# Florida Governor Approves SunRail



## pennyk (Jul 2, 2011)

Much to the surprise of many Central Floridians, Governor Scott approved SunRail. They anticipate the first phase (of about 40 miles, I think) will be completed in 2014.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jul 2, 2011)

pennyk said:


> Much to the surprise of many Central Floridians, Governor Scott approved SunRail. They anticipate the first phase (of about 40 miles, I think) will be completed in 2014.


:hi: Good news Penny!  Wonder if he and his Political Henchmen/Handlers have been watching the elections that the T-Pubs are losing in other states and the firestorms happening in Wisconson and Ohio over the Idiotic attempts to deprive citizens of their Rights and the cancellation of Rail Projects, even the Wisconson Moron Gov. is starting to take notice and has approved some Rail funding! Must be Elections coming up next year? :help:


----------



## Ryan (Jul 2, 2011)

All he had to look at was his absolutely abysmal approval ratings.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1604&What=&strArea=;&strTime=0



> Florida voters disapprove 57 - 29 percent of the job Gov. Rick Scott is doing, *the worst score of any governor in the states surveyed by Quinnipiac University* and down from a 48 - 35 percent disapproval in an April 6 survey, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.


(bold mine)
It got so bad, that he posted a letter on his website for people to send to their newspapers to try and drum up some phoney support for his regime.


----------



## pennyk (Jul 2, 2011)

Ryan said:


> All he had to look at was his absolutely abysmal approval ratings.
> 
> http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1604&What=&strArea=;&strTime=0
> 
> ...


I am still amazed that people voted for him. :wacko:


----------



## Nexis4Jersey (Jul 2, 2011)

I must say this is worse then the HSR project and nothing more then a CSX handout.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 2, 2011)

Nexis4Jersey said:


> Nothing more then a CSX handout.


Agreed. I want modern and efficient passenger rail as much as the next guy, but this plan sounds like just another example of poorly reasoned corporate socialism funded by the ever more disillusioned taxpayer.


----------



## MattW (Jul 2, 2011)

Why does it sound that way to you two? I am quite looking forward to seeing this project go forward and I live in the next state up! Granted, I'd like to see weekend service, but assuming they hold to their plans it should be a reasonably well done rail system both in aesthetics (browse through the stations pdf file) and in scheduling. I haven't seen what equipment they're planning, but I've heard both the tried and true (if death trap) MP36 with Bombardier bi-levels, and some sort of DMU (originally CRC, but dunno if their "successor" is still in business).


----------



## AlanB (Jul 3, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> Nexis4Jersey said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing more then a CSX handout.
> ...


I love how people make claims with no basis or serious facts to support things.

This deal includes about $400 Million for CSX in total, barely 1/4th of all money involved.

To start with, CSX gets $150 Million for the land, track, and signals over the 61.5 miles of Class IV track that Florida is buying. That works out to $2.46M per mile. At the time this deal was put to paper, BNSF sold 42 miles of Class II track to the State of Washington for $107 Million or $2.55M per mile. And the line in Washington was all single track with only a few sidings. Much of the CSX line is double track and in much better shape. So technically it could be said that CSX is taking a slight bath on this.

Another $209 Million going to CSX will be used to build 5 new brides on the S line, the line that will be used by CSX instead of the A line which they're selling. Building new bridges so as to close crossings benefits the drivers in those areas who won't have to stop and wait for a parade of freight trains. It doesn't benefit CSX. CSX doesn't care if people have to stop and wait for their trains. By the way, even though this money was included as part of the overall plan for Sunrail, Florida was going to do this no matter what. AFAIK, some of this work is already in progress at this time. I haven't gone checking, but it was supposed to have started last year, and it would have gone forward even if the Sunrail deal fell through.

About the biggest true "corporate welfare" item would be the $32M the CSX is getting to help them relocated operations from Taft Yard to a new intermodal facility south/west of Orlando. Since they won't be able to get to Taft Yard during the day due to commuter operations, Taft is located in Orlando off of the A line, it really is only fair to help CSX out with this move. After all CSX doesn't have to sell the tracks. And they could have charged far more for those tracks than they did.

Yes, I know that it's fun to hate the big bad corporations. But CSX really isn't the bad guy this time. They are getting less than fair market value for their property and a little assistance to move a yard that they won't effectively be able to use anymore.


----------



## Spokker (Jul 3, 2011)

SunRail is a complete waste of money. How this was approved but not Florida high speed rail is beyond my comprehension. Florida high speed rail actually had a chance to make money, which is what I thought these Republicans were all about. Yet these people support one of the worst commuter rail projects in existence.

I don't get it.


----------



## Nexis4Jersey (Jul 3, 2011)

Spokker said:


> SunRail is a complete waste of money. How this was approved but not Florida high speed rail is beyond my comprehension. Florida high speed rail actually had a chance to make money, which is what I thought these Republicans were all about. Yet these people support one of the worst commuter rail projects in existence.
> 
> I don't get it.


Because Mica gets $$$ from CSX , thus this is approved.... Look on the plus side , now when Mica tries to dismantle Amtrak due to being inefficient, we have this to throw in his face.


----------



## WICT106 (Jul 3, 2011)

Also understand that Governor Scott is a politician, and he may have felt some serious heat over the rejection of the previous rail funding. He was smart in getting this rail project underway. Good for him. We should welcome his support of this effort. Maybe we can get pols like him to listen to us instead of those who oppose funding for rail.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 4, 2011)

AlanB said:


> This deal includes about $400 Million for CSX in total, barely 1/4th of all money involved.


I understand that $400 million may be chump change to the folks along the NEC, but to the rest of us that's big enough to consider important.



AlanB said:


> CSX gets $150 Million for the land, track, and signals over the 61.5 miles of Class IV track that Florida is buying. That works out to $2.46M per mile. At the time this deal was put to paper, BNSF sold 42 miles of Class II track to the State of Washington for $107 Million or $2.55M per mile. And the line in Washington was all single track with only a few sidings. Much of the CSX line is double track and in much better shape. So technically it could be said that CSX is taking a slight bath on this.


So CSX is actually ignoring their supposed duty to their shareholders and taking a bath on this sale. Why? If they didn't think the offer was in their best interest they could easily kill the deal or just lobby for better terms. The basis for your conclusion is an unrelated sale between another railroad and another government some two thousand miles away on the opposite corner of the country. Unfortunately these figures you've used only work if you can somehow separate this portion of the plan from all the other agreements, which I don't believe you can. In which case maybe we're looking at something more in the range of $6.5 million per mile all told. Now how good of a deal is that?



AlanB said:


> Another $209 Million going to CSX will be used to build 5 new brides on the S line, the line that will be used by CSX instead of the A line which they're selling. Building new bridges so as to close crossings benefits the drivers in those areas who won't have to stop and wait for a parade of freight trains. It doesn't benefit CSX. CSX doesn't care if people have to stop and wait for their trains.


 We move from your claiming CSX are foolish enough to be taken to the cleaners by politicians they themselves have funded and lobbied to your claiming CSX doesn't benefit at all from fewer grade crossings. Again I disagree. I believe that when there are fewer crossings there are likely to be fewer collisions. And that when there are fewer collisions there are likely to be fewer legal battles, fewer investigations, fewer regulatory inquires, and fewer repairs required. In my view that benefits CSX just as much as it benefits everyone else. Except that CSX is apparently not paying their fair share.



AlanB said:


> Yes, I know that it's fun to hate the big bad corporations. But CSX really isn't the bad guy this time. They are getting less than fair market value for their property and a little assistance to move a yard that they won't effectively be able to use anymore.


No, it's not about CSX being the "big bad corporation." It's about a political system that favors public transit only when it benefits a major contributor. I think Florida's relationship with passenger rail has made it clear that's how things work. And no, it is not very fun watching American taxpayers being fleeced into bankruptcy. Or watching fellow Americans attempt to invert the situation and claim that the most powerful interests involved are the ones who are actually being victimized by the lowly taxpayers. It's actually rather troubling to tell you the truth.


----------



## AlanB (Jul 4, 2011)

WICT106 said:


> Also understand that Governor Scott is a politician, and he may have felt some serious heat over the rejection of the previous rail funding. He was smart in getting this rail project underway. Good for him. We should welcome his support of this effort. Maybe we can get pols like him to listen to us instead of those who oppose funding for rail.


He felt a lot of heat of the HSR decision. He got taken to court by his Senate and he was rebuked by the Senate. And that rebuke came from 16 Republicans and 10 Democrats, together they formed a veto proof majority.


----------



## AlanB (Jul 4, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > This deal includes about $400 Million for CSX in total, barely 1/4th of all money involved.
> ...


Like it or not, it's chump change even in this deal. It represents 1/4th of the total expendatures.



Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > CSX gets $150 Million for the land, track, and signals over the 61.5 miles of Class IV track that Florida is buying. That works out to $2.46M per mile. At the time this deal was put to paper, BNSF sold 42 miles of Class II track to the State of Washington for $107 Million or $2.55M per mile. And the line in Washington was all single track with only a few sidings. Much of the CSX line is double track and in much better shape. So technically it could be said that CSX is taking a slight bath on this.
> ...


Being payed a fair market value for something is not corporate welfare no matter how much you'd like to spin it. And that was my point. They could have demanded far more and did not. Why they did or didn't has no bearing on the fact that they didn't charge the state tons more. They are giving up something that they already own, so that when they do use it they now get to pay for the right to use it.

And it's very easy to separate the numbers. It's spelled out quite accurately in the paperwork.



Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Another $209 Million going to CSX will be used to build 5 new brides on the S line, the line that will be used by CSX instead of the A line which they're selling. Building new bridges so as to close crossings benefits the drivers in those areas who won't have to stop and wait for a parade of freight trains. It doesn't benefit CSX. CSX doesn't care if people have to stop and wait for their trains.
> ...


CSX has very few lawsuits, and in most cases wins them anyhow, since the motorist is almost always at fault. In fact, last year there were 4 grade crossing accidents on CSX tracks, and 3 of them involved Amtrak trains. So there was only 1 accident involving CSX. However, I will still grant you that there is a slight benefit to them because of this. But the major benefit is to the citizens in those counties who will no longer have to sit and wait at a crossing. That benfit far outweighs any benefit to CSX no matter how much you'd like to spin it the other way.



Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I know that it's fun to hate the big bad corporations. But CSX really isn't the bad guy this time. They are getting less than fair market value for their property and a little assistance to move a yard that they won't effectively be able to use anymore.
> ...


Look, if you want to debate the wisdom of Sunrail, that's one thing. But the last thing that is happening here is that CSX is fleecing the taxpayers. In fact, even if Sunrail had been stopped by the Governor, the $209M to close those crossings would have still taken place and CSX would now still own the A line tracks and have greater flexibility to move its freight. Now if they have a derailment on the S line, they basically shut down until they can repair the damage. There is no alternative anymore, short of trying to slip in a few extra freight trains at night on the A line.

Instead the Gov approved things, so CSX gets a fair market to perhaps slighly lower than market price for its line. And that leaves the only thing that could really be considered corporate welfare in this deal, the $32M for moving the rail yard.


----------



## AlanB (Jul 4, 2011)

Nexis4Jersey said:


> Spokker said:
> 
> 
> > SunRail is a complete waste of money. How this was approved but not Florida high speed rail is beyond my comprehension. Florida high speed rail actually had a chance to make money, which is what I thought these Republicans were all about. Yet these people support one of the worst commuter rail projects in existence.
> ...


Mica wanted Florida's HSR just as much as he wanted Sunrail; yet he couldn't force the Governor's hand on that one.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 4, 2011)

AlanB said:


> Like it or not, it's chump change even in this deal. It represents 1/4th of the total expendatures.


So if some figure is 25% of some other figure then it is no longer significant. Like it or not, that makes absolutely no logical sense.



AlanB said:


> Being payed a fair market value for something is not corporate welfare no matter how much you'd like to spin it. And that was my point. They could have demanded far more and did not. Why they did or didn't has no bearing on the fact that they didn't charge the state tons more. They are giving up something that they already own, so that when they do use it they now get to pay for the right to use it.


I simply don't agree with you that SunRail as currently envisioned is a reasonable case for the level of taxpayer money being spent. Nor do I agree that asking "fair market value" for something automatically makes it a reasonable investment for taxpayers. Nor do I agree that CSX is getting the short end of the stick in a sale for which they hold final approval. These seem like pretty reasonable positions to me. Maybe you're just so married to the idea that Florida needs more passenger rail that you're unwilling to look at the funding as anything but money well spent.



AlanB said:


> And it's very easy to separate the numbers. It's spelled out quite accurately in the paperwork.


Yes, you can separate the numbers mathematically but if they cannot be broken into a separate sale with a separate approval process then it's a purely theoretical construct.



AlanB said:


> CSX has very few lawsuits, and in most cases wins them anyhow, since the motorist is almost always at fault. In fact, last year there were 4 grade crossing accidents on CSX tracks, and 3 of them involved Amtrak trains. So there was only 1 accident involving CSX. However, I will still grant you that there is a slight benefit to them because of this. But the major benefit is to the citizens in those counties who will no longer have to sit and wait at a crossing. That benfit far outweighs any benefit to CSX no matter how much you'd like to spin it the other way.


These bridges are not going to last one year. Depending on the construction it could be on the order of several decades. Over the next thirty or forty years I think there is a very good chance CSX will have materially benefited from having fewer grade crossings thanks to Florida taxpayers. I'm not against the taxpayers paying part of the bill, I just don't think they should get stuck with all of it. Why is that so hard for you to agree with?



AlanB said:


> Look, if you want to debate the wisdom of Sunrail, that's one thing. But the last thing that is happening here is that CSX is fleecing the taxpayers. In fact, even if Sunrail had been stopped by the Governor, the $209M to close those crossings would have still taken place and CSX would now still own the A line tracks and have greater flexibility to move its freight.


If investing in SunRail as current planned is unwise then getting the best possible deal on the ROW does not change that. Despite your conclusions to the contrary, it is self-evident that CSX is not getting screwed. If they were they would simply nix the deal and it would be over before it even started. Corporations are not tasked with helping the public good. They are not expected to defer to the public's interest. They are expected to turn a profit above all other considerations. There is no reason to assume or expect any other outcome. No wonder then that CSX would be very happy with selling the A-line while still retaining operating rights. Maintenance, repairs and legal liability for a nice chunk of one of Florida's mainlines will now be the responsibility of Florida taxpayers while CSX will still retain their ability to offload overflow during nights and weekends. It's also quite probable that CSX sees SunRail for the political stunt that it is and fully expects to reacquire controlling interest of weekday operations along the A-line if and when SunRail fails a future political budget test.


----------



## RCrierie (Jul 4, 2011)

How can it be worse than the HSR project?

For one, it's cheaper to acquire the trackage, and then maintain it vs building and then maintaining a 125+ MPH line.

Secondly, it makes use of equipment types already in use across the US, such as bilevel commuter coaches and commuter diesels.

If SunRail proves successful enough, it can be expanded and increased in speed; but from where I stand; a 60~ mile line is a pretty good low key start for a system that can slowly be expanded as needed.


----------



## Ryan (Jul 4, 2011)

TS,

So what's your point - that this deal never should have been done and SunRail should have been killed as well? If so, why? If not, under what conditions would you like to see them go forward?

Your primary yardstick seems to be that "If CSX likes it, that must mean that the taxpayer is getting screwed" - if that's truly your argument, do you not see any space for a mutually beneficial deal to go down?

I hate to say it, but you're really long on complaining and criticism, and short on actually feasible ideas for progress.


----------



## MattW (Jul 4, 2011)

So you're saying that the benefit to CSX is greater than the benefit to the taxpayers? Why? What's your measurement for this?


----------



## AlanB (Jul 4, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Like it or not, it's chump change even in this deal. It represents 1/4th of the total expendatures.
> ...


Stop putting words in my mouth and telling me what you think I've said!

If CSX were getting half the funding, then you could potentially claim that this was a taxpayer bailout. When 3/4ths of the project monies are not going to CSX, it's not a bailout of CSX!



Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Being payed a fair market value for something is not corporate welfare no matter how much you'd like to spin it. And that was my point. They could have demanded far more and did not. Why they did or didn't has no bearing on the fact that they didn't charge the state tons more. They are giving up something that they already own, so that when they do use it they now get to pay for the right to use it.
> ...


Again, whether or not you think that Sunrail is a good idea or a bad idea doesn't change the fact that it is not corporate welfare for CSX. As for fair market value, I guess you're one of those guys who thinks that we should use eminent domain for everything.

As for Florida needing more passenger rail, I do believe that it does. And I do think that Sunrail is a first logical step for the Orlando area. But unlike you, I'm not allowing my feelings to interfere with what the numbers show for CSX. CSX has already signed off on this deal. They did it months ago. And once again, that $209 for those bridges was agreed upon a long time ago. It got thrown into this deal at the last minute, but it really has nothing to do with Sunrail.



Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > And it's very easy to separate the numbers. It's spelled out quite accurately in the paperwork.
> ...


As noted above, it can be separated. That $209M will be spent no matter what else happens. So even though it is considered on paper as part of the deal, work has already started on those bridges even though the Governor just signed off on Sunrail this weekend. If he hadn't signed off on this deal, work would have continued on those bridges no matter what. It's an agreement within an agreement!

Florida had already signed off on that deal for the bridges, and then some politician decided to throw it into the Sunrail deal



Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > CSX has very few lawsuits, and in most cases wins them anyhow, since the motorist is almost always at fault. In fact, last year there were 4 grade crossing accidents on CSX tracks, and 3 of them involved Amtrak trains. So there was only 1 accident involving CSX. However, I will still grant you that there is a slight benefit to them because of this. But the major benefit is to the citizens in those counties who will no longer have to sit and wait at a crossing. That benfit far outweighs any benefit to CSX no matter how much you'd like to spin it the other way.
> ...


Read my post again!

I did agree that there is some potential benefit for CSX in those bridges. But it is minor compared to the public benefit!



Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Look, if you want to debate the wisdom of Sunrail, that's one thing. But the last thing that is happening here is that CSX is fleecing the taxpayers. In fact, even if Sunrail had been stopped by the Governor, the $209M to close those crossings would have still taken place and CSX would now still own the A line tracks and have greater flexibility to move its freight.
> ...


I never said that CSX was getting screwed. I simply corrected your erroneous position that this deal represented corporate welfare for CSX.

As for the nonsense about CSX getting the line back, they might have hoped that would happen down in the Miami area originally, but that illusion quickly vanished. Tri-Rail isn't going anywhere and CSX is never getting those tracks back. And thanks to their own screw-ups, they don't even get to dispatch the line anymore, Tri-Rail took that away from them. So now they have to sit and wait for Tri-Rail to decide when their freight moves.


----------



## eagle628 (Jul 4, 2011)

MattW said:


> I haven't seen what equipment they're planning, but I've heard both the tried and true (if death trap) MP36 with Bombardier bi-levels, and some sort of DMU (originally CRC, but dunno if their "successor" is still in business).



Well, according to this, it's MP36s and Bombardiers (what exciting and unique rolling stock North American commuter lines have). US Railcar (CRC's successor) offers equipment, but they've no factory to build them, and I don't believe anyone's ever ordered anything from them. http://en.wikipedia....wiki/US_Railcar


----------



## jis (Jul 4, 2011)

RCrierie said:


> How can it be worse than the HSR project?
> 
> For one, it's cheaper to acquire the trackage, and then maintain it vs building and then maintaining a 125+ MPH line.
> 
> ...


I fully agree with you. Frankly I don't see the logic behind the position that Texas Sunset and Nexis4Jersey are taking.

I think it is good that Florida is stepping upto the plate with their second reasonably well conceived commuter system. Their first is also considering the possibility of a second line using the FEC line, which could potentially also help out Amtrak. The first line has already helped out Amtrak. I simply do not see the downside in this at all. All my Florida friends from the Orlando area and Orange County, and most of them are not rail fans or foamers, seem to like the idea too.


----------



## Rail Freak (Jul 4, 2011)

pennyk said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> > All he had to look at was his absolutely abysmal approval ratings.
> ...


May have something to do with those darn hanging chads!!!!


----------



## pennyk (Jul 5, 2011)

jis said:


> RCrierie said:
> 
> 
> > How can it be worse than the HSR project?
> ...


Thank you Jis. Not all of my Orlando friends think it is a good idea, but, of course, I do.


----------



## jis (Jul 5, 2011)

AlanB said:


> Again, whether or not you think that Sunrail is a good idea or a bad idea doesn't change the fact that it is not corporate welfare for CSX. As for fair market value, I guess you're one of those guys who thinks that we should use eminent domain for everything.


Eminent domain is not the panacea that some imagine it to be, and does not necessarily produce the lowest price either. Eminent domain simply means that the owner cannot refuse to sell, but the owner can take the government to court if the offered price is not considered OK, and the thing can get held up there essentially for a long long time while the dispute is adjudicated, and typically both sides have to give some to arrive at a final result. Many judges are not particularly sympathetic to the government using eminent domain to try to bilk the owner of the fair market value.

Having watched the use of eminent domain to acquire the Lackawanna Cutoff right of way in NJ from an owner who claimed a completely outrageous market value for it and the final price that was arrived at, and given the current going price for properties similar to the CSX one in question (as documented by Alan in this thread), I am actually convinced that Florida is getting a pretty good deal. Others may disagree, but at best it is one marginally informed opinion against another. 

On the whole the deal is a win win where both of the three or four sides come out ahead. CSX gets to consolidate operations on a single route and get passenger trains out of its hair. Florida gets a commuter rail service starter line around Orlando and Amtrak gets freight out of its hair on the SunRail owned railroad. Tri-Rail ownership south of West Palm has done wonders to Amtrak time keeping down there. This will have similar positive effect on Amtrak. So as I said before, I don't understand the objections being raised and am of course happy to be educated and convinced otherwise with reasoned argument. And as Ryan said, it would be helpful to know what changes to the deal would make it more acceptable, so that we can understand what the exact objection is. Right now it seems to me that the objection is that CSX is getting something out of it therefore it is bad, which IMHO is a silly objection.


----------



## saxman (Jul 6, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> No, it's not about CSX being the "big bad corporation." It's about a political system that favors public transit only when it benefits a major contributor. I think Florida's relationship with passenger rail has made it clear that's how things work.


Not that I know anything about the SunRail porject, but isn't this essentially a public-private partnership, or sort of like it? Stuff like that has been going on for centuries and why is it such a bad thing?


----------



## jis (Jul 7, 2011)

saxman said:


> Texas Sunset said:
> 
> 
> > No, it's not about CSX being the "big bad corporation." It's about a political system that favors public transit only when it benefits a major contributor. I think Florida's relationship with passenger rail has made it clear that's how things work.
> ...


Besides if one does not believe in the Capitalist system involving small, medium and big business entities benefiting from economic activities and being the primary driver of same, I suppose one really is asking for the second coming of Marx.


----------



## George Harris (Jul 7, 2011)

How about back to the subject, which the project, not political arguments, posturing, grandstanding, whatever.

I think this is a great thing. Sounds reasnoably well thought out for these things. It is a busy corridor. Give people a good system to ride and it will whet their appetite for more. When you remember that railroad companies have been paying property taxes to every locality they run through since their tracks first went down to call any of this stuff corporate welfare is laughable.


----------



## George Harris (Jul 7, 2011)

MattW said:


> I haven't seen what equipment they're planning, but I've heard both the tried and true (if death trap) MP36 with Bombardier bi-levels, and some sort of DMU (originally CRC, but dunno if their "successor" is still in business).


Suggest that you look into the FRA requirements on vehicles. Anything that by any stretcb of the imagination could be called a death trap simply will not be allowed to run.


----------



## MattW (Jul 8, 2011)

George Harris said:


> MattW said:
> 
> 
> > I haven't seen what equipment they're planning, but I've heard both the tried and true (if death trap) MP36 with Bombardier bi-levels, and some sort of DMU (originally CRC, but dunno if their "successor" is still in business).
> ...


George, I have a great deal of respect for you, and will happily defer to you on most rail-oriented topics. However, while I may not be an expert, it doesn't take an expert to recognize bad railcar design when stuff flies apart at the seams instead of crumpling or even accordioning.

I have looked, and I failed to find the section of the crash standards that indicated that railcars should come apart at the seams and telescope into themselves:



The NTSB Chatsworth Collision Report said:


> the forward one-quarter of the coach (encompassing the intermediate-level passenger compartment, which is above the lead-end truck) separated at the center sill and telescoped into the carbody,


Unless I'm mistaken, the FRA crash standards to which you refer indicate 800,000 pounds compression statically applied. Which unless I'm interpreting the CFR wrong means essentially: place car in clamp, slowly tighten until scale reads 800,000. That's significantly different conditions than a locomotive suddenly being shoved into the car from a sudden collision. Additionally, CFR Title 49 Part 238.203© states:



> When overloaded in compression, the body structure of passenger equipment shall be designed, to the maximum extent possible, to fail by buckling or crushing, or both, of structural members rather than by fracture of structural members or failure of structural connections.


Based on the NTSB report, it appears that structural connections failed when overloaded in compression (by sudden application of locomotive). The only saving grace I see for the BiLevels appears to be back up in (b) of that same part:



> Passenger equipment placed in service before November 8, 1999 *is presumed* to comply with the requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section, unless the railroad operating the equipment has knowledge, or FRA makes a showing, that such passenger equipment was not built to the requirements specified in paragraph (a)(1).


Since the original BiLevels were delivered in 1992 when Metrolink started, and/or the design stemming from 1978, are we just *presuming* that the equipment is not in fact the deathtrap I claim it to be? Simply presuming that something is safe because it was placed in service before 1999 seems rather unsafe to me and my unexperienced mind.

The railfan side of me hates Metrolink's new crash energy management cars with a burning vengeance, but the practical side of me agrees that such designs is what our rail systems need in the %.00001 chance that our signaling systems fail, or the crew or dispatchers center make a mistake.

Imagine if during a head on collision, the engine of a particular car model had a habit of telescoping into the passenger compartment. Would that not also be a deathtrap and a bad design to be immediately remedied?

Fortunately, there have been very few collisions, which given that the BiLevels are not universally used means few instances of collision, with Glendale and Chatsworth being the only two I know of so, (unfortunately for this discussion) the information about the BiLevel's crash performance is somewhat limited. I am also unable to find the NTSB report on the Glendale collision which was admittedly very different circumstances than the head on collision of Chatsworth, but may have further enhanced either of our positions.

If I am getting this wrong, please enlighten me as I'd actually like to learn, but based on the NTSB report and the CFRs (which I admittedly might be misinterpreting due to my inexperience) the cars do appear to be less than safe.


----------



## jis (Jul 8, 2011)

SunRail is purchasing the following equipment:

4 Bombardier bi-level Coaches

9 Bombardier bi-level Cab Cars

7 MP36PH-3C Diesel Engines

as reported in _Orlando Sentinel_.

So apparently FRA has no objections to such.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Jul 8, 2011)

The Bombardier cars are widely used in commuter service, mostly on the newer startup services, such as Sounder in Seattle, Trinity Rail in Dallas-Fort Worth, Rail Runner in New Mexico, Coaster in San Diego, Tri-Rail in Miami and Utah. If the FRA had any objections, you would think they would have brought them up by now.


----------



## George Harris (Jul 13, 2011)

The 800,000 pound compressive load is derides as excessive and completely unreasonable by all the European vehicle manufacturers.

Teh pre 1999 "presumption" is essentially a grandfather clause to avoid having to pull out of service all older equipment. Use of presumption is leaving a door open to go after the obviously inadequate and unsafe.


----------



## George Harris (Jul 13, 2011)

MattW said:


> I am also unable to find the NTSB report on the Glendale collision which was admittedly very different circumstances than the head on collision of Chatsworth, but may have further enhanced either of our positions.


Thought I would look up Glendale. The NTSB website used to be fairly easy to go to and find accident reports. Appears that such is no longer the case. I could not find it either. Struck out on a reasonable web search as well. I guess some paranoid somewhere decided that it was dangerous to have these public documents actually available to members of the public. If you really want it bad enough a Freedom of Information Act inquiry giving the date and time should get it, but I have no idea how much trouble that would be or how long it would take.


----------



## Anderson (Jul 15, 2011)

I'm going to punt something out here for the "SunRail is a waste": Look, it's not ideal, but I see it as being a potential nucleus of a larger system. Look at how far the line goes out the north side of town, especially in Phase 2. Give it a few years and _someone_ will say "Why not extend this to Jacksonville?" Also, presuming that the interstate RoW remains in place, I think you could get the same said of Tampa. JAX-ORL in the long term is nothing to sneeze at, and JAX-ORL-TPA is actually a respectable system.

The other thing is that while this isn't an ideal system, it's far from the mess that the HSR was looking to be (especially since there, you had the suggestion of profitability).

Edit: To explain, Phase 2 goes all the way to DLD, or about 50-60 miles from ORL. I don't think a couple of corridor trains running ORL-JAX is too much of a stretch to see, particularly with the plans being punted around for expanded service in the state. It won't happen next week, but I've got to say that I see this as a longer-term project now that we got that white elephant out of the picture. Granted, those $2.4 billion could've set up an amazing state-wide system, but I digress.

Edit 2: To explain my views on the subject, I don't see the use of eminent domain as a cost-saving measure...but I could see it used effectively as a "We are running these trains and we'll let the court sort out how much we owe you" tool.


----------



## jis (Jul 15, 2011)

Anderson said:


> Edit 2: To explain my views on the subject, I don't see the use of eminent domain as a cost-saving measure...but I could see it used effectively as a "We are running these trains and we'll let the court sort out how much we owe you" tool.


One of my points in my ramble about eminent domain was that it is often better to try the negotiation route first before bringing in the eminent domain troops, because the courts generally will be more sympathetic towards the property owners if no negotiation was attempted at all. Also often one can get a better deal through the give and take of negotiations than through the hammer of eminent domain proceedings. Eminent domain is appropriate when negotiations fail.

However, there are places where eminent domain simply will not work, mainly because the price determined will be higher than what anyone can afford, e.g. to try to apply eminent domain to run the Sunset limited daily on UP.

My suspicion is if the SunRail venture had gone in for meinent domain they would eventually have paid as much as twice what they are coughing up all told at present. That is what makes the claims that SunRail is corporate welfare totally absurd. If I were an UP holding out for making the most money out of it, the they handled this is not even close to optimal.


----------



## Shawn Ryu (Jul 16, 2011)

They should probably buy used cars from Metra, and Metrolink to save money, no point getting new equipments when they are just starting.


----------



## jis (Jul 16, 2011)

Shawn Ryu said:


> They should probably buy used cars from Metra, and Metrolink to save money, no point getting new equipments when they are just starting.


Most new operations get at least some new cars. Even those that got used cars seem to have them as backups and reserve rather than for day to day ops. Whether there is a point or not depends on what the relative costs of maintaining new cars vs. used cars works out to be. Even UTA which got a unch of NJT Comets for cheap does not use them too much. They are all parked in a single line at their yard, while they mostly use new Bombardier cars.


----------



## George Harris (Jul 22, 2011)

The Nashville system bought all used cars and engines. They put their whole system together at minimal expense. It was interesting to watch how they did it verss how Albuquerque did it at about the same time using new everything. Somehow Richardson really had the fix it when it came to getting money.

Emminent Domain is usually regarded as a last resort by all parties. However there are some large businesses that as a matter of policy tell government or other agencies with Emminent Domain powers to simply go for it when the agency wants some of their land because that way their land people do not have to justify the final price to anyone.


----------



## John Bredin (Jul 22, 2011)

Shawn Ryu said:


> They should probably buy used cars from Metra, and Metrolink to save money, no point getting new equipments when they are just starting.


Don't know about Metrolink, but while Metra was indeed selling off its old carbon-steel (flat-sided) cars to start-up commuter operations as well as scrappers, in the last few years they've been scrambling to repurchase them and throw them back into service as fast as they can be put back in Metra paint and signage. Until Metra gets a new order of cars* nobody's buying used Metra cars but Metra itself. :lol:

*Metra has new-ish electric-multiple-unit (EMU) gallery cars for the Metra Electric line, but (1) not enough to replace the old Highliner EMUs, just supplement them, and (2) for several years now, no new gallery cars for the other, diesel-powered, Metra lines.


----------

