get fresh air in them verses the recirculated air one breaths in planes.
Still can't go from Norfolk
Still can't go from Norfolk to Blacksburg.
however...
however we pay for it, the truth is that we need passenger rail here. the south hampton roads area is just itching for a connection. just imagine skipping the interstate, not having to worry about gas money, and just hopping the train to washington d.c. or charlotte. that would be such a convenience for me, personally.