Detroitman
Member Username: Detroitman
Post Number: 1024 Registered: 06-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 11:33 am: | |
Commuter train may get trial run Demonstration project could link Ann Arbor, Detroit on Amtrak line Tuesday, December 05, 2006 BY JOHN MULCAHY News Staff Reporter http://www.mlive.com/news/aane ws/index.ssf?/base/news-20/116 5333730252390.xml&coll=2 |
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie
Post Number: 778 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 11:57 am: | |
Amtrak does operate commuter trains under contract for local authorities in other cities, with commuter-style equipment more basic and plain than Amtrak coaches. If this trial run will have any success, there will have to be a dedicated shuttle to take workers from the New Center station to downtown and vice versa. Riding a commuter train in and then waiting for a D-DOT bus which may or may not show up ain't gonna cut it. |
Bob Member Username: Bob
Post Number: 1255 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 12:03 pm: | |
My guess would be that they would run it like the Foxtown Tigers train, where the DDOT Bus/trolley is waiting there when the train comes in. But this is great news. |
Bob Member Username: Bob
Post Number: 1256 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 12:05 pm: | |
Also I think it was in the 70s into the 80s Amtrak did operate a commuter rail service between AA and Detroit. |
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie
Post Number: 779 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 12:12 pm: | |
Yes-- it was called the "Michigan Executive." It originally ran all the way to Jackson but then was cut back to Chelsea, IIRC. One of the few exceptions to the rule that Amtrak doesn't operate commuter trains. The other exception I can think of was the "Valpo Local," aka "Dummy," from Chicago to Valparaiso. |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 1963 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 12:27 pm: | |
quote:One of the few exceptions to the rule that Amtrak doesn't operate commuter trains.
Amtrak actually runs quite a few commuter operations, including Sounder in Seattle, Metrolink in Los Angeles, MARC in Maryland, VRE in Northern Virginia, and Coaster in San Diego. Until a couple years ago, they even operated the MBTA (Boston) commuter rail system. |
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 216 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 12:33 pm: | |
Amtrak essentially runs a commuter rail from DC to NY. |
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 2236 Registered: 02-2005
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 12:50 pm: | |
There is no word on how frequent this would be running, but anything would be better than the current three trips a day; you can't even leave A2 for Detroit before 1:22pm on any given day. I would almost exclusively use this train service to go between Detroit and A2 if it is frequent enough. Some improvement of the tracks might have to be made from Dearborn to New Center, though, or whatever is neccesary to permit the train to travel faster than 25 mph in the city. |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 1964 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 12:53 pm: | |
quote:Amtrak essentially runs a commuter rail from DC to NY.
You're not entirely incorrect. I'm not sure I would pay $90 each day to commute from Philly to DC, but Amtrak does sell monthly passes along the Northeast Corridor. |
Jsmyers Member Username: Jsmyers
Post Number: 1820 Registered: 12-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 12:54 pm: | |
Amtrak does operates commuter trains under contract. They aren't Amtrak trains, but one of Amtrak's businesses is providing the engineers etc to run them under contract. http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ ContentServer?pagename=Amtrak/ am2Copy/Title_Image_Copy_Page& c=am2Copy&cid=1081442674300&ss id=542 DDOT and SMART busses are quite frequent (like every 5 minutes) on Woodward, especially at commuting times. The bigger challenges is to make sure there are enough seats open on them and make sure that there is an appropriate stop to wait at. Since those busses (especially DDOT) make so many stops along the way, as part of a demonstration project, it might be appropriate to have a Woodward limited service that would only stop at major stops. It could make these stops: Henry Ford Hosp. Rail station (Woodward/Baltimore) WSU (Kirby) DMC (Alexandrine) GCP (People Mover) Campus Martius RenCen And then turn around and make a return trip. This would approximate what LRT service on Woodward would be like (except that LRT wouldn't be impacted by traffic). That is about 4.5 miles total. If we assume an average speed of 15 mph (I have no idea if this is reasonable, but my bet is that it is conservative), the total one-way trip is 15 minutes (remember that many will get on at the rail station, shortening the journey time). That means that 6 buses running in constant loops will provide 5 minute headways. DDOT's website says they have 472 busses total, SMART's says they have 284 fixed route busses. 6 buses (and drivers) is very doable. |
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie
Post Number: 780 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 1:03 pm: | |
My first post in this thread does state that Amtrak operates commuter trains under contract. In my second post when I said, "Amtrak doesn't operate commuter trains." I meant that Amtrak doesn't operate (at least, it's not technically supposed to) commuter trains strictly for its own sake with its own equipment. |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 1966 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 1:07 pm: | |
quote:My first post in this thread does state that Amtrak operates commuter trains under contract. In my second post when I said, "Amtrak doesn't operate commuter trains." I meant that Amtrak doesn't operate (at least, it's not technically supposed to) commuter trains strictly for its own sake with its own equipment.
Gotcha. Even where Amtrak is contracted the operate commuter rail service, the facilities and equipment are owned by the service provider. For example, Maryland's MARC service is operated by Amtrak, but the locomotives, passenger cars, and most of the stations, are owned by the State of Maryland. |
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa
Post Number: 648 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 1:30 pm: | |
Maybe Michigan can lease Via Rail equipment, one train sits at Windsor station from midnight to just before 10 o'clock in the morning every day. Don't worry, I know this isn't feasible. |
Dougw Member Username: Dougw
Post Number: 1462 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 1:48 pm: | |
Looks like this article was prompted by the public meeting in Ann Arbor Monday. Don't forget to attend one of the other public meetings today and tomorrow: Tuesday, December 5, 2006 4:30-8 p.m. The Fairlane Club (Dining Room D), 5000 Fairlane Woods Dr., Dearborn 48126. Wednesday, December 6, 2006 4:30-8 p.m. SEMCOG offices in the Buhl Building 535 Griswold, Suite 300 (Ambassador Room) Detroit http://www.annarbordetroitrapi dtransitstudy.com/ Personally, while on one hand we don't need a commuter rail line running every 15 minutes at this point, on the other hand I hope they're proposing something more than just 4 or 6 trips per day, that would effectively make it useless as a link to the airport. Something running once per hour might work as a compromise. And contracting the service through Amtrak makes sense. |
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 675 Registered: 02-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 3:06 pm: | |
It's effectively useless as a link to the airport period, without some sort of shuttle/monorail being implemented, which isn't part of this test. |
Fortress_warren Member Username: Fortress_warren
Post Number: 286 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 3:30 pm: | |
Where's Trainman? This is his reason for life. |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1848 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 3:41 pm: | |
"Something running once per hour might work as a compromise. And contracting the service through Amtrak makes sense." Duh! Any service with more than one train would require two parallel tracks. There's two tracks, with busy freight requiring track #2 on the Michigan Line in the Conrail SAA. Also, as I mentioned earlier, if there were frequent passenger service, any freight which needs to cross track #1 (current Amtrak track on the Michigan Line) would be deprived of utilizing the CP-LOU Delray by-pass at Wyoming. Having commuter service destroying freight business is a poor way to run a railroad. Hint: Freight makes profits and pays the bills for the four major freight railroads using the Michigan Line. Passenger/commuter only pays back a paltry percentage of its operating costs (i.e., loses money big time!) It wouldn't hurt if the rail buffs figured out how the railroad business really works before letting their dreams cloud the issue. And there's no way where one train could complete that circuit (two ways) each hour. Think about those matters before posting your wish lists to Santa, Virginia. |
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa
Post Number: 649 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 3:56 pm: | |
Fortress, ironically, Trainman is not that interested in trains. |
Fortress_warren Member Username: Fortress_warren
Post Number: 288 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 4:07 pm: | |
Trainman is not that interested in trains. How can that be? If it's private ownership; can't have that. Publically owned; The Way Forward. Is T-man sick? Can't get to the keyboard? I wish him well. |
Douglasm Member Username: Douglasm
Post Number: 724 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 7:37 pm: | |
Could one set up a deticated bus service between a New Center stop and Downtown similar to what the DSR used to run between the General Motors Building and Milwaukee Junction back when the GTW serviced the northern suburbs? I don't see why not. |
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul
Post Number: 84 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 7:52 pm: | |
The Mlive newspaper article said, "The analysis of five rapid transit options - two using rapid transit buses, two using commuter "heavy'' rail, and one using light rail - was made public last month. That analysis revealed that none of the options, as configured, would be competitive for federal dollars." I read the PDF version of the study, and how is this Amtrak idea going to prove that it can work for federal funding better than the 5 options in the study? |
Miketoronto Member Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 383 Registered: 07-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 8:01 pm: | |
May I ask why so much talk is going on about a commuter line from Ann Arbor? Metropolitan Detroit does not even have a decent bus system to get people in Metro Detroit to work. So why all this worrying about getting Ann Arbor people onto rail into downtown Detroit? Lets fix the problems with the transit system within Detroit and get Metro Detroit residents to work, before worrying about getting Ann Arbor people to downtown Detroit. |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1851 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 8:02 pm: | |
What follows is a breakdown of operating costs on a rider basis as per SEMCOG figures: reposted from Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 4:42 pm: OK, we'll consider the likely CRT option: Minimum operating cost: $93 million/year Daily trips: 2,100 (Are these round trips, single rides, and how many days per week or year?) The capital costs range from $618 to $1,474 million? Even with the local governments paying the minimum of 40% of the capital costs, that's a capital expenditure of only some $247 to $590 million. Just how dumb do the proponents of commuter rail think we are? [Couldn't resist...] The operating costs alone without debt service push an average CRT trip to some $133 per passenger trip! [$102 million (avg. per year)/(365 days* 2,100 trips)]. In addition, those ridership numbers probably do not include seven days/week but are probably for only five days/week. If so, that would push the cost per trip much higher... |
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner
Post Number: 487 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 - 8:14 pm: | |
Mike, AA had the first scheduled public meeting. There is another tonight and one tomorrow. Tonight's is in Dearborn and tomorrow's is downtown. |
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa
Post Number: 652 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 11:56 am: | |
There has been a lot of focus on the AA-Detroit line, but I think the real jewel of the TRU proposal is the Detroit-Dearborn (Woodward-Michigan) LRT. Could Detroit, Wayne County, Dearborn, etc. apply for federal funding of such a line? With existing bus service, SEMCOG would be able to come up with reasonably accurate ridership projections. I say build the Detroit system first while keeping an eye on an AA-Detroit-Pontiac commuter rail line (no need to draw PM comparisons as the LRT would not be a train to nowhere). |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1856 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 12:14 pm: | |
"There has been a lot of focus on the AA-Detroit line, but I think the real jewel of the TRU proposal is the Detroit-Dearborn (Woodward-Michigan) LRT. Could Detroit, Wayne County, Dearborn, etc. apply for federal funding of such a line?" And just where and how could those communities come up with the 40% of the $ billions that the Feds will not cover. Come up with sensible funding first, otherwise any massive mass transit plans are DOA. Hint: Moribund SE Michigan is not going turn around on account of LRT up and down Michigan or Woodward. |
River_rat Member Username: River_rat
Post Number: 247 Registered: 02-2006
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 12:49 pm: | |
The Detroit - AA line is about as likely as steam locomotive down the center of Woodward to Birmingham. The ridership just isn't there and the infrastructure necessary is not justified. Add this to the lack of political clout in Washington to get any funding and you are left with busses. Hourly busses (like Greyhound). Somebody mentioned the old 'Michigan Executive' run in the 70's. Think back to the fifties when we had a full fledged cummuter rain system in the area. Grand Trunk to Pontiac (and elsewhere such as Caseville), New York Central to AA via the Chicago service (over a dozen trips a day), the C & O on the Grand Rapids line, etc. Not to mention the streetcars on Woodward and Jeff. (Message edited by river_rat on December 06, 2006) |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 1968 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 1:25 pm: | |
Livernoisyard, stop making shit up.
quote:Minimum operating cost: $93 million/year
Do you have a source for this? I find it hard to believe that a 45-mile commuter line operating perhaps 6 trains a day would cost $93 million per year to operate. Virginia Railway Express operates 30 trains a day, carrying 14,000 passengers daily on two lines (about 80 route miles). VRE's operating budget for FY06 was $33 million. Nineteen million dollars of this was projected to be covered by fares, leaving a deficit of $14 million. SOURCE: www.mwcog.org/transportation/a ctivities/clrp/tip0611/17%20-% 20rptTrnOp-VA.pdf
quote: The capital costs range from $618 to $1,474 million?
Where do you get this figure? Do you know what this includes? Typically, commuter rail costs $2-$3 million per mile to implement on existing trackage. MDOT's 1997 concluded that a 100-mile commuter rail network connecting Detroit to Mt. Clemens, Pontiac, and Ann Arbor would cost $130 million. Furthermore, how does this compare to the $1 billion+ proposed expansion of I-75, that Corradino concluded would save the average driver LESS THAN ONE MINUTE over the entire length of the corridor? You just love to see Detroit bogged down in the Dark Ages, don't you? The cars-only strategy you continually promote has worked so well for Southeast Michigan, hasn't it? |
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 218 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 1:27 pm: | |
Ann Arbor is probably the focus because they'd be the most likely to use it. That and the corridor between Detroit and Ann Arbor being fairly under-developed when compared to Detroit-Pontiac or Detroit-Mt. Clemens... |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1858 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 1:54 pm: | |
Livernoisyard, stop making shit up. quote: Minimum operating cost: $93 million/year Do you have a source for this?" STFU Dan! You KNOW that those figures came from the SEMCOG study posted on another DY transit thread last month because YOU questioned then that the same SEMCOG's data seemed out of line to you. Go look them up yourself again, or are you so lazy or stupid that I have to bump it up for you? So quit pretending that "my" figures are bogus. You socialists in the Beltway seem to have conveniently short "memories" whenever your boondoggles cannot be justified on any sensible basis. BTW, it's only a simple application of fourth or fifth grade arithmetic in order to easily derive my conclusions from the SEMCOG data. Perhaps, that extreme level of math ability needed on your part is what holds you back... |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 1969 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 2:14 pm: | |
^^^Golly gee, I guess you told me! I mean, how can I argue with an intelligent, well-reasoned post like that? |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1859 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 2:31 pm: | |
Golly! Just look at your post that precipitated it: "Livernoisyard, stop making shit up." And I indeed know why you cannot "argue with an intelligent, well-reasoned post." BTW, those data are still on DY--those very same data that you knew about only a few weeks ago. So, play dumb all you want wondering just why you get "your own shit" thrown back at you. |
Dougw Member Username: Dougw
Post Number: 1467 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 5:47 pm: | |
Lyard is correct in the sense that those were the numbers coming out of the initial Ann Arbor to Detroit "screening results" for CRT. (Danindc, see the top post at https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/5/86822.html for a refresher. Working too hard? ;) ) However, it turns out that that ridiculously expensive CRT option was kind of a strawman anyway, that was for service every 20-30 minutes, which causes all kinds of additional expense, including new track. It looks like they finally released the detailed cost analyses here: http://www.annarbordetroitrapi dtransitstudy.com/news/study_r eports.aspx As it was explained at Tuesday's public meeting, after eliminating the original 5 options, they are now looking at a "CRT Modified" option which will be much more along the lines of what Danindc is talking about (maybe 4-12 trains per day), which should be a lot cheaper. The public meeting went better than I expected. And hey, both LRT and BRT were more or less eliminated from consideration, which makes sense for this route. The only other option now being considered aside from "CRT Modified" is a "Premium Bus" alternative which will probably not have right-of-way lanes, which seems like enough of a loser that it will hopefully get dumped soon. My impression from the meeting is that "CRT Modified" is the leading alternative right now. Also, there was a mention that the airport is currently looking at fixed transit system to go between the various airport terminals, which could conceivably directly connect up with a CRT line passing by north of the airport, which was interesting. |
Bvos Member Username: Bvos
Post Number: 2089 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 11:37 pm: | |
The problem with a Dearborn to Detroit LRT option is that when you switch transit modes you loose a lot of riders. So while its likely that ridership and density numbers will support LRT along that stretch, it will have significant ridership drop offs due to folks having to switch to the CRT, bus, etc. |
Bvos Member Username: Bvos
Post Number: 2090 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 11:40 pm: | |
Forgot to mention this. There are credible rumors that Norfolk Southern is actually considering selling their line between AA and New Center to an entity who would run commuter rail along the line. Norfolk Southern has been at many of the steering committee meetings and is playing an active role in this process. I believe that there is a genuine desire on NFS to help make mass transit happen in SE Michigan. |
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 2242 Registered: 02-2005
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 11:51 pm: | |
that is great news, somewhat unexpected. Do you have any links about this? |
Bvos Member Username: Bvos
Post Number: 2092 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - 11:54 pm: | |
No links because it's still in discussion/negotiation. |
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 2243 Registered: 02-2005
| Posted on Thursday, December 07, 2006 - 12:00 am: | |
okay let's hope something comes out because I'm doing some school-related research on this topic. |
Dalangdon Member Username: Dalangdon
Post Number: 118 Registered: 03-2006
| Posted on Thursday, December 07, 2006 - 12:28 am: | |
In most cases, when Amtrak is involved in a commuter operation, they provide bare bones service (i.e. mechanical and housekeeping) while the host railroad that the trains travel on provide the operating crews (conductors and engineers) That is the case with Sounder in Seattle, for instance. This works well, for the host railroad then handles the dispatching and works around their own freight trains, and their own capacity issues. In some cases, such as the SFO area Caltrain, Amtrak also provides the operating crews. In that corridor (San Francisco - San Jose) passenger service take precedence over freight. In terms the "cost per passenger" concept: That is an argument that people who don't understand either transit or railroad operations quite frequently fall into. Those same people tend to enjoy making things up, twisting things way out of context, or just swallowing ridiculous concepts from ridiculous entities (such as the Heritage Foundation) whole. There's no point in arguing with them. |
Busterwmu Member Username: Busterwmu
Post Number: 313 Registered: 09-2004
| Posted on Thursday, December 07, 2006 - 1:58 am: | |
In this case, however, the dispatching would be handled by the NS Dearborn Dispatcher from the building on Michigan Ave, not be any private agency or by Amtrak. |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1861 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Thursday, December 07, 2006 - 3:18 am: | |
I suspect that the Norfolk Southern is more concerned about whatever negatives that commuter service would impose upon its potential development of the Junction Yard along the Michigan Line between Central and Lonyo. If NS ever goes intermodal in Detroit, in addition to the CSX intermodal in Livernois Yard, the last thing they need is having commuter rail literally shutting down many of its operations due to the separation of passenger trains from their freight operations. |
Malcovemagnesia Member Username: Malcovemagnesia
Post Number: 6 Registered: 12-2005
| Posted on Thursday, December 07, 2006 - 5:21 am: | |
f.w.i.w., I ride CalTrain (the San Francisco corridor commute service that Amtrak operates) a few days per week. Lemme tell you guys, it is SOOO nice to be able to sit back on the train and relax while commuting to & from work faster than driving down US 101 and hunting for a parking spot on either end of the the business day. If those suckers stuck in traffic going in and out of Detroit on 75 & 96 could only know what they were missing, there'd probably be such a clamor. It's almost a surprise that nobody has been brave or forward-thinking enough to try out commuter rail in the Metro area yet. Except it's not a surprise, since I'm familiar with Detroit area politics. |
Bvos Member Username: Bvos
Post Number: 2094 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Thursday, December 07, 2006 - 8:59 am: | |
I agree malcove. One of the problems with Detroit is that no one has been outside of the area. And those that have (if they ever return to Detroit) kept living like a Detroiter in the area they were in, never using mass transit and the other amenities that make for a world class city. So no body really knows first hand the advantages of mass transit, hence no clamor for it. |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 1970 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Thursday, December 07, 2006 - 11:12 am: | |
quote:The problem with a Dearborn to Detroit LRT option is that when you switch transit modes you loose a lot of riders.
I don't necessarily agree. If there is a local transit mode available, it broadens the reach of the commuter rail system, appealing to a larger ridership base. There are synergies to be enjoyed--it's not quite the same as transferring from one bus line to another. Union Station is the busiest station in the Washington Metro system, largely because of the tens of thousands of commuter rail riders who transfer to/from the train to the Metro every day. If the Metro were not available to take people across town from the train station, you can bet your ass a lot of those people would be switching back to their cars. |