September results for Amtrak’s new Borealis service between Chicago and Minneapolis/St Paul are out, representing its first full summer holiday season. Monthly patronage has taken a sharp downward drop for the first time, from 22,300 the previous month to 18,800 – almost back to the same rate from its initial introduction in May. This isn’t exactly a surprise – holiday season is over and the weather is cooling down, so the post-summer slump is a normal feature for any transportation service.
What’s interesting though is that passenger miles have not dropped proportionally. In fact, the average distance per passenger remains over 12% above the pre-summer figure, which means more people are using the train for longer trips. Dividing passengers by passenger-miles, we see that the average distance per passenger has risen from 199 miles in May, to 223 miles in September – now nicely over half the 411-mile total between Chicago and MSP (though down from a high of 60% in August). Given we know that typically over a third of total rides are in the short (86-mile) Chicago-Milwaukee sector, and that these are largely commuter trips and therefore less seasonally variable, this suggests an increasing share of passengers travelling the full distance.
In late October, Amtrak reported another milestone for the Borealis, surpassing 100,000 passengers in its first 22 weeks of operation. Extrapolating that to the full month would be about 16,500 passengers for October, which suggests patronage is continuing to ease off as the winter months set in. That’s unsurprising, but it does mean the exuberance of the service’s first few months might need to be tempered – it doesn’t currently look like needing a second daily train in the short term, nor an increased number of carriages. However, keep in mind that Amtrak had originally expected demand of around 125,000 per year, so to be on track for double that figure is a hugely significant achievement.
Why is all this relevant to regional fast rail in Australia? The success of Borealis demonstrates the point I’ve been making with Hot Rails this whole time – that you don’t need the 400km/h supertrains to attract meaningful patronage on short- to medium-haul intercity routes. Borealis is a far cry from anything resembling “fast rail” – its average speed barely cracks 90km/h, about the same as the Sydney-Melbourne XPT. Yet with its 7h20m travel time, it can still capture a double-digit percentage of the air travel market between its two terminal cities.
As a case-study, Borealis is highly applicable to Australia. Our east coast cities are comparably sized, and separated by similar distances. Previous proposals for upgrading the Sydney-Melbourne line (such as the 1981 Bicentennial High Speed Railway project, or more recently the Wentworth, Centennial and Hoare deviations advocated by Phillip Laird) would have reduced travel time from the current 11 hours to around 6 hours – enough to become a serious competitor to air travel. If the performance of Borealis were replicated on Sydney-Melbourne (~10% modeshare), we could expect a 6 or 7 hour service to capture patronage of over 1,000,000 – enough for at least 6 XPT-sized trainsets in each direction, daily.
So by all means, let’s keep working towards true high-speed rail between Sydney and Newcastle, and eventually beyond. But we should have upgraded the mainline to medium-speed standards decades ago. The success of Borealis shows it would still be a worthwhile investment today.
Amtrak having a drop in patronage, compare this to Brightline, the US private operator where demand is increasing and facilities and service are well above Amtrak along with shiny new welcoming railway stations. Brightline have 3 operational lines, passenger journey of 378 km with an average speed of 111 kph.
Amtrak having a drop in patronage, compare this to Brightline, the US private operator where demand is increasing and facilities and service are well above Amtrak along with shiny new welcoming railway stations. Brightline have 3 operational lines, passenger journey of 378 km with an average speed of 111 kph. The Overland requires new ownership and new modern rollingstock and the travelling hours reduced if trains could go via Ballarat using variable gauge. Having met with Journey Beyond Rail executives, the company are happy with the current service and have no plans to change. Alstom Transportation have variable gauge available.
Hi Edwin, you are correct. Curve easing where alignment is just below acceptable, and replacement of the following lengths of the three major deviations identified in ARTC’s 2001 Interstate Track Audit:
– near Macarthur to Mittagong;
– Goulburn to Yass; and,
– Bowning to Cootamundra.
However, these really bad segments should simply be duplicated on a new alignment that fits into a high speed track in the future.
Existing tracks can then be more available for non-time dependent freight, whereas the high-speed alignment can be used for time dependent freight at night & passenger services during the day. I know it’s not that simple
Regarding train services, why doesn’t South Australia consider a weekly service from Adelaide to Broken Hill to meet the Explorer from Sydney, at least integrating to some degree, interstate continuity. BUT it has to terminate at Adelaide Central in my humble opinion.
I’ve been convinced that Adelaide Underground / City Loop is the next major project needed on our rail network. Eliminating turnbacks would probably double the practical capacity of the whole network, plus free up the Adelaide Hauptbahnhof for regional services. Only then can we start reinstating our once-great regional network.
An Adelaide transport group, TAN or Transport Action Group have created plans for an Adelaide Underground, details which are on their FB page. They’re not talking to me as I said their plan was too short, in my view should go as far as Frome. St to serve Lot 14, hospitality and retailers in Rundle St and major events in the Botanical Gardens and Rymill Park.
An Adelaide group consisting of academics and planning professionals have formed a FB group known as TAN or Transport Action Network and have available their plans on FB for an Adelaide underground railway. I had a meeting with TAN but my views didn’t go down well with them. TAN’s proposal is to take in Hindmarsh and Victoria Square which in my opinion is far too short,
The original plan put forward by the City of Adelaide in 2012 Strategic Plan had the rail line going from Adelaide Railway Station to East Terrace to Wakefield Street then Victoria Square, which I believe is too long with a lot of dead end travel.
My view is to travel from Adelaide Railway Station to Frome Street then around to Victoria Square. This route would then cover Lot14, and major events of the Botanical Gardens, Rymil Park, then around to Victoria Square.
There is also too much reliance on wholly Government funding whereas I prefer the PPP approach.
Not a scrap of interest from either Political Parties in South Australia, any regional or interstate passenger rail services would have to be from a private company, the main problem with Broken Hill would be finding a transit path with freight services
The Adelaide CBD rail loop must be the next major project. That will free up space for regional services at Adelaide Central. But whatever alignment is chosen it should go underground at Adelaide Central to form the premier interchange (Same as Britomart). This is a once in a life-time opportunity, got to get it right the first time.
So, if a longer route, so be it. Need to think of what Adelaide land-use patterns will be like in 100 years.
THEN the SG must be extended into Adelaide station and down to Mt Barker. That will ensure better competition for rolling stock acquisitions and hopefully production in Australia. The underground loop should also have a third rail for SG services