Lets just get back on topic.
The California cars involve very little if any of the ARRA grant tranche that involves a deadline. A significant part of the Midwest order is funded by time limited ARRA grant. Hence the difference in how they need to be handled.In a statement provided to Trains News Wire, Caltrans, the lead agency in the 172-car project, acknowledged that some American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds designated for the $551 million project will likely revert back to the U.S. Treasury. The deadline for spending the stimulus funds is Sept. 30, 2017.
Most at risk are the 130 cars intended for use in the Midwest, an order dependent on the ARRA funds.
This shows as I suspected, that California had only a small proportion of the federal funding with the September 2017 deadline and they are probably quite capable of funding that part or a significant part of that part, on their own if necessary. The situation in the case of Midwest is less optimistic. These numbers are consistent with the numbers on one of the slides in the sldieset I pointed to in a message a few messages back.IDOT for 88 cars (on behalf of Michigan and Missouri too) total $238.5 million
of which Stimulus $211.4 million
and from HSIPR $27.1 million
Caltrains total $113.8 million
of which Stimulus $54.2 million
from HSIPR $36.8 million
and from Prop 1B state funds $22.8 million
So while Cali might get less than half its cars by deadline Sept 2017,
the Midwest must get about 85% of its cars or it's Cinderella's Coach.
Not so bad for Cali after all
Not sure if any of the 45 option order waiting for sign-off is to use
Stimulus funds, but I doubt it. They've paid attention to the deadline,
after all.
Hopefully, while the California ones are being built and delivered, the midwest can figure out their money problem. The midwest states really need to come up with a dedicated stream of revenue to pay for their stuff without waiting for the Federal Government. They really need their own version of Prop 1B.For the Midwest (IDOT) order, what is the breakdown of the specific HSIPR and ARRA accounts? Do all the accounts involved have September 2017 deadline or only some of them? If the latter what is the amount that does not have September 2017 deadline.
Ah! Here is a breakdown that was posted by Woody back in August 2014 way back in this thread:
This shows as I suspected, that California had only a small proportion of the federal funding with the September 2017 deadline and they are probably quite capable of funding that part or a significant part of that part, on their own if necessary. The situation in the case of Midwest is less optimistic. These numbers are consistent with the numbers on one of the slides in the sldieset I pointed to in a message a few messages back.IDOT for 88 cars (on behalf of Michigan and Missouri too) total $238.5 million
of which Stimulus $211.4 million
and from HSIPR $27.1 million
Caltrains total $113.8 million
of which Stimulus $54.2 million
from HSIPR $36.8 million
and from Prop 1B state funds $22.8 million
So while Cali might get less than half its cars by deadline Sept 2017,
the Midwest must get about 85% of its cars or it's Cinderella's Coach.
Not so bad for Cali after all
Not sure if any of the 45 option order waiting for sign-off is to use
Stimulus funds, but I doubt it. They've paid attention to the deadline,
after all.
BTW, I have been reading this thread from page 1 and trying to determine how many of us need to eat how much Crow regarding our starry eyed blue sky optimistic speculation about how all this was going to go down. It is pretty grim. Lots and lots of Crows involved.
You mean those ugly horizonsHAH! Good luck with that.
Those shiny new Siemens engines are gonna look GREAT pulling 1970's era amfleets
The two train sets Wisconsin didn't want would be perfect for the new Chicago-Rockford-Dubuque service in Illinois. The rail line in and out of Galena is full of twists and turns and these trains would handle the curvy track the best without having to slow down too much. It would be nice if Illinois could have gotten their hands on these Talgo sets for the new Black Hawk service.I don't mean to throw the discussion too far off course, but does this delay put the Talgos, currently sitting unused at Beech Grove, back into play at all?
If I understand the settlement between Talgo and the state of Wisconsin correctly, Wisconsin paid Talgo $9.7 million(in addition to the $40 million the state spent on the first two trainsets), and Talgo currently holds the title for the two trainsets. Talgo is paying to store the trains and keep them in shape to sell. If Talgo does sell the trainsets, it must kickback 30% of the sale price to Wisconsin, up to a maximum of $9.7 million.
I know the purpose of the Midwest pooled purchase of railcars and locomotives is to have a standardized fleet, and taking on the Talgos would be anathema to that strategy. But would Talgo be desperate enough to either sell the trainsets at a fire sale price, just to get them off the books, or agree to lease the trainsets, provided a maintenance contract was thrown in? Could the Midwest states apply its share of any penalty money Nippon-Sharyo may be required to pay for the bi-level delay against the purchase or lease of the Talgos?
I'd imagine IDOT and MDOT will both be anxious to showcase their new 110-mph corridors once they are ready, potentially wanting to add a frequency or two. MDOT is studying a coast-to-coast service, from Grand Rapids to Detroit as well as a train from Ann Arbor to Traverse City. IDOT still plans on service to the Quad Cities and possibly Rockford. That, of course, was one of the reasons for the new equipment purchases. Would either state consider the Talgos the best stopgap available at the moment
No, the two Talgos would have the same drawbacks as anywhere else in the Midwest. Only 2 trainsets which will require a specialized service and maintenance facility for just those 2 trainsets. Will cost money to open and supply a facility that would be better spent on acquiring and supporting N-S bi-levels.The two train sets Wisconsin didn't want would be perfect for the new Chicago-Rockford-Dubuque service in Illinois. The rail line in and out of Galena is full of twists and turns and these trains would handle the curvy track the best without having to slow down too much. It would be nice if Illinois could have gotten their hands on these Talgo sets for the new Black Hawk service.
Also as to Chicago-Rockford-Dubuque, if the budget impasse was cleared up tomorrow (from my keyboard to God's ears!) the present plans are Chicago-Rockford only, via Metra and Union Pacific rails, because Canadian National owns the only possible route west of Rockford and they aren't playing ball right now. :angry2: IIRC, the last plan before Rauner put everything on hold was one daily round-trip to Rockford in 2015 followed about a year later by another.Besides, the plans for the Chicago-Rockford-Dubuque service are in deep freeze, thanks to the Illinois budget crisis made far worse than it needs to be by Governor Rauner. The service expansion, except for the rolling stock, is entirely state funded, so as far as I know, all contract and track work has been stopped. Even the Quad Cities service expansion which has $177 million in federal funding is on hold until Rauner releases the state funding portion of the project. If Rauner doesn't release the state funds soon, the FRA may have to take back the $177 million in FY2010 federal funding and re-allocate it elsewhere.
ARRA (stimulus) funding has a deadline. HSIPR funding has no deadline.I can't remember whether it was the ARRA funding that had the deadline or the HSIPR one. Maybe afigg can throw some light on that.
Read the Progressive Railroading article more carefully. Excerpt:Hi,
It was just announced this week that the FEDS and the California HSR just amended their funding agreement adjusting many items including giving them more time to complete the work. If they did it for the HSR project, they may also amend the funding agreement for the new cars. We will find out soon, one way or the other.
The funding for the initial operational segment comes from a mix of Federal ARRA (stimulus) grants, FY2010 grants, state funds, and up to $9 billion in state bond money. What they have arranged to do with the FRA is to spend all of the stimulus funds first by September, 2017; then spend the remaining FY2010 funds along with the state funds. I gather this required restructuring of the contract payment plans and agreements with the FRA as the early spending was to be a mix of federal and state matching funds."Today's amendment marks a significant step toward the delivery of the operable segment connecting the Silicon Valley with the Central Valley, does not delay the project, and will ensure that ARRA funds are expended by the mandated deadline of September 30, 2017," authority officials said.
The California amendments are all good news. Obviously the FRA is aware of the deadline problems and trying to find a work-around.Read the Progressive Railroading article more carefully. Excerpt:... the FEDS and the CAHSR just amended their funding agreement ... giving them more time to complete the work.
If they did it for the HSR project, they may also amend the funding agreement for the new cars.
The N-S contract ... is funded by stimulus grants. The fix is simple, 2 or 3 sentences extending the deadline in a FY2017 appropriations bill. The politics of that fix ..."Today's amendment ... will ensure that ARRA funds are expended by the mandated deadline of September 30, 2017"....
There are likely a few other projects that will bump up against the September, 2017 deadline. Yes, tailoring an extension to exclude CAHSR or limit it to rolling stock only (to provide a margin for Siemens if there are delays in the Charger testing or production) might improve the chances of getting the rider through the House. But there are 30 to 40 right-wingers who object and obstruct every chance they get, so the extension would have to be in a bill that won't need their votes to pass. The politics on Capital Hill are complex and near toxic these days.CAHSR has sworn embittered enemies. Bi-level cars for Midwestern and California routes are probably sort of opposed by the usual rail haters, but not at the level of passion as CAHSR. So a deadline extension, for bi-level cars only, should be more do-able if it comes to that.
The boldface on the last item is mine. So they are working on options to fund and complete the 130 car order despite the delay and the ARRA funding deadline. Whatever those "options" are. Anyway, appears that the current schedule has the first new bi-levels being delivered for testing in early 2017.The FAI for the manual door took place at the end of May.
The FAI for truck assembly is to take place on July 12th.
The section burn test will take place on June 22nd with the dynamic test taking place on June 27th.
With regard to the car shell re-design:
A number of items have been closed.
They are looking at weight reductions as a part of the re-design modifications.
Mock ups and design are taking place simultaneously.
It is anticipated that the manufacturer will have an updated schedule this week for the test/at risk model with testing planned for the Fall of 2016 – to be finalized in January, 2017.
The states (Caltrans and IDOT) and FRA are working on funding, and funding options, and solutions despite the expiration of ARRA funds. They have a commitment to have a complete project that fulfills the original intent – post ARRA funding.
Enter your email address to join: