Garl B. Latham : transit, support, Amtrak

The Grid and Gateway proposition

Garl B. Latham — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:57:00 GMT

I don't set out to be negative (honestly!) and I've never wished to concentrate upon what I conclude may be wrong in the world of railroading while ignoring possible solutions. No matter how badly things may be going, it's not right or fair to continually pick on others if I'm unwilling to share a few of my own proposals in a public forum.

Regarding the design and implementation of new and restored passenger services, I have developed several ideas which revolve around a central proposition I believe to be the most logical and cost-effective way of reintroducing the concept of intercity train travel to our modern society.

I call this the Grid and Gateway system, mainly because the phrase is so descriptive - and because I've always enjoyed alliterations!

I began working on this plan during the waning days of the 20th century, first offering a basic outline to railway passenger supporters through a post on the All-Aboard electronic mailing list (now part of Yahoo! Groups) in the year 2000. An article entitled "Wordplay and Passenger Trains" appeared in the January 2001 edition of the Western Rail Passenger Review and was subsequently picked up by various advocacy organisations, including the Arizona Rail Passenger Association, the Southwest Railroad Historical Society and MobilityDallas.

Eventually, the National Association of Railroad Passengers embraced this general notion. With my permission, NARP adopted the phrase "Grid and Gateway" (occasionally hyphenated thusly: "grid-and-gateway") to use in conjunction with the release of their 40th anniversary "Vision for the Future" proposal in 2007. Groups such as the Kentucky Public Transportation Association and the North Carolina Alliance for Transportation Reform endorsed the scheme.

Unfortunately, my recommendation of a Grid and Gateway system has never really captured the public's imagination. Maybe it sounds too technical. I certainly wouldn't hesitate to re-brand the overall strategy, presuming a satisfactory marketing term could be developed. In the meantime, High Speed Rail and Higher Speed Rail (followed, naturally, by Almost High Speed Rail and Nearly Sort-of High Speed Rail) have commanded centre stage.

Oh, well. "What's in a name? That which we call a rose / By any other word would smell as sweet." I sincerely appreciate Shakespeare's genius, and would like to think my idea might retain some sort of "that dear perfection" by any other name.

I feel that might be the case. After all, I'm not necessarily original; I just know a bit about history and have been blessed with a (usually) reliable ability to accurately judge a good plan. Ofttimes, it is only a predisposition to be supportive of rail-based initiatives which undermines my objectivity!

The Grid and Gateway is simply a modern day adaptation of what once was - and what, with the proper support (both by the general public and our industry), could be once again. It also builds upon the work of the late Dr. Adrian Herzog of the United Rail Passenger Alliance. URPA's Route Matrix theory (another barely marketable designation!), based upon Dr. Herzog's brilliant work, is a classic example of the beauty of pure and straightforward mathematical logic, as appiled to our transport mode of choice.

Today, we often hear of airline-styled hub-and-spoke services as an approach worth emulating in the railway passenger field - especially when discussing tomorrow's systems; however, historically, it was quite unusual to see a hub-and-spoke operational pattern in the railroad world outside of local city streetcar lines and a handful of interurban roads.

Instead, common carriers perfected another routine which served (and could once again serve) the public much more efficiently, exploiting the train’s strong points and accepting its limitations. Rather than forcing customers to rely upon hub-and-spoke traffic configurations, long distance trains were run as part of a grid-type route matrix, interchanging passengers not only at their terminal points, but also at certain intermediate stations. The places where these interchange points were located became collectively known as "Gateway Cities". These gateways, from Cincinnati and Denver to Manly, Iowa and Effingham, Illinois, provided railroad travelers, many times by way of true "Union Station" facilities, the opportunity to transfer from one train - and one company - to another.

The railroad’s proven "grid-and-gateway" pattern is infinitely more logical for today’s passenger train operators to have as a guide. If long distance trains are to truly work as a viable means of public transport - and they can indeed do so - then a railroad-minded scheme must needs be applied to their operation, which demands the traditional Grid and Gateway approach!

In lieu of high-dollar, new-from-the-ground-up corridors designed to impersonate earth-bound airlines, railway passenger services of the next generation must be reliant upon existing infrastructure, remain operationally self-sufficient (or effectively so) and share guideway space with other (commuter/intermodal/freight) traffic. They need to be planned and executed in order to offer a viable alternative to the de-facto monopolies inherent in today’s travel world (due to the United States’s lack of an overriding energy/environmental/transportation policy).

It is also imperative that we embrace a multiple number of inter-corridor, long distance routes as an integral part of any railway system developed for the North American continent. That's the only possible way to achieve a fair and equitable distribution of transportation services.

For a "reasonable" (read: "minimal") financial commitment - tied to an esoteric understanding of railroad operations - a rebuilt, revitalized system of intercity passenger trains could once again exist; trains that would effectively serve a diverse passenger base with safe, comfortable, reliable, cost-effective transportation. The railway alternative, far from being outmoded and unnecessary, should be considered a foundational part of our total transportation network - a true 21st century solution to a contemporary need!

End of sermonette.

What I'd like to do, in an occasional series over the next couple of months, is delve into the Grid and Gateway concept and review a few of the reasons why it WOULD work - presuming our nation ever gets to the point where the reestablishment of a comprehensive network of efficient and saleable intercity passenger train services is an honest desire and not simply a campaign promise.

With your support, I will do so.

Don Phillips, Barack Obama and personal vindication

Garl B. Latham — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:53:00 GMT

During the late 1980s, as Union Pacific began to merge former Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad operations into its growing system, I became concerned about the future of a little used ex-Katy main line in north central Texas. The route in question stretched from B-RI Jct. in the city of Waxahachie to Dana Jct. just north of Hillsboro, basically completing the Dallas (eastern) side of the Katy's primary Kansas City - San Antonio corridor.

Historically, the Katy sent most of their north/south freight traffic through Fort Worth, leaving the alternate route by way of Big D available for passengers...which also left it quite vulnerable, once such trade evaporated.

UP, naturally, saw no reason to maintain both lines and, once the marriage was consummated, quickly moved to "rationalise" its plant.

Thanks to BNSF and Rail America's Dallas, Garland and Northeastern, most of the Dallas side was saved (with certain portions, thanks to DART, reclaimed for alternative rail-based uses). However, sans overhead traffic, that bucolic 35-mile stretch across the blackland prairie between Ellis County and Hill County was found good for little and profitable for nothing.

Nothing, that is, except the future.

According to several studies, the single most viable intrastate passenger operation in Texas would be the corridor between Dallas and San Antonio via Waco and Austin.

There are many reasons why that line's potential has yet to be tapped. One is a classically circuitous routing, including the fact that trains leaving Dallas must first head west to Fort Worth before turning south. Regrettably, the only way to operate directly from Dallas to Waco (and points beyond) is by way of the now-abandoned Katy.

Over a span of years, I tried, in vain, to get SOMEONE's attention and support (the Texas D.O.T., the North Central Texas Council of Governments, somebody) for the purchase of that route. In the meantime, various pieces dried up and fell along the wayside. UP applied to abandon the final four-and-one-half mile long segment, stretching from Waxahachie to the community of Nena, early in this century.

That exhaustive and convoluted introduction is important because of what happened a couple of years ago. At a conference, I saw a friend and key passenger train service advocate (and past president of the Texas Association of Railroad Passengers) who, in passing, mentioned how he had finally come to agree with me about the vital nature of that trackage.

It should have been saved. A government agency needed to step up and make a commitment. More productive activity among those who cared could have changed the outcome.

Yeah; I was right all along.

And that, along with four bucks and change, will buy my occasional cafe latte from Starbucks.

I wish his admission had made me feel better. Instead, it made me sick - down to my very soul.

Not because of his feelings, per se. He was only being honest and certainly meant no harm.

No, it was because of what could have been. Amtrak had been in existence for almost 19 years before the UP took ownership of that route, and another one score years passed before the rails were finally removed. If short- to medium-distance corridors truly represent the primary future of intercity passenger train service in these United States, why did this irrevocable loss occur?!

Unfortunately, this is by no means the only (or even the best) example of an instance where I fussed and pestered and wrote and preached and was later - TOO LATE - shown to be "right all along."

Maybe God is just trying to teach me some humility...or encourage the practice of perseverance in the face of intractability. Perhaps a far greater trial awaits me tomorrow, where yesterday's lessons learned will finally prove indispensable.

All of this came to mind as I was leafing through the latest issue of Trains Magazine. Don Phillips, a reporter for the International Herald Tribune (and former transportation writer for The Washington Post), maintains a monthly column which, for me, has always been a must-read. His February essay, entitled Obama hasn't matched language with action, details several reasons why the current administration's apparent goals for improved/expanded passenger service have generally remained unrealised.

He has much to say, not much of it complementary.

"'High Speed Rail' was a slogan that never lived up to its billing, and may have harmed rail initiatives."

"...the term 'high speed rail' has turned on Obama."

"...even the billions appropriated for high speed rail are obviously a puny amount, and that is becoming clear to everyone."

"...Obama no longer has the political power to keep the money flowing."

"...OBAMA HAS NEVER DEFINED 'HIGH SPEED RAIL'." [emphasis mine]

"...Amtrak's current system continues to rot."

"Is it any wonder that the term 'high speed rail' has turned from a phrase of hope to a phrase of derision?"

"What should Obama have said? ...[he should] have come into office...stressing that WE MUST WALK BEFORE WE CAN RUN." [emphasis mine]

Progressive Railroading magazine, through its web site, gave me an outlet I never had before, allowing me to address these matters (and more) well prior to the publication of Mr. Phillips' report. Columns like Obama Speed Rail, High Speed Rail is not the starting point and The myth of "Higher Speed Rail" reviewed the foundational problems with the current administration's transportation endeavours and offered possible alternatives. The compositions were well received by our group and the critical feedback universally constructive.

I feel somewhat vindicated by what Don Phillips has to say. I'm glad a man with a well-established reputation is finally calling Mr. Obama and his transportation appointees to task, both for their missteps and their abject failures.

I, too, want to believe I'm right; not because of who I am, but because of what my logical mind indicates is true.

I trust this will encourage me to continue writing, even in the face of intrenched opposition. I should never stay away very long from those who, like me, understand the industry, the technology, the issues at hand and the importance of these things to our world.

My sincere best wishes to all.