All Aboard Florida - New Train Service 2017

[ParrotBill]

Here is an article about this new train service to debut in 2017.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-train-ridership-orlando-20150712-story.html

Here is the web site for the train service.
http://www.allaboardflorida.com/

What surprises me is two things:
1. The amount of ridership they anticipate. 16 trains each way each day Orlando to Miami!
2. Train stations only at Orlando Airport, Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, and Miami. None in Cocoa Beach area.

They do talk about the Orlando intermodal station being a new hub of transportation for the Orlando area. I would be excited to see that develop further including the resort areas!

 

[Andrew015]

Very interesting. However, I don't understand why anyone would forgo their car (call it ~$30 in gas and tolls) in exchange for the train ($90 ticket). Then, the train traveler needs to make additional travel arrangements for getting from MCO to their intended destination (WDW, Universal, etc.), thus incurring other additional costs. It seems to me that the only tangible benefit is a half-hour reduction in travel time. The downsides are significantly higher costs and the loss of flexibility. Am I missing something?

 

[DDLand]

I wonder if they could extend Magical Express service to these new trains. For people doing a multi part vacation having the option to use the bus to get the train station could be helpful.

 

[Josh Hendy]

Very interesting. However, I don't understand why anyone would forgo their car (call it ~$30 in gas and tolls) in exchange for the train ($90 ticket). Then, the train traveler needs to make additional travel arrangements for getting from MCO to their intended destination (WDW, Universal, etc.), thus incurring other additional costs. It seems to me that the only tangible benefit is a half-hour reduction in travel time. The downsides are significantly higher costs and the loss of flexibility. Am I missing something?

The cost of the car ride is a bit more due to cost of tires and maintenance etc. but it's indisputable that trains are in most cases a needlessly expensive substitute for gasoline passenger cars. They're great for moving bulk freight, but the extreme weight and cost of rail vehicles make them extremely inefficient at carrying passengers ... except in certain circumstances such as in very densely populated and very heavily traveled cities and urban corridors.

The missing factor is probably this: environmentalist dogma states that any kind of mass transit must automatically be better than any kind of personal, gas-fueled vehicle. Therefore, the rail company may be scoring free taxpayer money, tax reductions, regulatory offsets, etc. by offering an expensive, impractical, unpopular and mostly worthless rail service. Think of this train service as the solar panel or wind farm approach to transportation and it should become clear what's going on.

 

[Jess_S]

Or maybe some people can't drive or don't want to drive.

 

[Josh Hendy]

Or maybe some people can't drive or don't want to drive.

Certainly. And trains are a very enjoyable alternative to driving. It's just that they're a very expensive and inefficient way of moving people from 'A' to 'B', which is why passenger trains have all but disappeared except in very large urban areas and/or places where taxpayers are forced to support them.

 

[Andrew015]

The cost of the car ride is a bit more due to cost of tires and maintenance etc...

While I don't disagree that there are costs associated with "tire wear and general maintenance", I would hazard a guess that 98% of all consumers would never even consider these costs as part of their decision making process on such a short trip. Even for those that would, these costs are virtually negligible on a ~200 mile road trip as compared to gas and tolls. It's not going to move the needle on the "Do we drive or take the train?" discussion from a cost perspective. This certainly would be a different story if we were talking about Philadelphia to MCO, but that's not the case.

... but it's indisputable that trains are in most cases a needlessly expensive substitute for gasoline passenger cars. They're great for moving bulk freight, but the extreme weight and cost of rail vehicles make them extremely inefficient at carrying passengers ... except in certain circumstances such as in very densely populated and very heavily traveled cities and urban corridors.

The missing factor is probably this: environmentalist dogma states that any kind of mass transit must automatically be better than any kind of personal, gas-fueled vehicle. Therefore, the rail company may be scoring free taxpayer money, tax reductions, regulatory offsets, etc. by offering an expensive, impractical, unpopular and mostly worthless rail service. Think of this train service as the solar panel or wind farm approach to transportation and it should become clear what's going on.

I don't disagree with any of this. Rather, I think your argument is spot-on. I wasn't questioning, "Why are they building it?", but rather, "Who would ride this?". Obviously, those without cars would be candidates, but if one cannot afford to own a car, are they really going to be able to afford a ~$200 round trip train ticket when they could probably take the Greyhound for ~$50? Hell, there are probably flights from Miami to MCO that are cheaper. This then leaves you with the very small subset of "We like the train" people, which IMHO, makes for a pretty weak financial justification.

 

[Vaughn4380]

The missing factor is probably this: environmentalist dogma states that any kind of mass transit must automatically be better than any kind of personal, gas-fueled vehicle. Therefore, the rail company may be scoring free taxpayer money, tax reductions, regulatory offsets, etc. by offering an expensive, impractical, unpopular and mostly worthless rail service. Think of this train service as the solar panel or wind farm approach to transportation and it should become clear what's going on.

So why do you hate the environment so much?

 

[Planogirl]

Why are trains always so blasted expensive here? We really enjoyed the nice trains in Europe but I suppose that those are heavily subsidized. Not that Amtrak isn't...

 

[ParrotBill]

Amtrack is less subsidized than it used to be and we simply don't in this country see it as something we should provide as a basic service like they do. We love the automobile too much and we place so many destinations outside city centers so the train doesn't get you all the way there! I was so thrilled with the trains during my Europe trips. I loved sitting back and enjoying the countryside.

 

[Josh Hendy]

I believe that the trains are also more-or-less heavily subsidized in Europe ... varying between jurisdictions. And cars and gasoline are pretty heavily taxed and pretty expensive.

Even without the heavy government intervention trains would still be more practical in Europe because of the higher population density and shorter distances between cities. North America is just too darn big.

I have a 12-hour car trip (each way) coming up this weekend and believe me, I wish I could take a train instead. But it's ludicrous to imagine that anyone would ever build a train track that would go from where I live to where I'm going that would get me there at a decent speed and a decent price. And even if it got me to the primary destination I would still need a car at the other end to drive around the countryside doing the visiting that I have to do.

One of the Mike's on the WDW Today podcast has I believe taken the car-train from the Washington DC area a couple of times and has discussed it. I seem to recall he was disenchanted with it after the last time he took it but I may be wrong. I investigated it myself years ago and what with the trouble of driving to the DC area, and the cost of the car train for 5 people, it didn't appear to be any cheaper or more practical than either driving all the way to FL or flying and renting a car.

 

[iamfathom]

I'm looking forward to this for future holidays, as I am from the UK and don't drive, so it'll be really nice to have an easy option for visiting Miami.

But I am used to trains as I am from the UK and the rail network is substantial with very few popular areas of the UK you can't get to by train. But if you think the trains are expensive in the US, to commute 1 hour to work each day to London and back costs me £395 ($611).

 

[LeeAndRobin]

But if you think the trains are expensive in the US, to commute 1 hour to work each day to London and back costs me £395 ($611).

So if you work 45 weeks per year, 5 days per week, $611 per day for commuting means you're expecting us to believe you're paying out $137,475 per *year* just to get to work and back. That's a bit hard to believe.

 

[Josh Hendy]

I'm looking forward to this for future holidays, as I am from the UK and don't drive, so it'll be really nice to have an easy option for visiting Miami.

But I am used to trains as I am from the UK and the rail network is substantial with very few popular areas of the UK you can't get to by train. But if you think the trains are expensive in the US, to commute 1 hour to work each day to London and back costs me £395 ($611).

Per day, week, month or year?

 

[iamfathom]

Per month.

I wish I were on a job that would justify me paying that per day!

 

[skier_pete]

One of the big problems with train travel in the US is its actually often cheaper to fly than to travel by train, which makes no sense. We've looked at taking the train to NYC from the Buffalo area, and you are talking $250 round trip. It's crazy. The only real useful train system in the US is the NE corridor commuter rail.

 

[mcjaco]

Certainly. And trains are a very enjoyable alternative to driving. It's just that they're a very expensive and inefficient way of moving people from 'A' to 'B', which is why passenger trains have all but disappeared except in very large urban areas and/or places where taxpayers are forced to support them.

True the disappeared due to the influx of the Interstate system, and the personal automobile becoming affordable for all. Many routes are seeing growth, however, in unprecedented numbers (ie: Hiawatha Service, and the Chicago to St. Louis trains). The Northeast Corridor sees immense numbers of users each year. It's the rural routes that can't pull the numbers in, thus Amtrak needing subsidies to keep those routes running.

Why are trains always so blasted expensive here? We really enjoyed the nice trains in Europe but I suppose that those are heavily subsidized. Not that Amtrak isn't...

Amtrak is subsidized, but barely. And Congress just cut their funding again (the day after the accident in Philly). What a lot of people don't realize is that Amtrak has to lease their trackage rights on freight lines, as they don't have their own lines (like in Europe). This is a major cause of delays, and costs. Until someone wants to step up and start rebuilding the passenger rail infrastructure in the US, we'll never see high speed train travel like Europe (which is awesome, if you've ever been on it).

 

[DOOM1001]

I live in Miami,my car gets 35+ mpg and I take the free US 27 instead of the Turnpike which is like $20+ in tolls each way,I do hit 2 of those $1 tolls before reaching US 27 so each way I spend about $25 in gas plus $2 in tolls,$54 total round trip.I would probably take the train once or twice to try it out,as long as its convenient to get to the parks once off the train,but financially it just wouldn't make sense to always take it.Then you also have to factor in that when I do my trips to Orlando I park hop between all the parks,Disney,Universal,Sea World and Busch in Tampa,that wouldn't be very easy without a car.I probably wouldn't be a long term customer,for some people in Miami without cars or who prefer to avoid putting miles on their cars and dont tour the parks the way I do it might work.I would think those taking cruises in Miami or just visiting a train ride to the Central Fla parks would be appealing.It would also bring some added tourists down to Miami for a day or two after doing the parks in Orlando.Its overall a good thing but the amount of daily trains planned seems excessive.

 

[mcjaco]

I think you have to look past the tourist part of this. Seems to me there's probably a good bit of business run from Miami to Orlando and back. That might appeal to the business traveler, rather than having to hop on a short flight, or driving by car.

 

[JoWiJo]

One of the big problems with train travel in the US is its actually often cheaper to fly than to travel by train, which makes no sense. We've looked at taking the train to NYC from the Buffalo area, and you are talking $250 round trip. It's crazy. The only real useful train system in the US is the NE corridor commuter rail.

In the television show The Big Bang Theory, there is a dialogue in an episode that speaks to this so well.

Sheldon: We’re not flying, we’re taking the train.

Penny: Oh, cool.

Howard: Yeah, cool. Seven times as long as flying, and costs almost twice as much.