Brightline Trains Florida discussion

[jis]

Here is an odd twist to the Miami - Orlando passenger Rail project....
From the Orlando Sentinel:

The Mormon church could stymie efforts to build a $1.5 billion train between South Florida and Orlando International Airport by not allowing tracks on land it once owned.

Attorneys for All Aboard Florida, the Coral Gables company behind the train, are trying to decide what to do about the potential problem. On Thursday, they were poring over legal documents related to the property on the south side of the BeachLine Expressway near the airport.

"We're still analyzing it. I don't have an answer to it," said Husein Cumber, executive vice president of Florida East Coast Industries, a privately held real-estate outfit that owns All Aboard Florida.

You can read the whole story here.

I did not see anything in the article that indicated that the Mormons were even remotely interested in blocking this project. This sounds like an attempt to create a headline more than real news.

It is news because All Aboard Florida is taking it seriously. Otherwise it would not be news. It is good to see that they are being proactive rather than being blindsided later.

 

[pennyk]

Here is an odd twist to the Miami - Orlando passenger Rail project....
From the Orlando Sentinel:

The Mormon church could stymie efforts to build a $1.5 billion train between South Florida and Orlando International Airport by not allowing tracks on land it once owned.

Attorneys for All Aboard Florida, the Coral Gables company behind the train, are trying to decide what to do about the potential problem. On Thursday, they were poring over legal documents related to the property on the south side of the BeachLine Expressway near the airport.

"We're still analyzing it. I don't have an answer to it," said Husein Cumber, executive vice president of Florida East Coast Industries, a privately held real-estate outfit that owns All Aboard Florida.

You can read the whole story here.

I did not see anything in the article that indicated that the Mormons were even remotely interested in blocking this project. This sounds like an attempt to create a headline more than real news.

It is news because All Aboard Florida is taking it seriously. Otherwise it would not be news. It is good to see that they are being proactive rather than being blindsided later.

When I read the story in my Orlando Sentinel newspaper, I came away with the impression that there was a potential threat to this project.

 

[George Harris]

Here is an odd twist to the Miami - Orlando passenger Rail project....
From the Orlando Sentinel:

The Mormon church could stymie efforts to build a $1.5 billion train between South Florida and Orlando International Airport by not allowing tracks on land it once owned.

Attorneys for All Aboard Florida, the Coral Gables company behind the train, are trying to decide what to do about the potential problem. On Thursday, they were poring over legal documents related to the property on the south side of the BeachLine Expressway near the airport.

"We're still analyzing it. I don't have an answer to it," said Husein Cumber, executive vice president of Florida East Coast Industries, a privately held real-estate outfit that owns All Aboard Florida.

You can read the whole story here.

I did not see anything in the article that indicated that the Mormons were even remotely interested in blocking this project. This sounds like an attempt to create a headline more than real news.

It is news because All Aboard Florida is taking it seriously. Otherwise it would not be news. It is good to see that they are being proactive rather than being blindsided later.

When I read the story in my Orlando Sentinel newspaper, I came away with the impression that there was a potential threat to this project.

Having read this story on-line after in being brought up in another web site the main impression I came away with was much ado about nothing.

"Could" seemed to be the word chosen relative to most of the issues raised. The article seemed to be primarily a congolmeration of fact-free supposition and guesswork used to fill a blank space on the page.

When you read the headline, it sounds like the project would require taking of one of their major facilities in the area. But, when you get beyond the headline it is far less. All that is required is a modification of a near 50 year old agreement between a LDS church owned property and the expressway authority, which does not appear to require one additional acre of their property.

The quotes from both the Expressway Authority person and the Deseret Ranch person sound more like the cautious responses of people that were blindsided by the question tnan any form of position statement. Read the Deseret Ranch manager's statement:

Ranch manager Erik Jacobsen, contacted by email, would say only, "We are supportive of efforts to bring rail to Central Florida as part of regional transportation opportunities and are willing to work with all parties involved."

The article went on to say, "He declined further comment." What else could he say? I would consider this statement as sounding relatively positive.

As to the thought of being able to operate by 2015: I do not know what planet these people are living on to think this possible? It would be doubtful if construciton could start today, and we are not even there yet.

 

[Anderson]

I think the "story", if there is one here, is that they might be looking to leverage their position in some fashion or another. I found the idea that they might try and leverage their position to add a stop at their planned development particularly interesting.

 

[Brian_tampa]

Yesterday Feb 4th, the FRA released its decision (signed on January 30th, 2013 by Mr. Joseph Szabo) on the Environmental Assessment (EA) that was submitted for public review back around the first of November 2012. They concluded with a "Finding of No Significant Impact" (FONSI). This means that no Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required and also appears to clear the way for AAF to apply for a RRIF loan for the section of the project between Miami and WPB. If other federal RRIF loans are sought for other portions of the route, a similar EA review will have to be undertaken for those sections.

Here is the link to the EA report document in pdf format:

http://www.fra.dot.gov/Elib/Details/L04277

Interesting paragraph from page 26, Barriers to Elderly and Handicapped:

"Further, AAF trains will be single level, fully accessible coaches, with level floor boarding from platforms. All station facilities and platforms will have elevator access, and individuals with disabilities will not encounter stairs in boarding or departing from trains. Also, there will be no stairs or other obstacles to impede movement on board trains. AAF trains will be the first-in-the-nation to have the entire train accessible to wheelchair passengers, including access to pass between coaches for the entire length of the train." (From the FONSI report)

What available train sets match this description? Especially the claim of wheelchair access between train cars?

 

[chrsjrcj]

This rules out any Superliner cars (passage between cars on the top level) and Amfleet (stairs to board because of low level platforms). Not like Amtrak had many to spare anyway.

Personally, I'm still holding out for the Talgo.

ETA: Hmm...page 9:

For example,
to operate safely and efficiently, all station alternatives would need to be situated on tangent track at
sites that accommodate the development of high-level platforms at least 800 feet long and
approximately 50 inches high above the top of the rail to comply with level boarding requirements of
the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (PL 110-325).

This probably puts the Talgo out of play, but Tri-Rail wouldn't be able to share platforms with AAF since their fleet requires low level boarding. I also believe that Amtrak's Acela is fully handicap accessible (platforms and changing cars), so I'm confused when it comes to AAF's claim.

ETA 2: AAF answers pretty much all my questions on page 38:

SFRTA endorses the Project but makes the following comments:

•The EA does not encompass the full scope of AAF’s planned passenger network.
•The EA does not analyze the impact of AAF’s proposed operations on the existing Tri-Rail
Commuter Rail service or AMTRAK’s intercity service, or assess the amplified benefits of
linking AAF’s and Tri-Rail and/or AMTRAK’s operations.
•The EA does not provide support for assertions that future freight traffic on AAF’s
corridor will not exceed 2006 volumes.

Response: With regard to the first comment, it should be noted that the EA covers the project as
proposed by the AAF to the FRA (see additional discussion in section 1.0 of this FONSI) addressing West
Palm Beach to Miami, Florida, which AAF intends to pursue as an independent project. With regard to
the second comment, commuter rail is not part of the No Build Alternative and is not part of the
Selected Alternative. The possibility of commuter rail within the FEC corridor has been studied for at
least 10 years. Those studies have not yet established a definite preferred alternative or
approach. Moreover, no funding plan exists for such commuter service. Given the number of issues still
in flux regarding the possibility of commuter rail within the FEC corridor, an agreement is not in place
between FDOT, SFRTA and AAF for that service. However, as AAF has stated in the EA, while there are
no current plans for shared use of the stations for commuter rail service, the option for such service will
continue to exist even after the Project becomes operational because the stations will be developed in a
manner that will not preclude future commuter rail service on the FEC corridor, by SFRTA, FDOT or
others. Further, AAF representatives have publically and consistently stated their support for commuter
rail over the last 10 years. 28

The investment grade ridership study completed by AAF assumes a fare structure that is multiple times
the current fare structure published by SFRTA. This accounts not only for the different type of service
that will be provided by AAF (e.g. multiple class seating, free Wi-Fi, meal service, etc.), but also allows
AAF to target the non-commuter market that exists in the South Florida region. With intercity type oftrain sets,
service times (one-hour headways instead of twenty minute headways in the case of Tri-Rail
during peak hours), and service attributes, AAF will serve different market segments than Tri-Rail,
therefore allowing both to coexist in the region. FRA agrees that continued coordination by AAF with
FDOT and SFRTA is appropriate and has been included as one of the mitigation commitments identified
in section 7.

 

[chrsjrcj]

It also appears to be just for the Miami to West Palm Beach section. I've been wondering if this will be Phase 1, and they'll run "express" train between Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and West Palm Beach. Tri-Rail just recently received extra equipment (in the form of Hyundai-Rotem cars, unfortunately), so they can run trains on the FEC. Whether it's in the form of Tri-Rail or AAF, I won't be surprised to see passenger trains while I'm driving down US 1 in a few years. I think that much is certain.

 

[Brian_tampa]

Just saw today at the Orlando airport website (GOAA) the following RFQ notice:

http://www.orlandoairports.net/construction/advertisements/WS102A_Advertisement.pdf

I believe this is a recent RFQ post from the GOAA. The most interesting thing about this RFQ is located in the third paragraph:

"The CM@R - South Airport Intermodal Terminal will also be required to coordinate with the owner and operator of the Intercity Rail system, Florida Enterprise Corporation (FEC), and other intermodal system owners as applicable."

Despite no public announcement that an agreement between FEC and the GOAA has been reached since negotiations started last July, this RFQ assumes that FEC (and its subsidiary AAF) are definitely going to be building and operating trains into the new South Terminal Intermodal Terminal station. Interesting news! (Even though they got the corporate name wrong!)

 

[George Harris]

"Further, AAF trains will be single level, fully accessible coaches, with level floor boarding from platforms. All station facilities and platforms will have elevator access, and individuals with disabilities will not encounter stairs in boarding or departing from trains. Also, there will be no stairs or other obstacles to impede movement on board trains. AAF trains will be the first-in-the-nation to have the entire train accessible to wheelchair passengers, including access to pass between coaches for the entire length of the train." (From the FONSI report)
What available train sets match this description? Especially the claim of wheelchair access between train cars?

I think any trainset currently available would require wider doors between cars.

The problem you do get is that a high level platform meeting ADA requirements (not more than 3 inch gap and within 5/8 inch of floor level) will not pass standard freight cars. The standard passenger car is 10'-0" wide at floor level and the standard AAR freight car width is 10'-8", so right there you have a 4 inch gap with ZERO clearance to the freight car standard maximum dimension. This means that for every platform, either the track has to be prohibited to freight moves, or a gantlet track installed.

The vehicle that can be used without fancy work at platforms is a car built to the Japanese Shinkansen width, which is 3380 mm (11'-1") wide. With this, you can set a platform that is 5'-7" offset from track centerline, which both meets ADA and allows a freight car to pass.

There is much to be said for using this width passenger car everwhere in the US where it can fit, which really means everywhere outside the small clearance northeast and trains that have to go there. Using the Shinkansen 3-2 seating, these cars can give you essentially the same passenger capacity as a Superliner and do it on one level, without using airplane sardine can seat width and spacing.

By the way, even though the article refers to 50 inch platform height, the car floor height is 51 inches above the rail for Acela and I think also Amfleet, For the Shinkansen cars the floor height is 1300 mm which is right at 51 1/4 inces above the rail.

 

[Anderson]

Hmm...this is just that Texas project talking, but I'm wondering if JR Central might not sell some non-MU cars in conjunction with an ongoing order. I'm wondering how much trouble it would be for them to pull off the pans and MU gear and sell a few sets that could be hooked up to diesel locos?

 

[George Harris]

Hmm...this is just that Texas project talking, but I'm wondering if JR Central might not sell some non-MU cars in conjunction with an ongoing order. I'm wondering how much trouble it would be for them to pull off the pans and MU gear and sell a few sets that could be hooked up to diesel locos?

Start with the body shell and work out. There are not powered cars in the Shinkansen sets that could be used as the basis. Put the diesel in an end unit body shell. By the way, the normal end units on Shinkansen trainsets do not have traction motors.

 

[chrsjrcj]

Orlando Business Journal:

GOAA, FAA in dispute over rail line location

The Greater Orlando Aviation Authority is appealing changes the Federal Aviation Administration wants at Orlando International Airport to allow All Aboard Florida’s proposed train to travel along State Road 528 and through the northern entrance of the airport, Orlando Business Journal has learned.

The FAA was concerned the rail path would be too close to airport runways and asked the authority to require All Aboard Florida to locate the rail line six feet below ground level or move the runway by 1,020 feet.

It does mention that AAF will enter the airport from the north, which makes sense if the eventual plan is to extend to Tampa.

 

[Brian_tampa]

In tonight's online WPB Newspaper:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/business/all-aboard-florida-confirms-west-palm-station-clea/nWZL2/

Looks like the WPB station location has been confirmed as was suspected previously. Also, a second environmental assessment will cover the rest of the route by end of 2013. AAF says it will operational by end of 2015 - no surprise given the slowness in obtaining agreements with the Orlando airport and Beachline Expy Authority.

I just want to know what rolling stock they have ordered! My gut feeling is that AAF has done alot of work so far and has yet to publicly announce it. As reported before, AAF themselves said it will take 24 to 30 months to obtain new train sets.

 

[MikefromCrete]

"Further, AAF trains will be single level, fully accessible coaches, with level floor boarding from platforms. All station facilities and platforms will have elevator access, and individuals with disabilities will not encounter stairs in boarding or departing from trains. Also, there will be no stairs or other obstacles to impede movement on board trains. AAF trains will be the first-in-the-nation to have the entire train accessible to wheelchair passengers, including access to pass between coaches for the entire length of the train." (From the FONSI report)
What available train sets match this description? Especially the claim of wheelchair access between train cars?

I think any trainset currently available would require wider doors between cars.

The problem you do get is that a high level platform meeting ADA requirements (not more than 3 inch gap and within 5/8 inch of floor level) will not pass standard freight cars. The standard passenger car is 10'-0" wide at floor level and the standard AAR freight car width is 10'-8", so right there you have a 4 inch gap with ZERO clearance to the freight car standard maximum dimension. This means that for every platform, either the track has to be prohibited to freight moves, or a gantlet track installed.

The vehicle that can be used without fancy work at platforms is a car built to the Japanese Shinkansen width, which is 3380 mm (11'-1") wide. With this, you can set a platform that is 5'-7" offset from track centerline, which both meets ADA and allows a freight car to pass.

There is much to be said for using this width passenger car everwhere in the US where it can fit, which really means everywhere outside the small clearance northeast and trains that have to go there. Using the Shinkansen 3-2 seating, these cars can give you essentially the same passenger capacity as a Superliner and do it on one level, without using airplane sardine can seat width and spacing.

By the way, even though the article refers to 50 inch platform height, the car floor height is 51 inches above the rail for Acela and I think also Amfleet, For the Shinkansen cars the floor height is 1300 mm which is right at 51 1/4 inces above the rail.

3-2 seating, ugh.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

It looks like the Greater Orlando Aviation Authority and the FAA are working at working out their differences about the requirement the FAA wanted that the tracks be below ground level, as both have filed a stay motion in GOAA's appeal of the FAA's decision.

Details are in this article in the Orlando Business Journal from Feb. 15.

From the article:

The FAA was concerned the rail path would be too close to airport runways and asked the authority to require All Aboard Florida to locate the rail line six feet below ground level or move the runway by 1,020 feet.GOAA concluded that sinking the rail line six feet wouldn’t work because Florida’s water table is lower than six feet and moving the runway would dramatically impact the airport.

 

[chrsjrcj]

Can't sink the rail line 6 feet because of the water table? Orlando (Disney World) has tunnels, Ft. Lauderdale has a tunnel, and Miami is building a tunnel. I'd think 6 feet is fine, but I'm not a geologist.

 

[Aaron]

Can't sink the rail line 6 feet because of the water table? Orlando (Disney World) has tunnels, Ft. Lauderdale has a tunnel, and Miami is building a tunnel. I'd think 6 feet is fine, but I'm not a geologist.

I don't know about Ft. Lauderdale or Miami, but at least at the Magic Kingdom at Disney World, the tunnels are for the most part not underground. Think of the tunnels as the "first story", with the rest of the Magic Kingdom built on top of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilidor#Utilidors_at_Walt_Disney_World

 

[cirdan]

Not sure if anyone is aware of this, but this is what I found. Apparently the fleet will consist of EMD F59PHIs and here is the shocker. These hi-level cars are Ex-ATSF and Amtrak Hi-levels. Not sure if this is what they will use, but 2014 is two years away still and things can change. Can't rule out they may purchase used cars.
http://ccrail.com/wp...ccrail.com_.pdf

I wouldn't attach too much importance to those details for now. I may be mistaken, but to me that power point looks like somebody thinking out loud, and recoloring some graphics they downloaded from the internet. Many of the pictures look vaguely familiar so I believe I may have come across them elsewhere in a different context. They're probably not all from the same source either, as the exterior mockups don't fully match the interior ones. I thus don't belive that detail planning has actually reached this stage yet.

 

[Brian_tampa]

A short review of the status of All Aboard Florida in today's Orlando Business Journal:

http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/blog/2013/03/all-aboard-execs-target-this-year-to.html

AAF is saying construction to start this year as well as ordering train sets, and completing negotiations with the FDOT.

 

[battalion51]

You know I have to wonder if Talgo is going to make a big push to sell the sets that Wisconsin was going to buy for this project. I also wonder if FEC is going to operate this independently, or if there is going to be some sort of effort to do codeshare with Amtrak...

 

[AlanB]

I don't see the Talgo's going to the FEC, since they've said that they want bi-levels and the Talgo's are single level. Additionally, two sets isn't enough to operate the service.

As for a code share, I rather doubt it, since really the only places that a transfer might be feasible are from West Palm and south. I don't see most people wanting to ride south from Orlando and other points to connect at WPB, only to go back north on Amtrak.

Now, if Amtrak ever starts running on the FEC from JAX to MIA, then things could change. And seeing as how Gene Skorpowski, the former manager of the Capitol Corridor and the genius/architect behind the huge success of said corridor, was hired by the FEC to put their passenger rail program together anything is possible.

 

[battalion51]

All good points Alan. But, as the saying goes, Money Talks. If Talgo can sweeten the pot enough, they may be able to get FEC to buy in. If you think about it, Bi-Levels could easily work on Cascades, but they decided to go with a single level fleet. Having something that's FRA approved would certainly help...

 

[jis]

Given that Skorpowski is the man who decides this stuff for FEC, I'd be quite surprised if FEC takes Talgos that are not available in sufficient numbers to cover their current needs and thus get stuck with managing two separate relatively small fleets with all the associated headaches of maintaining multiple maintenance facilities and parts inventory and all that. He is too business minded to fall for that kind of stuff. but we'll see.

 

[Paulus]

I don't see the Talgo's going to the FEC, since they've said that they want bi-levels and the Talgo's are single level. Additionally, two sets isn't enough to operate the service.

Information I have is that they are going for single level sets, not bilevel.

 

[Blackwolf]

So, just how many trainsets would the FEC need anyhow? Talgo has two turn-key sets right now that could me modified to FEC specs relatively easily (remember, the Wisconsin trains never had a cafe and only had one class of service.) Could Talgo, if FEC drafted up a contract for business, whip their US plant back into full-operation for an additional number of trains on semi-short-notice if asked for more sets?

I'm thinking along the lines of: "We have X $million and can contract you immediately, but you need to provide the trains in 18 months or no deal."