1 / 39

Total Ridership 2004

Total Ridership

benjamin
Download Presentation

Total Ridership 2004

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    2. Total Ridership – 2004 Of course with riders tracks revenue— Total rider ship is up 7.9% over the previous year Total riderhsip up 9.6% with the new timetable (last 2 months) Ridership tracking 6% above projection Average fare per passenger is tracking higher than the 17.5% fare increase at 19% not only getting more riders, but getting more riders going longer distances. Of course with riders tracks revenue— Total rider ship is up 7.9% over the previous year Total riderhsip up 9.6% with the new timetable (last 2 months) Ridership tracking 6% above projection Average fare per passenger is tracking higher than the 17.5% fare increase at 19% not only getting more riders, but getting more riders going longer distances.

    3. Total Ridership – 2005 Of course with riders tracks revenue— Total rider ship is up 7.9% over the previous year Total riderhsip up 9.6% with the new timetable (last 2 months) Ridership tracking 6% above projection Average fare per passenger is tracking higher than the 17.5% fare increase at 19% not only getting more riders, but getting more riders going longer distances. Of course with riders tracks revenue— Total rider ship is up 7.9% over the previous year Total riderhsip up 9.6% with the new timetable (last 2 months) Ridership tracking 6% above projection Average fare per passenger is tracking higher than the 17.5% fare increase at 19% not only getting more riders, but getting more riders going longer distances.

    4. Total Ridership – 2006 Of course with riders tracks revenue— Total rider ship is up 7.9% over the previous year Total riderhsip up 9.6% with the new timetable (last 2 months) Ridership tracking 6% above projection Average fare per passenger is tracking higher than the 17.5% fare increase at 19% not only getting more riders, but getting more riders going longer distances. Of course with riders tracks revenue— Total rider ship is up 7.9% over the previous year Total riderhsip up 9.6% with the new timetable (last 2 months) Ridership tracking 6% above projection Average fare per passenger is tracking higher than the 17.5% fare increase at 19% not only getting more riders, but getting more riders going longer distances.

    5. Fare Revenue (in $1,000s) Revenue is up from previous year by 32.2% also up 57.7% from previous year 30% since the new timetable (august and September Revenue only) Revenue up 7.8 % from projected 22% Fare increase with no fare elasticity Revenue is up from previous year by 32.2% also up 57.7% from previous year 30% since the new timetable (august and September Revenue only) Revenue up 7.8 % from projected 22% Fare increase with no fare elasticity

    6. Speed Sells A 15% reduction in end to end run time = 25% increase in ridership and 60% increase in revenue over the last 2 years

    7. Productivity 393 @ 81k Earned Revenue per employee Revenue Generation Parking Fares 393 @ 81k Earned Revenue per employee Revenue Generation Parking Fares

    8. Effect of Capacity on Demand Demand based on service levels

    9. On-time Performance / Reliability TESTING THE LIMITS 96 train level tests limits of infrastructure Terminal storage and design Signal system (block length) Rolling stock spare ratio and design (dwell time and door design Hold out stations (every minute counts) Station access Cannot increase capacity without additional investment TESTING THE LIMITS 96 train level tests limits of infrastructure Terminal storage and design Signal system (block length) Rolling stock spare ratio and design (dwell time and door design Hold out stations (every minute counts) Station access Cannot increase capacity without additional investment

    10. Cal train's Project 2025 and the State of Good Repair Program

    11. Project 2025 Provides a capital investment strategy that: Improves system safety Maintains / improves system reliability Supports future throughput requirements Supports system expansion Defines opportunities and constraints Identifies critical decision points

    13. Capital Program Timeline Capital Improvement program consists of: State of Good Repair / Replacement and Rehabilitation Enhancements (includes Facilities, Extensions, Systems) Current infrastructure, max 6 express per hour.Capital Improvement program consists of: State of Good Repair / Replacement and Rehabilitation Enhancements (includes Facilities, Extensions, Systems) Current infrastructure, max 6 express per hour.

    14. State of Good Repair Optimizes condition of infrastructure Maintains FRA requirements Enhances system reliability & availability Facilitates larger / more numerous capital program activities

    15. Capital Improvements ALL SCENARIOS Signal system upgrade Terminal capacity expansion Station improvements (remove hold out rule and improve station access/parking) Bridge replacement Grade crossing program Other “state of good repair” improvements

    16. Capital Improvements SCENARIO SPECIFIC Platform design – Regulatory Constraint Overtake requirement Fleet replacement Yard & Storage expansion Terminal design

    17. Capital Program Timeline Capital Improvement program consists of: State of Good Repair / Replacement and Rehabilitation Enhancements (includes Facilities, Extensions, Systems) Current infrastructure, max 6 express per hour.Capital Improvement program consists of: State of Good Repair / Replacement and Rehabilitation Enhancements (includes Facilities, Extensions, Systems) Current infrastructure, max 6 express per hour.

    18. Current Service Diesel Locomotives In order to maintain need an incremental increase in rolling stock Have 8.5 million right now to shore up spare ration and increase peak capacity by 700-800 seats. Even this will get us only thru 2011 under the most conservative demand curveIn order to maintain need an incremental increase in rolling stock Have 8.5 million right now to shore up spare ration and increase peak capacity by 700-800 seats. Even this will get us only thru 2011 under the most conservative demand curve

    19. Planned Operations

    20. Electric Locomotive

    21. Elements of Consideration Electric Locomotive Reduction in end-to-end run time Lower operating costs Simple transition Access by mini-high or level boarding 10 trains per hour Loses performance with longer consist lengths Low operational flexibility Not compatible with HSR Requires mid-line overtake

    22. Electric Locomotives In one scenario electric locomotive Can incrementally increase fleet to satisfy demand Model for the maximum demand: will require 299 cars and 36 locomotives to deliver the 10 TPH service andIn one scenario electric locomotive Can incrementally increase fleet to satisfy demand Model for the maximum demand: will require 299 cars and 36 locomotives to deliver the 10 TPH service and

    23. EMU Train Set

    24. Elements of Consideration RAPID TRANSIT/EMU Significant reduction in end-to-end run time Lower operating costs Less rolling stock Possible level boarding Cost savings for DTX HSR compatible 10+ trains per hour More frequent stops Additional facilities Regulatory Challenge - PTC

    25. RAPID TRANSIT – EMU (Not FRA compliant) In one scenario electric locomotive Can incrementally increase fleet to satisfy demand Model for the maximum demand: will require 299 cars and 36 locomotives to deliver the 10 TPH service andIn one scenario electric locomotive Can incrementally increase fleet to satisfy demand Model for the maximum demand: will require 299 cars and 36 locomotives to deliver the 10 TPH service and

    26. Capital Improvements RAPID TRANSIT/EMU SCENARIO No midline overtake True level boarding (CPUC) Mixed Traffic (FRA)

    27. Capital Program Timeline Capital Improvement program consists of: State of Good Repair / Replacement and Rehabilitation Enhancements (includes Facilities, Extensions, Systems)Capital Improvement program consists of: State of Good Repair / Replacement and Rehabilitation Enhancements (includes Facilities, Extensions, Systems)

    28. Next Steps Examine Regulatory Environment Develop capital investment strategy Determine extent of capital improvements Analyze rolling stock alternatives Performance Cash Flow Lifecycle costs

    29. Legacy Problems Legacy – something given from the past Legacy Thinking – maintaining the status quo because: Risk averse (Nobody gets fired for buying IBM) Based on previously accepted assumptions (Flat Earth Theory) Protects vital industry or economic needs (Where are the US car manufactures now?)

    30. WORTHINE$$

    31. Steel is inversely proportional to brains Article by Wayne Williams The origin of the 1,000,000 pd AAR buff force axial load – At 600k and 800 k pounds coupler yokes and draft gears kept getting yanked out so we increased the design load until failures stopped. Article by Wayne WilliamsArticle by Wayne Williams

    32. Application And the requirement is global Regardless of traffic blend. Whether its mixed operations dominated by freight or one freight train per day or one freight train per week or some future need

    33. Legacy Thinking

    34. Rules Applied To Airlines

    35. On Highways - Even with heavier trucks at greater frequency

    36. Beyond Legacy Thinking FAA rules on child safety seats

    37. Commuter Rail …. is 31 times safer than the automobile Studies have been done showing that the risk is much higher if you choose to travel by car (even if they are properly restrained), than to fly. That is why the FAA has refused to require babies (under 2) to be strapped into their own seat. If they required that, enough families would choose to drive, to avoid the extra ticket cost. More children would be killed in auto accidents than would die in airplane crashes, or turbulence, even if they didn’t have their own airline seat. This is one of the times I agree with the FAA (that doesn't happen too often). If the object is to minimize the loss of children's lives, then it makes no sense to issue a regulation that will, in the end, lead to more deaths because the imposition of economic costs causes a change in the behavior of traveling parents. Studies have been done showing that the risk is much higher if you choose to travel by car (even if they are properly restrained), than to fly. That is why the FAA has refused to require babies (under 2) to be strapped into their own seat. If they required that, enough families would choose to drive, to avoid the extra ticket cost. More children would be killed in auto accidents than would die in airplane crashes, or turbulence, even if they didn’t have their own airline seat. This is one of the times I agree with the FAA (that doesn't happen too often). If the object is to minimize the loss of children's lives, then it makes no sense to issue a regulation that will, in the end, lead to more deaths because the imposition of economic costs causes a change in the behavior of traveling parents.

    38. Railroad Lifecycle Economics Lighter rolling stock means: less wheel and track wear, lighter & less costly infrastructure, less fuel consumed, faster transit times, shorter blocks resulting in more trains, lower fares and more profit

    39. Results of Rapid Transit Model From the Reduced Trip Times – Carry More Passengers Improved ROI Earn More Revenue Increase average Fare Reduce Operating Costs Earned revenue per employee Save More Lives Off of the highways & on to trains

More Related