Study Virgin Trains, Rep. John Mica tells Amtrak's new CEO

That's the word from Alex Kummant's appearance today before the U.S. House's Subcommittee on Railroads of the
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

Such good advice.

Virgin operates 2 franchises in the UK: Virgin West Coast and Virgin CrossCountry. Together they received £578.1 million in subsidy in 2003/04:
http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/nrt0304-yr.pdf
(page 51)

The following year, Virgin's combined subsidy came down to £200.8 million.
http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/nrt0405-yr-rev.pdf
(page 51)

A trend? No. In 2005/06, subsidy went up, to £243.1 million.
http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/294.pdf
(page 73)

Remember, these are pounds, not U.S. dollars.

Take Congressman Mica's advice, folks. Study Virgin Trains.

At Dulles International, spending $1.3 billion to get passengers from concourse to terminal

Mobile lounges bad. Trains good. Good enough, in any case, for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to spend $1.3 billion on a railroad that doesn't even leave the airport.

What does $1.3 billion buy?

At Dulles, it will buy a people-mover that moves at 42 mph, compared with the 15 mph speed of the mobile lounges. Which means it will shave a whopping four minutes off the "travel" time between concourse and terminal.

In Amtrak's case, it electrified the Northeast Corridor from New Haven to Boston, a distance of 157 miles, and cut at least an hour off the travel time between Boston and New York--not just for the Acelas but for every Amtrak train .

The point isn't whether Dulles's investment is justifiable. The question is why Amtrak investment isn't judged by the same criteria. Improved operating results are a function of capital investment.

In the East, gas tax to boost rail capacity

AP reports a 5-way partnership that will spend $150 million to upgrade select Norfolk Southern rail lines for double-stack container trains.

The Federal Highway Administration will pay the lion's share, $95 million, with the other 4 partners kicking in the other $55m: Norfolk Southern and the states of Ohio, Virginia and West Virginia.

Is this the way to break the logjam over using motor fuel tax for capital improvements in the rail network? AP's David Hammer seems to suggest as much.

The project also has the support of the trucking industry, even though it was funded under last year's federal highway bill as a way to reduce trucking traffic. Tim Lynch, senior vice president of American Trucking Associations, said more efficient rail transport between Norfolk, Va., and Chicago should improve trucking business at each end of the route and at the planned terminals along the way.

Lynch said the trucking industry's only concern is that a rail project is being funded by the highway bill, which largely draws on fuel taxes paid by motorists.

The Heartland Corridor project sets a new precedent for federal highway dollars, Lynch said. "If that will grow in priority, we have to evaluate where the revenues are coming in from," he said.

What does this have to do with passenger trains? Clearances raised to accommodate double-stack container trains are high enough for bi-level passenger cars like Amtrak's Superliners.