Fact Sheet: Amtrak in Florida

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Fact sheet: Amtrak in Florida Passengers in Florida, 2013-2019: Floridians near a station boarding & detraining (in thousands) Within 25 miles: 12,373,707 (66%) 1,099.3 Within 50 miles: 15,473,012 (82%) 1,067.5 1,016.9 936.4 Amtrak service in the state 909.2 885.0 905.4 Silver Star - Daily service Silver Meteor - Daily service Sunset Limited - suspended fall 2005 Auto Train - Daily service 24 Amtrak stations 2017 2018 2019 Chipley Crestview Deerfield Beach 23,407 21,895 21,066 DeLand 20,827 20,677 20,453 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Delray Beach 13,782 13,643 14,752 Fort Lauderdale 40,613 40,249 41,220 Quick recap, 2019 (arrivals and departures) Hollywood 24,312 22,348 21,652 Jacksonville 70,049 66,085 63,973 Coach/ First/ Kissimmee 35,416 34,774 35,726 Business Sleeper Total Lake City Passengers 740,354 165,002 905,356 Lakeland 5,305 5,040 5,400 Madison Average trip 496 miles 886 miles 567 miles Miami 64,485 63,500 62,766 Average fare $ 71.00 $293.00 $143.00 Okeechobee 3,935 3,988 4,109 Average yield, per mi 14.3¢ 33.1¢ 25.1¢ Orlando 128,831 123,990 127,187 Palatka 12,579 11,598 12,313 Top city pairs by ridership, 2019 Pensacola Sanford 228,894 224,818 236,035 1. Sanford - Lorton, VA 855 mi Sebring 15,214 13,848 14,083 2. Orlando - New York, NY 1,167 mi Tallahassee 3. Tampa - West Palm Beach 192 mi Tampa 106,534 105,664 110,312 4. Orlando - Tampa 56 mi West Palm Beach 52,973 52,572 53,717 5. Miami - Tampa 257 mi Winter Haven 20,598 20,515 19,757 6. Orlando - Washington, DC 942 mi Winter Park 27,253 25,844 27,047 7. Fort Lauderdale - Tampa 235 mi 8. Orlando - West Palm Beach 248 mi 12 Thruway stops 9. Miami - New York, NY 1,480 mi 2017 2018 2019 10. Miami - Orlando 313 mi Bradenton-Ellenton 1,916 1,673 1,307 Top city pairs by revenue, 2019 Dade City 524 382 369 Daytona Beach 776 675 652 Fort Myers 4,225 4,147 4,074 1. Sanford - Lorton, VA 855 mi Gainesville 2,484 2,276 2,319 2. Orlando - New York, NY 1,167 mi Ocala 2,901 2,630 2,557 3. Orlando - Washington, DC 942 mi Port Charlotte 1,147 1,130 951 4. Miami - New York, NY 1,480 mi Sarasota 2,933 3,095 3,335 5. Jacksonville - New York, NY 1,020 mi St Pete-Clearwater 5,881 5,413 5,468 6. Fort Lauderdale - New York, NY 1,458 mi The Villages 542 483 480 7. Miami - Washington, DC 1,255 mi Waldo 105 111 96 8. Orlando - Philadelphia, PA 1,076 mi Wildwood 797 751 606 9. West Palm Beach - New York, NY 1,415 mi 10. Tampa - New York, NY 1,223 mi Top statewide officials Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) http://www.flgov.com Sen. Marco Rubio (R) 1200 G St NW, Ste 240 http://rubio.senate.gov Washington, DC 20005 (202) 408-8362 Sen. Rick Scott (R) railpassengers.org http://rickscott.senate.gov Copyright 2020 Rail Passengers Association 20200405.

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operations
Pursuant to Section 207 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-432, Division B): Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operations Covering the Quarter Ended June, 2019 (Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2019) Federal Railroad Administration United States Department of Transportation Published August 2019 Table of Contents (Notes follow on the next page.) Financial Table 1 (A/B): Short-Term Avoidable Operating Costs (Note 1) Table 2 (A/B): Fully Allocated Operating Cost covered by Passenger-Related Revenue Table 3 (A/B): Long-Term Avoidable Operating Loss (Note 1) Table 4 (A/B): Adjusted Loss per Passenger- Mile Table 5: Passenger-Miles per Train-Mile On-Time Performance (Table 6) Test No. 1 Change in Effective Speed Test No. 2 Endpoint OTP Test No. 3 All-Stations OTP Train Delays Train Delays - Off NEC Table 7: Off-NEC Host Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Table 8: Off-NEC Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Train Delays - On NEC Table 9: On-NEC Total Host and Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Other Service Quality Table 10: Customer Satisfaction Indicator (eCSI) Scores Table 11: Service Interruptions per 10,000 Train-Miles due to Equipment-related Problems Table 12: Complaints Received Table 13: Food-related Complaints Table 14: Personnel-related Complaints Table 15: Equipment-related Complaints Table 16: Station-related Complaints Public Benefits (Table 17) Connectivity Measure Availability of Other Modes Reference Materials Table 18: Route Descriptions Terminology & Definitions Table 19: Delay Code Definitions Table 20: Host Railroad Code Definitions Appendixes A.
[Show full text]
20210419 Amtrak Metrics Reporting
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION 30th Street Station Philadelphia, PA 19104 April 12, 2021 Mr. Michael Lestingi Director, Office of Policy and Planning Federal Railroad Administrator U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Dear Mr. Lestingi: In accordance with the Metrics and Minimum Standards for Intercity Passenger Rail Service final rule published on November 16, 2020 (the “Final Rule”), this letter serves as Amtrak’s report to the Federal Railroad Administration that, as of April 10, 2021, Amtrak has provided the 29 host railroads over which Amtrak currently operates (listed in Appendix A) with ridership data for the prior month consistent with the Final Rule. The following data was provided to each host railroad: . the total number of passengers, by train and by day; . the station-specific number of detraining passengers, reported by host railroad whose railroad right-of-way serves the station, by train, and by day; and . the station-specific number of on-time passengers reported by host railroad whose railroad right- of-way serves the station, by train, and by day. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jim Blair Sr. Director, Host Railroads Amtrak cc: Dennis Newman Amtrak Jason Maga Amtrak Christopher Zappi Amtrak Yoel Weiss Amtrak Kristin Ferriter Federal Railroad Administration Mr. Michael Lestingi April 12, 2021 Page 2 Appendix A Host Railroads Provided with Amtrak Ridership Data Host Railroad1 Belt Railway Company of Chicago BNSF Railway Buckingham Branch Railroad
[Show full text]
Adding Passenger Service
A Modeler’s Aid Clinic Passenger Operations Conducted By Bruce Knapp How to integrate Passenger Trains into your operating sessions or How the Santa Fe Operated Passenger Service Why Passenger Service? Period and Equipment 1830 to 1850 Revenue Wood cars - usually stage coach bodies Advertising 1850 to 1870 Show off your modeling skills Wood cars built for railroad use Introduce sleeping cars Add interest Introduce air brakes & knuckle couplers Visitors like passenger trains 1880 to 1900 Introduce dining cars You make Walthers and Rapido very happy Introduce steam heat You also make local hobby dealers happy Introduce electric lighting Introduce vestibules and diaphragms Two Typical Wood Cars Period and Equipment 1900 to 1930 steel cars become standard air conditioning introduced All-reserved “name trains” 1930 to 1970 streamlining introduced “passenger specific” color schemes common high speed steam and diesels introduced 1971 to Present Amtrak formed Types of Passenger Service Mixed Train Combine Premier Class [Named Trains] Normal Service [Named or numbered] Local Service [locomotive & cars] Local Service [single unit] Commuter Service Mail & Express Trains Mixed Train Service Fan Trip [especially steam] Famous “Name Trains” Assigned Locomotives Chief, El Capitan, Super Chief: ATSF Steam [1940’s to 1960’s] th 20 Century Limited, Ohio Limited: NYC First Class: 4-6-2, 4-6-4, 4-8-2, 4-8-4 Broadway Limited: PRR The Hummingbird: L&N Local Service: 4-4-2, 4-6-2, 4-6-4 City of Los Angeles, City of San Francisco: UP Mixed Train: 2-8-0, 4-6-0,
[Show full text]
Atlantic Coast Service
ATLANTIC COAST SERVICE JANUARY 14, 2013 NEW YORK, VIRGINIA, the CAROLINAS, GEORGIA and FLORIDA Effective SM Enjoy the journey. featuring the SILVER METEOR ® CAROLINIAN SM SILVER STAR ® PALMETTO ® AUTO TRAIN ® PIEDMONT® 1-800-USA-RAIL Call serving NEW YORK–PHILADELPHIA WASHINGTON–RICHMOND–RALEIGH–CHARLOTTE CHARLESTON–SAVANNAH–JACKSONVILLE ORLANDO–KISSIMMEE–WINTER HAVEN TAMPA–ST. PETERSBURG–FT. MYERS WEST PALM BEACH–FT. LAUDERDALE–MIAMI and intermediate stations AMTRAK.COM Visit NRPC Form T4–200M–1/14/13 Stock #02-3536 Schedules subject to change without notice. Amtrak is a registered service mark of the National Railroad Passenger Corp. National Railroad Passenger Corporation Washington Union Station, 60 Massachusetts Ave. N.E., Washington, DC 20002. ATLANTIC COAST SERVICE Silver Silver Piedmont Piedmont Palmetto Carolinian Silver Star Train Name Silver Star Carolinian Palmetto Piedmont Piedmont Meteor Meteor 73 75 89 79 91 97 Train Number 98 92 80 90 74 76 Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Normal Days of Operation Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily R y R y R B R B R s R s R s R s R B R B R y R y l l y l å y l å r l r l On Board Service r l r l y l å y l å l l Read Down Mile Symbol Read Up R R R95 R93/83/ R82/154/ R R R 67 67 Mo-Fr 161 Connecting Train Number 174 66 66 66 9 30P 9 30P 6 10A 9 35A 0 Dp Boston, MA–South Sta. ∑w- Ar 6 25P 8 00A 8 00A 8 00A R9 36P R9 36P R6 15A R9 41A 1 Boston, MA–Back Bay Sta.
[Show full text]
Great Passenger Trains
SOUTHERN PACIFIC PASSENGER TRAINS Dcdication 1.tt, tt/!nt tr. tr.,....,,, t.\1,:1.r., 1,',.\ll{l I'1,.. Orrhe6rcl(cndpipt^: \/r'.r" l']t tti,\ ),,n\,tt "l " ,,,.,r'-ll ..\'' !l''.\l\ tr't.; s e,R n,t 7'\lin rl,l;n'rt uri'trtrn I'ri rrt''' i i J.l {' L\rtrlror Lrb^ t|, tt! Ln \Lt.' r"n\, ]'// r 1.rP sfi " Bnct covea main: r,rl{/ /rrr. s,t ) | u 1)i n; }'t1') i I I t t nrn ) qt t $ttr l,\li.{}! t'ta t" Wirf nrr.r!rlnD..J Llu!,n!lrrrcl,)i*r!s J;r rhr I),\11!ht l.llq!l ,rt,l' ',1 1l', t.tt, ltit rll .\ll rish. ,c{1.(l /i'' n'r,,,,, ,, '| ,| h: s;".;--h R.tti" K, .tt tt: , t;lht nt|lttt, tht nr\'] tith"! Rlr.t &t 1)rrru (;r/r,d; Ilrnn SrJ'irnl srli ,t r"r,',, !rtr\,' t , rl lll'lrl r fit.iD nlI nFcr: ri 7ri7. J'a/ t.ru li;lit r\,l|lt' rh,t\'r't o l. 'lr . Bi.Lcovcr, 'r' ' \n r t Li u t' l b rt r t\, r t't' rt lnr\vl(lsr '\llr(nn nh.o.' r. nrklr..rNrtr rnrA!'ril" 'ri lh ti! n, tl,r',l i'rr " oi rtn,pl trt ,'\trnrtr nn[1ni l.' ."1,'."J .'lr', ""r' r,tt/,r ! r t j r,- r,, ,,,, t.. ,. .t .t Krl,L'run, 'll,i. ml,li..ti,", hA n,n lJ.c.
[Show full text]
Steel Wheels 4Q20 Web.Pdf
Arizona News All Aboard Arizona Todd Liebman, President For well over a hundred and rail corridor between Los Angeles-Phoenix-Tucson and even thirty years, passenger trains further east to El Paso would be an economic driver for have been a daily fixture Arizona. Arizona’s congested transportation system diminishes of life in Northern Arizona, the quality of life for Arizonans increasing air pollution, literally building communities congestion related delays, and negatively impacting the state’s like Flagstaff and Winslow, economy. Conversely, for a relatively small investment, Amtrak bringing economic activity could return to Phoenix, the Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle to the cities served along Route 66. That came to an end in could operate daily, and the Southwest Chief could return October when Amtrak reduced the Southwest Chief route to to daily service across Northern Arizona. It is often in rural three day per week service, along with all long-distance train communities, like Yuma and Winslow, where passenger rail service in the United States. This cutback is expected to create has the biggest impact. These communities have fewer public economic losses of $239 million in the first nine months to transportation options, and the train serves as a vital lifeline for the communities served from Chicago to Los Angeles. These residents and visitors alike. cuts will not help Amtrak’s bottom line and may do permanent The outlook does not have to be bleak. We can achieve our damage to ridership and the financial health of passenger rail in goals related to daily Amtrak service on routes across Arizona America, and to the communities served by rail.
[Show full text]
Q1-2 2021 Newsletter
Northwest Rail News 1st & 2nd Quarter 2021 statewide ‘High Speed Ground Transportation’ Reviving a Rail (HSGT) system. The next year, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) designated the Pacific Revolution: How Northwest Rail Corridor, which runs through the HSR in Washington heart of Seattle, as a high-speed rail (HSR) corridor. With the results of the earlier HSGT study in, the Can Get Back On 1993 Washington State Legislature passed RCW Chapter 47.79 and created something revolutionary: Track By Patrick Carnahan — Seattle, WA a goal to build a regional HSR network connecting Seattle with Portland, Spokane, and Vancouver, Amidst the fallout of the coronavirus pandemic, British Columbia by 2030. As recommended by the interest in passenger rail has increased markedly study, Washington and Oregon began implementing across the United States. With an enthusiastically modern intercity passenger rail service on existing pro-rail federal administration now in power, talk of tracks between Vancouver, BC and Eugene, OR, with our nation’s “second great railroading revolution” the goal of increasing this service’s top speed to 110 has begun among advocates and transit blogs from mph. From this came Amtrak Cascades, one of the coast to coast. But is this only our second, or even nation’s most successful intercity passenger rail third, attempt at such a revolution? What about the services. Following the study’s vision, the one that started in the Pacific Northwest around 30 Washington State and Oregon Departments of years ago, the one that aimed to create the most Transportation (WSDOT and ODOT) both created advanced rail system in North America? bold long-range plans for Cascades that would dramatically increase the line’s frequency and Where It Started usefulness.
[Show full text]
Amtrak: Overview
Amtrak: Overview David Randall Peterman Analyst in Transportation Policy September 28, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R44973 Amtrak: Overview Summary Amtrak is the nation’s primary provider of intercity passenger rail service. It was created by Congress in 1970 to preserve some level of intercity passenger rail service while enabling private rail companies to exit the money-losing passenger rail business. It is a quasi-governmental entity, a corporation whose stock is almost entirely owned by the federal government. It runs a deficit each year, and relies on congressional appropriations to continue operations. Amtrak was last authorized in the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 (Title XI of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94). That authorization expires at the end of FY2020. Amtrak’s annual appropriations do not rely on separate authorization legislation, but authorization legislation does allow Congress to set multiyear Amtrak funding goals and federal intercity passenger rail policies. Since Amtrak’s inception, Congress has been divided on the question of whether it should even exist. Amtrak is regularly criticized for failing to cover its costs. The need for federal financial support is often cited as evidence that passenger rail service is not financially viable, or that Amtrak should yield to private companies that would find ways to provide rail service profitably. Yet it is not clear that a private company could perform the same range of activities better than Amtrak does. Indeed, Amtrak was created because private-sector railroad companies in the United States lost money for decades operating intercity passenger rail service and wished to be relieved of the obligation to do so.
[Show full text]
Presentation
People Before Freight On-time trains on host railroads 3 LATEST REPORT CARD SIGNALS NEW GOLDEN AGE OF ON-TIME TRAINS 1 Canadian Pacific A 2 BNSF A 3 Union Pacific A 4 CSX A 5 Canadian National A 6 Norfolk Southern A Average grade for all host railroads: A 4 Amtrak National Network Passengers Continue to Experience Poor On-Time Performance 1 Canadian Pacific A 2 BNSF B 3 Union Pacific B- 4 CSX B- 5 Canadian National D- 6 Norfolk Southern F Average grade for all host railroads: C 5 Grading National Network routes on OTP 17 of 28 State-Supported Services Fail Class I Freight Percentage of trains on‐time State‐Supported Trains Route Host Railroads within 15 minutes Pass = 80% on‐time Hiawatha CP 96% Keystone (other hosts) 91% Capitol Corridor UP 89% New York ‐ Albany (other hosts) 89% Carl Sandburg / Illinois Zephyr BNSF 88% Ethan Allen Express CP 87% PASS Pere Marquette CSX, NS 84% Missouri River Runner UP 83% Springfield Shuttles (other hosts) 82% Downeaster (other hosts) 81% Hoosier State CSX 80% Pacific Surfliner BNSF, UP 78% Lincoln Service CN, UP 76% Blue Water NS, CN 75% Roanoke NS 75% Piedmont NS 74% Richmond / Newport News / Norfolk CSX, NS 74% San Joaquins BNSF, UP 73% Pennsylvanian NS 71% Adirondack CN, CP 70% FAIL New York ‐ Niagara Falls CSX 70% Vermonter (other hosts) 67% Cascades BNSF, UP 64% Maple Leaf CSX 64% Wolverine NS, CN 60% Heartland Flyer BNSF 58% Carolinian CSX, NS 51% Illini / Saluki CN 37% 6 Grading National Network routes on OTP 14 of 15 Long Distance Services Fail Class I Freight Percentage of trains on‐time Long
[Show full text]
AMTRAK Information Ridership & Endpoint
AMTRAK Information Ridership & Endpoint OTP Virginia financially supports four Amtrak routes which connect the Commonwealth to destinations in the Northeast. Ridership for state-supported trains is listed below. Information is reported on the federal fiscal year (FFY) schedule (October – September). Second train to Norfolk, VA started March 4, 2019 and was an extension of a daily roundtrip between Washington D.C. and Richmond. Amtrak train schedules were optimized for Washington - Norfolk, Washington - Newport News and Washington - Richmond routes as part of start of second Norfolk train. Route 46 - Roanoke One daily roundtrip between Roanoke, VA and Washington, DC/Northeast Corridor Ridership Month FFY19 FFY18 % Chg. Oct 19,636 16,311 +20.4 Nov 20,509 19,357 +6.0 Dec 19,872 20,620 -3.6 Jan 14,862 15,163 -2.0 Feb 12,717 12,934 -1.7 Mar 17,509 16,338 +7.2 Apr 18,984 17,340 +9.5 May 19,535 18,189 +7.4 Jun Jul Aug Sep YTD 143,624 136,252 +5.4 Route 47 - Newport News Two daily roundtrips between Newport News, VA and Washington, D.C./Northeast Corridor Ridership Month FFY19 FFY18 % Chg. Oct 28,660 28,481 +0.6 Nov 32,502 31,124 +4.4 Dec 31,290 31,262 0.1 Jan 21,436 20,535 +4.4 Feb 19,986 19,049 +4.9 Mar 25,143 25,546 -1.6 Apr 28,001 25,043 +11.8 May 28,653 26,764 +7.1 Jun Jul Aug Sep YTD 215,671 207,804 +3.8 Route 50 - Norfolk Two daily roundtrips between Norfolk, VA and Washington, D.C./Northeast Corridor Ridership Month FFY19 FFY18 % Chg.
[Show full text]
The Coast Routes Portland* San Francisco* Los Angeles
THE COAST ROUTES PORTLAND* SAN FRANCISCO* LOS ANGELES AMERICA'S MOST MODERN TRAINS SUNSET ROUTE* GOLDEN STATE ROUTE* OVERLAND ROUT E ,t VANCOUVER R 0 UTE 0 \... A N OMAHA E R 0 v CHEYENNE OGDEN SAN FRANCISCO 6 MONTEREY• SALT LAKE PENINSULA CITY DENVERl SEQUOIA-KINGS CANYON 0 NATIONAL PARKS 0 TULSA OKLAHOMA CITY s (J .,.. 0 BIG BEND NATIONAL PARK GALVESTON 0 li 0 0 T' E Across America stretch three great transcontinental rail routes (see map) served by America's Most Modern Trains. Famous S.P. "name" streamliners-the "City of San Fran cisco" and "San Francisco Overland" between Chicago and San Francisco; the "Golden State" between Chicago r COAST ROUTES and Los Angeles; the "Sunset Limited" between New Orleans and Los Angeles- offer you all the luxury of fine hotels on wheels. They dramatize Southern Pacific's great new equipment program. On most round trips between East and West you can include two of these famous streamliners plus one or more of S.P.'s spectacular Pacific Coast streamliners-the "Lark," "Starlight," and "Daylights" between Los Angeles and San Francisco; the "Shasta Daylight" and "Cascade" be tween San Francisco and Portland-for little or no addi tional rail fare. (Thus you "see the whole Pacific Coast", as explained, with map of our Coast- Shasta Routes, on pages 13-14.) Turn the pages .. to enjoy America's Most Modern BOSTON 0 BUFFALO 0 Trains . and glimpses of the scenic West and South DETROJT west they serve. 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page The Sunset Route (New Orleans·Los Angeles) 2 0 The Golden State Route (Chicago-Los Angeles) .
[Show full text]
Southwest Multi-State Rail Planning Study Technical Background Report September 2014
Southwest Multi-State Rail Planning Study Technical Background Report September 2014 Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Overview .................................................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 What is a Multi-State Rail Plan? ................................................................................................................ 7 1.3 Why the Southwest?.................................................................................................................................. 8 1.4 Geographic Scope of Study ........................................................................................................................ 9 1.5 Study Stakeholders .................................................................................................................................. 10 1.6 Guiding Principles for Southwest Multi-State Rail Network Planning ..................................................... 11 Chapter 2. Planning Context ................................................................................................................................. 12 2.1 Overview of the Study Area ..................................................................................................................... 12 2.2 Population and Travel Demand ..............................................................................................................
[Show full text]