chrsjrcj
OBS Chief
For whatever it’s worth, I did decide to take advantage of the 50% off offer for my first joyride to Orlando this Friday and 2/3 of the seats appear taken.
Brightline Trains Florida discussion 2023 Q4
- Thread starter pennyk
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
They've built a thriving short-haul business, that now it's interfering with their plans for long-haul business. Success is killing them.
There's also an inability to adapt, probably due to some existing constraints (equipment and slots/bridge openings, most likely, though station platforming limits in Miami might also come into play...I think the decision to scale MiamiCentral down from 8 platforms to 5 will prove to be a significant long-term goog on their part). I don't think they realized the presence of a "Cadillac commuter" market in South Florida (e.g. folks willing to semi-regularly pay for Premium). Note that the SF Premium Pass comes out to $15.725/ride if fully used ($629/40 rides), and that basically comes with a passable (if perhaps light) breakfast included if you show up a bit early, and it comes with complementary Uber rides at each end. I can think of more than a few places where that'd barely cover an overpriced continental breakfast, or times when $16 wouldn't cover the Ubers alone.
[Seriously, at that price point with those benefits and that average speed, I think you should be able to make commuter rail work in just about any major metro market. Conceptually, the SF Premium Pass is rather more transformative than I think anyone is giving it credit for being. I have to wonder what would happen if a commuter agency out there started introducing something like that - a more expensive monthly pass, but one that at least covered a rideshare link at the commuter's "home" end.]
Having said this, Brightline should probably look to acquire another 2-4 trainsets to handle the South Florida market, but I'm not sure where that would put them on slots between WPB and MIA. The additional three cars per train over the next two years (or so) will help, but it looks like they do need some differentiated capacity pending the presence of an "actual" commuter rail operation. (Of course, if they could pair this with one or two more stations - no more than one more station per train, but with the non-Boca trains stopping at (say) Delray, I think there are additional markets to be dug out of this. I also strongly suspect that there's going to be a market at some of the commuter line stations for a Premium Pass-type service.)
Edit to add:
Based on ridership data over the course of 2023, it looks like prior to shuffling things to ramp up Orlando service (so, pre-August, when I think there was probably a small ridership hit as they started fiddling with schedules; and definitely pre-September) there was a market of about 5k pax/day within South Florida (notably, over 1/3 of the Tri-Rail weekday average pre-pandemic). Fiddling with the passes might have dinged some of the shorter-market commuters later on as well. However, the fact that Brightline was making it to 35-40% of Tri-Rail's ridership on the basis of five stations instead of 18 is...kinda stunning when you stop to think about it. Of course, Brightline's documentation actually suggests that Brightline itself would potentially roughly match Tri-Rail for intra-SF ridership.
But having said that, trying to make a 5k/day intra-SF market and a 2.5-3.0k/day MCO-SF market both work on the basis of something like 8500 seats/day is a dog that won't hunt.
Last edited:
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
I am just stating an observed fact about Acelas, and before that Metroliners. I don't know why, but the nonstops have always failed so far. That is why there are none running today and for a while now. This has nothing to do with Covid. It has been the case since the late '70s.
Infills add city pairs and add passenger and ridership. It is of advantage for both Brightline and its potential customer base. It should be noted that they already added two infill stations between WPB and Miami and got a significant ridership boost from those. Of course at present probably Brightline needs more equipment first to make effective use of infills. However they do have plans for at least two infill stations between WPB and Orlando, and maybe more later. Mind you not all trains would or should stop at all infill stations.
I will reiterate that if they had a station in downtown Melbourne I’d probably be on it at least monthly instead of driving.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
I would love that too, but unfortunately the Space Coast station will most likely be in Cocoa given its proximity to Port Canaveral, the US's largest and world's second largest Cruise Port
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
I think it is more likely that several stations will come up in Brevard County when the County decides it wants to pull the trigger on its Commuter Rail Plan, and that has multiple stations in the Melbourne-Palm Bay segment. I would be surprised if Brightline decides to add more than one station in Brevard County, though the total length of its travel in Brevard County is longer than in any other county north of WPB.
Tampa leaders bemoan cancellation of prior HSR proposal, and eagerly anticipate Brightline extension, while WPB mayor extolls Brightline-triggered transit related development:
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/202...layed-rail-link-2/?share=ayetdnhi2indhs0giil0
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/202...layed-rail-link-2/?share=ayetdnhi2indhs0giil0
With investment in infrastructure and appropriate scheduling to make different express-levels of service that bypass less-busy stations it's fine.At what point does adding ever more stops become more of a liability than an asset? In other words, when does trying to tap every possible source of riders, begin to discourage longer distance travel, and negatively impact revenue?
Probably a “magic number”, that is always changing….
On the Tōkaidō Shinkansen (if you've seen a photo of a bullet train going past Mt. Fuji, it's that one) between Tokyo and Osaka, you have the "Kodama" ("Echo") service that stops at all sixteen stations and takes 4h, "Nozomi" ("Wish") that stops at just six and takes 2.5h, and "Hikari" ("Light") that stops at nine and takes about 3h. The Kodama service isn't worse than Nozomi except that it stops more places, just like Brightline trains that stop in Boca aren't any worse than ones that don't.
This depends on frequency as well. If you run one train per hour and want to have all trains make all stops, that's one thing. On the other hand, if you run 2x/hr and run them on several stopping patterns, you can add a few more stops without messing with runtimes too badly (or by running a few "locals" a day and the others as semi-expresses).At what point does adding ever more stops become more of a liability than an asset? In other words, when does trying to tap every possible source of riders, begin to discourage longer distance travel, and negatively impact revenue?
Probably a “magic number”, that is always changing….
Edit: Sorta like the various Shinkansen services noted above. Having all stations get (say) 6-8 trains/day but also having a few trains skip them all (with a bit more than 1x/hr) would probably be the most logical.
Last edited:
I’m kinda thinking that express services are as good for the railroad as they are passengers, since it lets the trainset run more services per unit time, even without charging more for express.
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,849
I think different stopping patterns and trains that overtake others have a massive appeal for railfans, because, after all, that's what makes railroads interesting.
From the point of view of management such games just makes things complicated. I feel that an hourly service is just about the lowest level you can get away with if you want to speak of a service being "frequent". If you start dropping stops there will be stations that get a train stopping every two hours or even less, but still need to be fully staffed and so on, and so still have the full level of construction and operating costs for a reduced quality of service and also a reduced ability to generate revenue. At that point you need to be asking whether that station deserves to be built and served at all (unless they exist purely to siphon in subsidies from local communities and the passengers who use them are considered a necessary evil).
I like the idea of "expresses" but these need to run in addition to the base level schedule and not cannibalize it. I can imagine for example a base level hourly schedule doing all stops and a handful of expresses that run only during the morning and evening weekday peaks, thus taking pressure off the base level trains while also offering faster times and thus maybe even justifying some "express surcharge".
From the point of view of management such games just makes things complicated. I feel that an hourly service is just about the lowest level you can get away with if you want to speak of a service being "frequent". If you start dropping stops there will be stations that get a train stopping every two hours or even less, but still need to be fully staffed and so on, and so still have the full level of construction and operating costs for a reduced quality of service and also a reduced ability to generate revenue. At that point you need to be asking whether that station deserves to be built and served at all (unless they exist purely to siphon in subsidies from local communities and the passengers who use them are considered a necessary evil).
I like the idea of "expresses" but these need to run in addition to the base level schedule and not cannibalize it. I can imagine for example a base level hourly schedule doing all stops and a handful of expresses that run only during the morning and evening weekday peaks, thus taking pressure off the base level trains while also offering faster times and thus maybe even justifying some "express surcharge".
Last edited:
That's the thing - I think "every other hour" (which you have at Boca, and what you started with at Aventura) is workable for the smaller stations, and if I buy Brightline's stated demand projections, about three trains every two hours seems like a plausible result.
I *don't* think you'd do overtakes with these. More likely is the express going out first, followed by the not-express.
[Once "actual" commuter trains get involved you *will* have some overtakes and so on.]
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Coca will have a catchment area stretching from Titusville to Melbourne, and even parts of Palm Bay. We are talking a population of around 600K.
I think capturing additional ridership for well managed revenue should almost always add revenue for additional riders. What is more relevant is the quality of the additional revenue, i.e. is it enhancing net earnings or depleting.At what point does adding ever more stops become more of a liability than an asset? In other words, when does trying to tap every possible source of riders, begin to discourage longer distance travel, and negatively impact revenue?
Probably a “magic number”, that is always changing….
It should be noted that not all infill stations will be served by Brightline. Due to the density of population along the route, inevitably over time local suburban service run by counties will develop in the form of a lower tier service serving many local stations. We observe this in spades on the NEC for example, where more infill stations are being built, some even served by Amtrak.
Specifically for Brightline even on the higher speed stretch there are plans and set aside space for a station at Innovation Way which will be served by SunRail and not by Brightline. If the East-West Corridor is developed then another infill station at Goldenrod Road is a possibility too.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
In the various studies and EISs I believe they use something like 25 miles and 50 miles as two levels of catchment, and they have some percentage of total demand associated with each to come up with a net number.
It means at 25mi you have x% of all people making the trip choosing train, and 50mi y% where y < x. It’s a useful abstraction for planning because a 25mi shape is easier to reason about than a 45 minutes at 9am on a Tuesday shape.Forgive my confusion, but not sure what your answer means...drive 25 miles to ride 50 miles? That doesn't seem likely, unless I misunderstood what you said...
This. It unfortunately ignores othee nuances that influence the decision (either to take the train or which station to pick).
- Status
