Brightline Trains Florida discussion
- Thread starter Anderson
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
Scott Orlando
Service Attendant
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Regarding what AAF said, officially their position as far as I can tell is that if an opportunity presents itself sometime in the future they might look at Tampa.
What I am speculating here are just my speculations based on informal chats with individuals, not with AAF, so it should be taken with an appropriate pinch of salt.
My speculation, based on some random conversations with people who shall remain unnamed is that once the Miami - Orlando thing is in place and running, doing a Jacksonville add-on is a trivial well constrained and understood problem with a relatively modest pricetag which involves almost no property acquisition issue. Everything that is needed is already owned by the Fortress Group (FG) in some way shape or form. It fits the FG model of building real estate developments and a railroad to connect them together. So most likely it is just a question of when, not if. In addition Jacksonville is already planning on it and setting aside access routes and such to the Transportation Center that they are building by the Convention Center, the old train station. They would really like both FEC and Amtrak to operate out of there.
Orlando - Tampa is an entirely different kettle of fish that is way outside the normal FG pattern. It involves others properties that have to be acquired and it presents relatively little opportunity for FG to build out huge real estate projects on its own property to justify for them the expenditure of putting a railroad together. So that one is a big "if" question first. Does this mean that no one will build Orlando to Tampa? Of course not. But it does mean that FG is likely to be much more circumspect about it. As Brian_tampa mentioned, one factor in favor of a Tampa project is the potential of a huge ridership, and that might indeed help answer the "if" question favorably even though FG has little property to develop in that part of Florida as far as I can tell. Certainly any significant windfall in the way of infrastructure development support from the private industry focused administration in Washington could help a lot there too.
BTW, did you know that the guys who were peddling the Maglev system (now defunct) for OIA to Convention Center had grand plans to then extend it to Tampa? Of course there was no funding for any of it beyond a dream and a prayer or two.
Again, no, no one from AAF said this or anything else that I have been babbling on out. It is my observation looking at past and present behavior patterns of the Flagler descendant operations which Fortress seems to be following. Their primary interest is in the Real Estate development and feeding business to them. So much so, that they are willing to sell off the FECR freight operations while retaining the underlying real estate property. My conjecture is that people who think the Brightline model can be replicated elsewhere and Fortress will do it, are in for a disappointment. Someone else might do it, but I don;t really see Fortress doing it in the near to medium term future. An interesting tidbit that many don;t realize, or forget, is that AAF and FEC Railroad are not even within the same subsidiary of the Fortress Group. FECR is a direct subsidiary of FG whereas AAF is a subsidiary of FEC Industries, which is a subsidiary of FG. The relationship between AAF and FECR is truly arms length, and recently there have been rumblings in the industry about FG trying to peddle FECR to short line operators. That also partly explains why they have kept AAF and FECR very seperate when dealing with regulatory matters too.
What I am speculating here are just my speculations based on informal chats with individuals, not with AAF, so it should be taken with an appropriate pinch of salt.
My speculation, based on some random conversations with people who shall remain unnamed is that once the Miami - Orlando thing is in place and running, doing a Jacksonville add-on is a trivial well constrained and understood problem with a relatively modest pricetag which involves almost no property acquisition issue. Everything that is needed is already owned by the Fortress Group (FG) in some way shape or form. It fits the FG model of building real estate developments and a railroad to connect them together. So most likely it is just a question of when, not if. In addition Jacksonville is already planning on it and setting aside access routes and such to the Transportation Center that they are building by the Convention Center, the old train station. They would really like both FEC and Amtrak to operate out of there.
Orlando - Tampa is an entirely different kettle of fish that is way outside the normal FG pattern. It involves others properties that have to be acquired and it presents relatively little opportunity for FG to build out huge real estate projects on its own property to justify for them the expenditure of putting a railroad together. So that one is a big "if" question first. Does this mean that no one will build Orlando to Tampa? Of course not. But it does mean that FG is likely to be much more circumspect about it. As Brian_tampa mentioned, one factor in favor of a Tampa project is the potential of a huge ridership, and that might indeed help answer the "if" question favorably even though FG has little property to develop in that part of Florida as far as I can tell. Certainly any significant windfall in the way of infrastructure development support from the private industry focused administration in Washington could help a lot there too.
BTW, did you know that the guys who were peddling the Maglev system (now defunct) for OIA to Convention Center had grand plans to then extend it to Tampa? Of course there was no funding for any of it beyond a dream and a prayer or two.
Again, no, no one from AAF said this or anything else that I have been babbling on out. It is my observation looking at past and present behavior patterns of the Flagler descendant operations which Fortress seems to be following. Their primary interest is in the Real Estate development and feeding business to them. So much so, that they are willing to sell off the FECR freight operations while retaining the underlying real estate property. My conjecture is that people who think the Brightline model can be replicated elsewhere and Fortress will do it, are in for a disappointment. Someone else might do it, but I don;t really see Fortress doing it in the near to medium term future. An interesting tidbit that many don;t realize, or forget, is that AAF and FEC Railroad are not even within the same subsidiary of the Fortress Group. FECR is a direct subsidiary of FG whereas AAF is a subsidiary of FEC Industries, which is a subsidiary of FG. The relationship between AAF and FECR is truly arms length, and recently there have been rumblings in the industry about FG trying to peddle FECR to short line operators. That also partly explains why they have kept AAF and FECR very seperate when dealing with regulatory matters too.
The reason it's so expensive is to make Tampa service viable, you start talking about speeds above 125mph, which means electrification. Since it wouldn't make sense to force a transfer at OIA, they'd be looking at having to re-upgrade the entire route. I would think that AAF must not see a stand alone Tampa to Orlando route as being viable or they'd be pursuing it.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Fortress Group does not have significant real estate holdings along the Tampa - Orlando route, so in general they would have a tendency to not pursue it. They are not a transport company. They are a real estate company that would build transport corridors to make their real estate more valuable, just like their predecessors the Flagler folks did. AAF simply does the bidding of their owners, like most others.
BTW, there is no reason that the route from Orlando to Tampa has to necessarily be over 125mph. The distance is 85 miles. That distance takes 40 mins at 125mph, 27 mins at 186mph and 23 mins at 220mph. Of course that assumes that the entire distance is run at that speed, which will never be the case. So the differences will be even less, One has to start asking seriously what is the "bang for the buck", Don;t get me wrong. I am all for electrification, but with the exorbitant cost of electrification in the US these days, one has to have a good enough reason to invest that amount, specially if one has to fund it privately.
Even for traveling from Miami to Tampa, whether it takes 3 hours and 41 mins or 3 hours and 27 mins seems to not make that much of a difference.
Meanwhile as we speak, already dual mode articulated tilting train sets are being conceived for operating under electric power at 180mph and diesel power at 125mph elsewhere in the world. So nothing requires electrifying the entire route given the advancement of technology.
BTW, there is no reason that the route from Orlando to Tampa has to necessarily be over 125mph. The distance is 85 miles. That distance takes 40 mins at 125mph, 27 mins at 186mph and 23 mins at 220mph. Of course that assumes that the entire distance is run at that speed, which will never be the case. So the differences will be even less, One has to start asking seriously what is the "bang for the buck", Don;t get me wrong. I am all for electrification, but with the exorbitant cost of electrification in the US these days, one has to have a good enough reason to invest that amount, specially if one has to fund it privately.
Even for traveling from Miami to Tampa, whether it takes 3 hours and 41 mins or 3 hours and 27 mins seems to not make that much of a difference.
Meanwhile as we speak, already dual mode articulated tilting train sets are being conceived for operating under electric power at 180mph and diesel power at 125mph elsewhere in the world. So nothing requires electrifying the entire route given the advancement of technology.
Makes sense. I wouldn't be surprised if after the extension to Jacksonville happens (which will be a success since the train will take about 4 hours versus at least 5 hours of driving), Tampa will start putting pressure on the state to figure out how to link them into brightline. They'd definitely stand out as a major point not linked by quality rail service.
Last edited by a moderator:
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
That is a very plausible scenario. The Orlando - Tampa Corridor is part of the Florida State Passenger Rail Plan - yes such a thing does exist. So at that level it does not need any selling. It is just that attitudes need to change in Tallahassee to get the Florida DOT to pay attention to its own plans that are gathering dust on a back shelf these days due to a transit hostile Governor.
Not only to Tampa, but there is a link from Tampa all the way down to Fort Myers that appears in it too. But that may be a bit of a stretch.
Not only to Tampa, but there is a link from Tampa all the way down to Fort Myers that appears in it too. But that may be a bit of a stretch.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Being owned by a railroad company is going to be worse than being owned by a random holdings umbrella company? It is not like selling it means dismantling it. Sales can take place with associated long term contracts and resource commitments. I don't see how it implies anything with regard to contract driven provision of service at specified quality level for specific agreed upon guaranteed income for a long time. It does not imply dismantling the running operation into multiple pieces and doling them off at all. My guess is that FECR whether owned by FG or someone else, will continue to be FECR just like it has been through its previous acquisitions etc.
Last edited by a moderator:
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,849
Often when companies structure their activities into subsidiaries, or as in this case, susbidiaries of subsidiaries,this does not mean there are concrete walls between thos subsidiaries. Subsidiaries are often created from an accounting or taxation perspective more than an operational perspective. If say AAF trains are being delayed because the dispatcher at FECR is priorizing freight, a senior AAF guy can walk across the corridor and lean on some people there and demand change. People within the same family of companies don't really say "you're not my boss, you can't tell me what to do", but if it's a separate company and the agreement isn't 100% watertight somebody will find and use the loophole because your own bottom lne matters more then the other guy's business. This is one of the reasons the Uk rail system was in such a mess for the first decade or so after privatization. It was all about the interfaces between different stakeholders not being sufficiently well defined and clarifyinfg whose resposnibility stopped where led to a lot of creative legalisms and people worming and squirming and passing the buck to others wherever they could. And furthermore, divisions within the same group may be fluid. It may make sense to keep AAF in a separate box during the construction and ramping up stage because that's not a core buisness for a freight railroad, but in the longer term real estate companies don't really want to run railroads and I can imagine AAF being transferred at some later point.
Last edited by a moderator:
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
AAF is owned by the real estate company FECI. Significant part of income from AAF's operation is expected to be from real estate leasing and hospitality sub leases. FEC Railroad is owned by the umbrella holding company FG. This reorganization happened when FECI was given AAF. At that point FECR was moved out of FECI to the holding company FG. I have no clue why. Also I have no idea what their plans may be except for what they have stated publicly.
chrsjrcj
OBS Chief
http://malled.blog.mypalmbeachpost.com/2017/01/10/all-aboards-brightline-to-unveil-first-passenger-train/
Media unveiling of the train is tomorrow. Should hit the test track (I believe it is from just north of Belvedere Rd. to just north of Hypoluxo Rd. in Palm Beach County) on MLK day.
Media unveiling of the train is tomorrow. Should hit the test track (I believe it is from just north of Belvedere Rd. to just north of Hypoluxo Rd. in Palm Beach County) on MLK day.
chrsjrcj
OBS Chief
http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/business/take-look-all-aboard-brightline-unveils-first-passenger-train/9hOtiavIcohs3VrsZrwEvN/
"BrightBlue" was unveiled today. Some really clever marketing on the train too. You can tell that they are really big on branding.
When all is said and done, this is going to be a really nice train. On par with the Acela (at minimum) IMO.
"BrightBlue" was unveiled today. Some really clever marketing on the train too. You can tell that they are really big on branding.
When all is said and done, this is going to be a really nice train. On par with the Acela (at minimum) IMO.
neroden
Engineer
In regards to Tampa-Orlando service, the I-4 median is vacant, clear, and ready for tracks and stations from Universal Studios Orlando to 34th St. in Tampa. There's probably lots of land speculation which could be done around there.
I don't remember where the HSR line was supposed to go east and west of there. The toll road median (417) in Orlando is also pretty empty, though, which is one way to get to the Orlando Airport.
So I hope AAF are keeping in touch with the state government and tollway authority. They may be able to make some kind of deal (land for trains)...
I don't remember where the HSR line was supposed to go east and west of there. The toll road median (417) in Orlando is also pretty empty, though, which is one way to get to the Orlando Airport.
So I hope AAF are keeping in touch with the state government and tollway authority. They may be able to make some kind of deal (land for trains)...
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,849
Being about 20 years newer than Acela, and with a lot of progress having been made since then, I think it wiould be fair to expect it to be better tha Acela.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
The ROW is being preserved. Beyond that nothing will happen until mid-twenties at the earliest, and it is also not clear if AAF will be involved in such, though they have aspirations of getting there some day, but not really soon. As I have mentioned before, a tentative ROW following 417 to I-4 (roughly) to get from the airport to the I-4 corridor has been discussed off and on, but that is about where things stand. Nothing concrete.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Video of a Brightline person explaining the features of a Brightline Select (First) Class Car.
Hmm, they'll be 4 car trains, at least at first. Not quite up to NEC Standards of 8 car trains.
Last edited by a moderator:
chrsjrcj
OBS Chief
In fairness, the NEC has been around decades longer than Brightline.
CCC1007
Customer Service Agent
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2015
- Messages
- 1,846
It's not like the train sets are designed to accommodate more cars...
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Acelas are 6 car trains. So NEC standard is not necessarily 8 cars. It is often the case that NER trains are 8 cars. But even for those, some are 7 or even 6 cars and others are 9 cars. So frankly there is no NEC standard.
In passenger facilities and ambiance arguably the Brightline trains will be way better than anything that runs on the NEC today. That should not be surprising considering that everything that runs on the NEC is from the last century.
In passenger facilities and ambiance arguably the Brightline trains will be way better than anything that runs on the NEC today. That should not be surprising considering that everything that runs on the NEC is from the last century.
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,849
2 locomotives for 4 cars seems somewhat excessive.
It only really makes sense if you consider it a temporary and transitional phase in the buildup to full service with more and longer trains.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
The Miami - WPB service is temporary using four car trains. Their target is six cars initially for the Orlando service, eventually growing to eight cars.
- Status
