Photojournalism
/ Writing / Stock photography /
|
|
Specializing
in Transportation and Travel
|
What's wrong with America's passenger stations? Analysis By Ernest H. Robl Copyright ©
2009 Ernest H. Robl |
 080503 East/Northbound Amtrak train 80, the Carolinian, arrives at Burlington, N.C., on May 10, 2008--National Train Day. The train is stopped on the single- track main line. There are no other tracks at this location. Click on the image for a larger version. But, here, at least, there is space
for |
Preface
The paper is not written on behalf of any organization—though some passenger rail advocacy organizations will likely agree with its conclusions—nor for any particular publication. If you are interested in publishing or quoting this paper, please see the notes at the end.
Introduction
With passenger rail making a resurgence in the United States, older passenger station buildings are getting a new lease on life. They are being renovated, rebuilt, or rehabilitated--depending on how a particular project is being described.
In many cases, only the historic outer shell remains, with the building getting a new interior conforming to the latest standards, including access for the mobility impaired.
In some cases, where an existing station building was demolished years ago by shortsighted municipalities that thought that passenger rail was a thing of the past, entirely new accommodations for passengers are being built or adapted.
But, with each of these processes, while many of these locations get a shiny new station building, the town also often gets a much less useful station.
Some background
In German, there are two different words for what, in English is called a railroad passenger station: Bahnhof and Haltestelle.
A Bahnhof is a location with multiple tracks and switches that allow movement from one track to another.
Haltestelle translates literally as "stopping point" and is simply that. It is a location on a main line or branch line where passenger trains stop, but which has no switches and at which no switching maneuvers can be performed. No cars or trains can be left there without impeding through traffic.
To back up a little further, I need to expand on the wording that I used in the initial paragraphs. To railroads, a station is simply a named location, whether or not there is any building or other structure at that point. What is commonly incorrectly referred to as a station is actually the station building. The same is even true in German (and some other languages). Bahnhof is the named location. To correctly refer to the building at that location, you need to add "Gebäude" (building).
The disturbing trend
Okay, so why are so many rebuilt stations less useful after their "modernization?" Because the disturbing trend is that after the rebuilding, most of these newly activated station buildings now have far fewer tracks. In fact, in many cases, the stations have been turned from a Bahnhof into a Haltestelle.
Trains now simply stop on the mainline track or tracks, and there is no way for another train to get around the stopped train, let alone for some equipment to be parked there for any length of time.
The removal of tracks goes back to the same shortsighted outlook that let the station buildings fall into disrepair or be demolished in the first place. The attitude is that "What we have now is all that we will ever need."
Cost tradeoffs
Yes, tracks--and switches in particular--cost money to maintain. Municipalities often put up much of the money for their new station building, supplemented by state and federal grants. While it is relatively easy to convince local administrators that having a shiny new building in their town is better than having a derelict building, it is much harder to convince them to also put money into upgrading rather than removing tracks. That's particularly true if the tracks are not going to be needed immediately or may only see occasional use in the near future.
As has been the case where station buildings were completely demolished, once the land has been put to other uses, it is difficult to get back for railroad use. If the original site of the passenger station building now has a multi-level parking deck, it would be extremely expensive to tear that down to again put a station building at that location.
The same is true with tracks. The longer tracks are gone, the more likely it is that some other structures will occupy that space or encroach into the right of way.
In most cases, the railroads are perfectly happy to tear out tracks while a passenger station is being rebuilt. Remember, that in most locations, Amtrak (and in Canada VIA) operates on tracks owned by the freight railroads. These railroads save money by having fewer tracks to maintain. They are no longer in the passenger railroad business.
But, even for the freight railroads, tearing out tracks can be very shortsighted. Of course, that wouldn't be the first time that freight railroads, more interested in quarterly profit and loss statements, than long-term vision, have been very shortsighted. Particularly in the 1970s, railroads removed or abandoned lots of track--which they found they could have used in later years. In some cases, where second or third mainline tracks were removed, they are now being put back in because traffic had reached the point where the existing track or tracks could no longer handle it.
Short-term setbacks
Yes, as this is being written in early 2009, railroad freight traffic is off substantially due to current economic conditions.
But those same economic conditions, however long they last, will not be permanent. And, those conditions may just contribute to sending a larger percentage of long-distance freight back to the tracks.
The European example
In Europe, the Haltestelle type stops are quite rare and are usually found only at some intermediate locations on lines that have commuter service. Only a few commuter trains in the morning and evening make brief stops at these locations.
Most smaller stations, even in moderate size towns, have at least six to eight parallel tracks, most of them served by passenger platforms. At locations served by both local and long-distance trains, each type of service is allocated its own tracks, so that not only can passengers make cross-platform changes of trains (from local to long-distance and visa versa), but so that passengers heading to a particular destination know that in all but very unusual circumstance, that train will always depart from the same platform and track.
Yes, some of the additional tracks are used to enable meets with or overtaking of freight trains. But, the additional platform tracks also ensure that if maintenance work is being done on a particular track, its electrical catenary, or the adjoining platform, traffic can temporarily be shifted to another track and platform.
But, more than that, the additional tracks make it much easier to terminate or originate passenger trains at that location, either on a permanent or emergency basis.
Once, while on a mountain branch-line passenger train in Austria, we found out that the line ahead had been blocked by a rock slide which would take several hours to clear. At this very small station, the engine of the train uncoupled, ran around the train and coupled back on on the opposite end. The train then headed back to the junction city where it had originated--and where, with Austria's dense rail network, most passengers could reach their destinations by an alternate, if somewhat longer route. Those that could not immediately reach locations on the other side of the rock slide at least found themselves in a larger station building with a restaurant and other amenities where they could wait for a later train that would run after the slide was cleared.
Back to the U.S.
Yes, line blockages do occur in North America, too. And, in most cases, because there are no facilities to turn trains at intermediate points, all passenger service is suspended for the duration. (Push-pull local trains, where the engine always remains at one end of the train and where the train can be operated from a control cab at the opposite end, are an exception. But even these trains would have to terminate at larger stations with multiple tracks, as there will likely be on-track work equipment that needs to get in and out of the trouble location--and if there are no locations for the passenger train to get past that equipment, it cannot continue on single track.)
Yes, in Europe the additional tracks at passenger stations are sometimes used for two other purposes:
Display
The second factor is particularly important. How do you convince those who have never traveled by train what a pleasant experience this can be? Let them view and walk through the equipment--and even try out the seats.
Yet, in the U.S., the vast majority of stations outside of such major cities as New York and Washington, D.C., do not have any station trackage on which to display equipment, or on which equipment could be set out for any reason. (It also makes much more sense to set out a defective passenger car at a railroad passenger station than to leave it unattended at a remote rural siding.)
In Europe, the idea of putting equipment on display at railroad stations is so common that many large corporations--even those not connected to the railroad industry--have display cars or even entire display trains. These consist of former passenger or baggage cars that have been rebuilt to show off the company's products or services. Yes, most major trade show venues in Europe also have track connections and display cars are likely to be found there during trade shows. But at other times, they may be spotted at railroad stations where the public can come to visit.
The bottom line
If your community is planning to redo its passenger station, don't just look at the plans for the building. Look at what trackage is there now and what will be there after the reworking of the site is complete. If the site will have less trackage, particularly if space now or formerly occupied by trackage will be occupied by something else, then now is the time to raise questions.
The local administrators who are in charge of updating the station building probably have little understanding of railroad operations. The freight railroad that owns the tracks through the site has little interest in promoting passenger operations nor in making the station facilities as useful as possible.
At the very least, something can probably be worked out to either preserve spur or siding tracks at the station--or to preserve the space where such tracks could be located in the future. But, someone has to think ahead and see not just the immediate needs but also the possibilities for the future.
If you are interested in reprinting this paper in a publication, please contact me. While I am interested in having as many people as possible gain a better understanding of passenger rail, please keep in mind that this paper is protected by copyright and is not in the public domain. In part, maintaining ownership to the copyright to this work helps to control how and where this work is reproduced—and to keep excerpts from being used out of context.
Links to this page are, of course, welcome.
[rev. 2009/02/19]
### EHR ###
Ernest H. Robl, Durham, NC, USA
ehr@mindspring.com
[Ernest H. Robl Home Page]
[Intermodal container FAQ]
[Transportation
data & commentary main page]
[Business] [Pictures
by category & location]
