Capacity Modeling Guidebook for Shared-Use Passenger and Freight Rail Operations (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

1 C H A P T E R 1 1.1 Introduction, Purpose and Overview of This Guidebook 1.1.1 Introduction A broadened understanding of rail capacity is an essential cornerstone for building the part- nerships required for successful implementation of passenger rail operations on shared-use cor- ridors. The product of such understanding is an ability for corridor partners to deal with service proposals and challenges in a dispassionate, objective manner. Public agency sponsors of pas- senger operations are frequently frustrated by the numerous challenges associated with develop- ing an operation that must simultaneously address public benefits and legitimate private sector concerns. A well-structured, transparent modeling structure to assess rail capacity can serve to confirm the design and scale of proposed changes as well as to educate those who are unfamiliar with the complexity of the rail environment. Unlike highways, most rail corridors are privately owned and are likely to remain in private hands even after substantial public investment. Public sponsors, including the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), want assurances that anticipated public benefits are realized once taxpayer funds have been expended. Rail capacity modeling is an important tool to determine appropriate shares of needed investment by each of the corridor partners. Depending on the circumstance, rail capacity modeling may establish the baselines for negotiation of ongoing con- tributions to upkeep and maintenance. For the foreseeable future capacity planning for shared-use corridors, and the use of such analytical methods discussed in this guidebook, will be a fact of life for freight and passenger railroaders. As of September 2013, apart from Amtrak long-distance national network trains, there were 18 mostly state sponsored, short-distance Amtrak operated passenger rail services which operate on shared-use corridors. There were also 24 commuter rail operations. Twelve operate at least in part on track owned by private freight railroads, 16 run on their own tracks, 7 do both, and 4 run at least in part on Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor. 1.1.2 Purpose of Report The purpose of this guidebook is to equip state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) and other public agency sponsors of passenger operations with an understanding of main line rail capacity analysis and planning. Specifically, it explains how freight railroads, Amtrak, and com- muter railroads consider the effects of implementing new passenger rail services on freight rail- roads and on publicly owned corridors, or shared-use corridors, such as Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor. This enhanced understanding of rail capacity issues will foster improved levels of Introduction

2 Capacity Modeling Guidebook for Shared-Use Passenger and Freight Rail Operations trust and communication and will support the overall objective of building solid and respectful partnerships for the use of such alignments. This is a guidebook on how state DOTs and other passenger rail service sponsors can suc- cessfully partner with rail corridor owners in addressing the capacity issue as a core element of successful shared corridor operations. It is meant as a complement to NCHRP Report 657: Guidebook for Implementing Passenger Rail Service on Shared Passenger and Freight Corridors, which explored the fundamental steps required for establishing new passenger services on freight railroads. 1.1.3 Overview of Report The guidebook consists of the following chapters. The remaining sections of Chapter 1 describe the outreach effort to shared-use corridor stake- holders, which occurred through the summer of 2012, followed by a summary of the “realities” of railroad operations. Chapter 2 is a synthesis of the responses obtained from the stakeholders. The feedback is orga- nized in terms of major themes that were distilled from their comments. It includes a summary of guiding principles which public agency sponsors of new passenger rail service might consider in their discussions with host rail carriers for access. Chapter 3 lists the various line capacity analysis methodologies that are available, and cites their respective strengths and where they are typically used. Chapter 4 provides three case studies, where three different methodologies were employed to assess line capacity. The results of the three analyses are then compared. Chapter 5 is a description of recent planning for a shared-use corridor set to see the deploy- ment of high speed trains in the near future. There are also three appendices. Appendix A is an explanation of the basics of rail capacity analysis. Appendix B discusses the history and implications on line capacity of Positive Train Control. Lastly, Appendix C is a glossary of railroad terminology that appears throughout the guidebook. 1.2 Outreach to Stakeholders 1.2.1 Introduction During the summer of 2012, this guidebook’s investigative team discussed issues surround- ing line capacity and operations assessments with freight railroads, commuter railroads, state Departments of Transportation, Amtrak, and the Federal Railroad Administration. A listing of the stakeholders interviewed and the dates on which the discussions occurred appear in Table 1-1. The discussions were either face-to-face or via teleconference. Brief summaries of these entities and their shared corridor interests appear herein. Entities identified in the table by abbreviation have their proper names noted in the text. 1.2.2 Freight Railroads BNSF Railway hosts both intercity passenger services operated by Amtrak and various states, as well as commuter rail services. Amtrak services include the Southwest Chief and portions of the Coast Starlight, California Zephyr, Empire Builder and Texas Eagle. State sponsored services

Introduction 3 include the Illinois Zephyr in Illinois, and the Heartland Flyer in Texas and Oklahoma, along with portions of Cascades in the Pacific Northwest, the Pacific Surfliner in Southern California, and the San Joaquins in northern and central California. Commuter rail services include: the Sounder in Washington State, Metrolink in the Los Angeles area, and Metra in Chicago. BNSF crews operate both Sounder commuter trains and Metra trains on BNSF lines in Chicago. CSX Transportation (CSXT) hosts both intercity services operated by Amtrak and various states, as well as commuter rail services. Amtrak services include the Auto Train, Silver Meteor, Silver Star, Palmeto, and the Cardinal, and portions of the Lakeshore Limited, Capitol Limited and the Carolinian. State sponsored services include the Empire Service in New York, the Hoosier State in Illinois and Indiana, and the Pere Marquette in Michigan. Commuter rail services include the Virginia Railway Express (VRE) service in Virginia and Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC) service in West Virginia and Maryland. CSXT provides train crews for the MARC as well. Norfolk Southern Railway (NS) hosts intercity services operated by Amtrak and commuter rail services. Amtrak services include the Crescent and the portions of the Capitol Limited and Lakeshore Limited. State sponsored services include the Piedmont Services in North Carolina and portions of the Chicago-Detroit-Pontiac, Chicago-Lansing-Port Huron, and Chicago- Grand Rapids Services. NS hosts commuter trains operated by Virginia Railway Express (VRE) in northern Virginia, Metra in Chicago, Southeast Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA) in Philadelphia, and New Jersey Transit (NJ Transit) in New Jersey. Stakeholder Parcipants Venue Date Freight Railroads BNSF Railway Interview June 14, 2012 CSX Transportaon Interview July 25, 2012 Norfolk Southern Railway Interview July 19, 2012 Union Pacific Railroad Teleconference August 22, 2012 Commuter Railroads MARC Interview August 8, 2012 Metra Interview July 9, 2012 OCTA Interview June 22, 2012 Sounder Interview July 12, 2012 VRE Interview August 6, 2012 State DOTs Caltrans Teleconference July 10, 2012 Capitol Corridor JPA Interview July 2, 2012 Conneccut DOT Interview June 27, 2012 Illinois DOT Teleconference August 28, 2012 North Carolina CDOT Teleconference June 25, 2012 Pennsylvania DOT Teleconference July 10, 2012 Washington DOT/Oregon DOT Teleconference July 25, 2012 Amtrak Interview Interview/ teleconference June 26, 2012 July 31, 2012 FRA Interview July 25, 2012 Table 1-1. Stakeholder outreach discussion venues and dates.

4 Capacity Modeling Guidebook for Shared-Use Passenger and Freight Rail Operations Union Pacific Railroad (UP) hosts intercity services operated by Amtrak and various states, as well as commuter rail services. Amtrak services include the Sunset Limited, and portions of the Coast Starlight; California Zephyr and Texas Eagle. State sponsored services include the Lincoln Service in Illinois and the Capitols in California, and portions of the San Joaquins in California and the Cascades in Oregon. Commuter rail services include Metrolink in the Los Angeles area, Metra in Chicago, and Caltrain and the Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) in northern Cali- fornia. UP hosts and operates Metra lines in Chicago. 1.2.3 Commuter Railroads Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC), administered by the Maryland Department of Transportation, operates commuter rail services on two routes between Baltimore and Wash- ington: one on the Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor and the other on CSX Transportation; and on CSXT between Washington and Harpers Ferry, WV, and Frederick, MD. Metra, the commuter rail operation in Chicago, operates numerous commuter rail services over lines belonging to UP, BNSF, NS, Canadian Pacific Railway (CP), and on a dedicated electri- fied line purchased from Canadian National Railway (CN). Orange County Transportation Agency (OCTA) is a member agency of the Southern Califor- nia Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), which operates the Metrolink commuter rail services in the Los Angeles area. OCTA is planning a joint service along with the North County Transit Dis- trict (NCTD) in San Diego County for a new through commuter rail service between Fullerton (Orange County) and San Diego utilizing Metrolink and NCTD services. OCTA owns trackage utilized by both UP and BNSF freight trains, and Pacific Surfliner corridor services. Sounder, the commuter rail operation of the Sound Transit regional public transit agency, operates trains on BNSF between Seattle and Everett and between Seattle and Tacoma. It is pres- ently building an extension of its south line over a new alignment and BNSF south of Tacoma. Virginia Railway Express (VRE), owned jointly by the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission and the Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission (agencies of the Commonwealth of Virginia), operates commuter trains on the CSXT between Fredericksburg, VA, and Washington, DC, and on NS between Manassas, VA, and Alexandria, VA. 1.2.4 State Sponsored Services Caltrans, also known as the California Department of Transportation, sponsors or funds three intercity rail corridor services: • The Capitols between San Jose, Oakland, Sacramento and Auburn on UP. • The San Joaquins between Oakland, Stockton, Fresno and Bakersfield on UP and BNSF lines; and also between Stockton and Sacramento on UP. • The Pacific Surfliner between San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, Anaheim, and San Diego on lines belonging to UP, BNSF, OCTA and NCTD. Caltrans’ Division of Rail manages the two latter services directly. The Capitol service is oper- ated by a public agency as noted immediately below. The Surfliners still receive some operating funding by Amtrak, though this will cease in October 2013, after which Caltrans will be the sole funding source. Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) manages the state-funded Capitol trains. CCJPA is a Joint Powers Authority, staffed by employees of the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART). Funding for operations comes from Caltrans.

Introduction 5 Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) owns a portion of Amtrak’s NEC from New York / Connecticut state line to a point just east of New Haven Union Station. On this line, ConnDOT hosts Metro North commuter trains and Amtrak Acela and Regional intercity trains. ConnDOT also sponsors Shore Line East commuter service between New London, New Haven and Stamford on the NEC. ConnDOT plans to implement new commuter rail service on Amtrak’s Springfield Line between New Haven, Hartford and Springfield in 2016. Amtrak will operate the new service. Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) sponsors Amtrak operated intercity ser- vices including the aforementioned Illinois Zephyr and Lincoln Service; Illini Service between Chicago and Carbondale over CN lines; as well as the Illinois portion of the Chicago-Milwaukee Hiawatha Service. IDOT is also leading the implementation of high speed rail intercity service on the UP between Chicago, Springfield and St. Louis. North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) sponsors the Amtrak operated intercity Piedmont Service and Carolinian between Raleigh and Charlotte over tracks owned by North Carolina Railroad, a state entity whose freight rail haulage services are leased to NS. Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) sponsors Amtrak operated intercity services: the Pennsylvanian between Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, and Philadelphia over tracks owned by NS and Amtrak; and a high frequency, high speed Keystone Corridor between Harrisburg and Philadelphia. Jointly the Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and the Oregon Depart- ment of Transportation (ODOT) sponsor the Cascades services between Eugene, Portland, Tacoma, Seattle, Bellingham and Vancouver, BC, over UP and BNSF lines. 1.2.5 Amtrak Amtrak, also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, provides intercity pas- senger rail services throughout the United States. Amtrak owns the majority of the NEC between Boston and Washington, DC, and hosts both commuter trains and freight trains on the NEC along with its regional and high speed trains. Amtrak owns segments of track in Michigan, and hosts Michigan state sponsored services there. Amtrak also runs its long-distance network trains on all major freight railroads in the U.S. and on numerous short lines. Amtrak crews operate state sponsored services, including: • Capitol Corridor, San Joaquin and Pacific Surfliner Services in California. • Cascades in the Pacific Northwest. • Heartland Flyer in Oklahoma and Texas. • Piedmont and Carolinian Services in North Carolina. • Blue Water, Pere Marquette and the Wolverine Services between Chicago, northern Indiana and Michigan. • Hiawatha Corridor in between Chicago and Milwaukee. • Empire Service and Adirondack Services in New York. • Vermonter and Ethan Allan Services between New York City, New York, Connecticut and Vermont. • Downeaster in Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine. 1.2.6 The Federal Railroad Administration Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation with the primary responsibility of federal oversight for the safety of the nation’s railroad system

6 Capacity Modeling Guidebook for Shared-Use Passenger and Freight Rail Operations as well funding and oversight of railroad research and development. It also provides training and technical assistance. Since the passage of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA) in 2008, FRA has taken on additional responsibilities for approving and administer- ing applications for federal funding of freight and passenger rail projects, including higher and high speed rail initiatives. FRA also oversees all Amtrak funding; leads the development of the National Rail Plan; sets standards for and reviews state rail plans; and has ownership interest in the Pueblo, CO, Transportation Technology Center. 1.3 Realities of Railroad Operation A general description of railroad operations is needed to understand the discussions in this report. The following paragraphs provide a basic description of U.S. freight and passenger opera- tions, including the control of train movements over a segment of track, how safety is assured through the application of signals and train control systems, and how dispatchers manage train movements to meet service quality goals. Common railroad terminology used to describe opera- tions and used in capacity modeling is included. The descriptions are amplified in Appendix A on Train Priorities and Line Capacity Effects and in Appendix B on Positive Train Control (PTC). The focus of this description is on shared passenger and freight operations on a railroad line segment equipped with wayside signals and Centralized Traffic Control (CTC), as explained below. Almost all passenger services likely to be the subject of serious capacity analysis will fit this description. 1.3.1 Signaling and Safety Safe train operations (avoidance of collisions) depends on dividing up a single line, or each line where there are two or more tracks, into signal blocks, typically two to 10 miles in length. Block lengths on a railroad may be a function of several factors, but the overriding safety requirement is that any train entering a block at its maximum permitted speed must be able to stop before the end of the block, thus maintaining a safe separation between trains. The minimum block length is the greatest braking distance of any train expected to operate over the line segment, plus an appropriate safety margin. Blocks must also be greater than the longest train that normally travels over the line segment, otherwise a single long train would occupy two signal blocks. Once minimum block length conditions are satisfied, block length is determined by desired line capac- ity. Increasing block lengths increases the minimum distance between trains and reduces capacity. In signaled territory, wayside signals are positioned at the start of each block. Referring to the simple track diagram, Figure 1-1, only one train (“Train 1”) is permitted to occupy a block in normal operations. A following train (“Train 2”), which has a clear block ahead, will see a yellow signal, indicating it must be prepared to stop at the next (red) signal by reducing speed. The signals are controlled by a track circuit, using low-voltage electrical currents in the rails. The electrical connection provided by the train’s wheels “shunts” the track circuit to detect the presence of a train and control the block signals. Thus an occupied track is always protected by a red signal. The yellow signal seen by “Train 2” provides an advance indication of the stop signal behind “Train 1.” This is called an approach signal. In railroad terminology, this signaling system is called an Automatic Block System (ABS). A train traveling in the opposite direction (“Train 3”) must enter a passing siding to allow Train 1 to continue. An event where trains are traveling in opposite directions and passing each other at a siding is called a meet. A faster train overtaking slower train at a siding is called a pass.

Introduction 7 Entry and exit switches can be controlled manually by the train crew, or with their accompanying signals, controlled by an interlocking. An interlocking is a mechanism that is either controlled locally from a signal tower (almost extinct) or remotely from a control center. A combination of signal indications, switch position detectors and siding track circuits, combined with electri- cal or electronic logic, ensures occupied tracks are protected by a stop signal and trains cannot move through a wrongly aligned switch. More complex interlockings may be used at crossovers and junctions. Where controlled remotely, interlockings are called Control Points (CP) on many railroads. The combination of interlockings and the ABS will prevent collisions and misaligned switch derailments, provided that locomotive engineers always obey signals. To reduce accident risks, railroads have developed systems that provide audible and visual warning in the cab of the aspects displayed by approach and stop signals, sometimes with enforced brake application if the engineer fails to start slowing the train. A variety of systems and tech- nologies are in limited use, called Automatic Train Stop (ATS), Automatic Cab Signals (ACS) and Automatic Train Control (ATC). Current FRA safety regulations limit speeds to below 80 mph in the absence of one of these systems, which is why passenger train speed is currently limited to 79 mph on many routes. Positive Train Control (PTC), described later, is a comprehensive safety system that enforces adherence to speed limits and work zone restrictions, as well as preventing collisions, and which will enhance or supersede other automatic systems. 1.3.2 Management of Train Movements The systems described in the previous section are designed to ensure safety, but do not man- age railroad operations in any way. Operations management is the function of the dispatcher, who uses a variety of means to transmit operating instructions to each train operating on a track segment regarding train priorities for meets and passes and other operating details. On lines not equipped with remotely controlled switches, the dispatcher’s instructions are conveyed by structured voice radio messages to a train crew; these messages are called train orders. Switches are operated locally by a signal tower operator or manually by the train crew. However, most rail Figure 1-1. Opposing train conflict resolution.

8 Capacity Modeling Guidebook for Shared-Use Passenger and Freight Rail Operations segments likely to be of interest in capacity studies have power switches that can be operated remotely by the dispatcher. The dispatcher’s workstation (usually called a dispatcher’s desk) is equipped with displays showing train locations, switch positions, etc., and switch and signal con- trols, as well as displays showing train positions on adjacent track segments. This system is called CTC (or Train Control System [TCS] on some railroads) and gives the dispatcher full control of railroad activity on the line segment. Figure 1-2 is an illustration of a typical dispatcher’s desk. Figure 1-3 is a close-up of a typical dispatcher’s screens. The efficient operation of a line segment depends very much on the dispatcher’s skill and experience, often aided by computer simulations (Computer Aided Dispatching [CAD]) that can recommend pass and meet locations to the dispatcher. Poor choices by the dispatcher can slow operations, reduce effective capacity, and delay trains. In considering the dispatcher’s role, it is worth noting that many American rail freight operations are not scheduled, especially when Photo by KJ Yaeger Figure 1-2. A typical dispatcher’s desk. Figure 1-3. A typical dispatcher’s screens. Photo by KJ Yaeger

Introduction 9 compared to, for example, a commuter rail service; and there is substantial randomness in when trains arrive on a line segment. The U.S. main line freight environment is in sharp contrast to lines where passenger traffic is dominant, such as on busy commuter railroad lines or most rail lines in Europe where most service takes place on a predictable scheduled pattern and dispatching skills have less influence on overall train performance. 1.3.3 Capacity and Capacity Analysis The primary subject of this report is railroad capacity and the methods used to analyze and estimate capacity. The short definition of capacity is the ability of a railroad line segment to carry a given volume and mix of traffic (freight and passenger, if present) while meeting service quality goals for each type of traffic. Capacity is a function of: • Physical characteristics of the line segment, such as single or double track, distance between passing sidings, signal system characteristics, permitted speeds for different train types, cur- vature, and gradients. • Traffic volume and characteristics, such as the numbers of trains of each type traveling over the line in a specific period of time (typically 24 hours), speeds, train length and weight, loco- motive power assigned to each train, and stops for passenger stations or to drop off and pick up freight cars from industry sidings. • Management practices and protocol, including dispatch procedures, safety regulations, and treatment of train movements through passenger terminal areas. Capacity may be defined as adequate when each user of the line segment is able to meet service quality goals for rail services using a line segment. For a passenger service operator, the service quality goal may be to achieve a given percentage of on-time arrivals and/or ensuring that indi- vidual train and aggregate delays do not exceed an agreed level. For a freight service operator, service goals will depend on service type. For example, an intermodal train may be required to meet punctuality goals reflecting commitments made to customers by the railroad, but for other train types the railroad’s primary objectives may be to minimize delays and unnecessary stops and starts that add to fuel, employee, and other costs. Capacity analysis is the process of estimating the extent to which traffic planned to operate over a given line segment can meet the service goals, and, if not, what modifications to infrastructure or operations will enable it to do so. An individual line segment cannot be considered in isolation, since the ability of adjacent line segments to also support traffic volume is critical. It is usually necessary to analyze several contiguous line segments. The practical impact of this need is that capacity analysis of the impacts of a proposed passenger operation must often include adjoining rail service territories that extend beyond the physical limit of the proposed operation. The analysis must also take proper account of any randomness in rail traffic volumes and timing, as well as consideration of the ability to recover from typical service delays. Appendix A provides a more detailed description of how train priorities and track layout affect capacity. Chapter 2, following, provides a more detailed definition of capacity, why it is important, and how service quality goals for different rail traffic types relate to capacity. 1.3.4 Positive Train Control (PTC) Development of new systems to control train operations and to extract greater operations efficiency has been of interest to North American freight railways for at least three decades. New train control and signaling technologies have been researched and tested for many years, but

10 Capacity Modeling Guidebook for Shared-Use Passenger and Freight Rail Operations systems complexity, constant evolution of underlying communications and computing tech- nologies, and the lack of common industry standards had frustrated implementation of such concepts. A new sense of urgency and political focus occurred with the fatal collision between a Metro- link commuter train and a Union Pacific Railroad freight train in Chatsworth (Southern Cali- fornia) in 2008. Following this accident, Section 104 of the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA) required that by December 31, 2015, PTC be installed on all rail lines carrying regularly scheduled commuter and intercity service as well as lines transporting toxic-by-inhalation haz- ardous materials. PTC functionality is required to: “. . . prevent train-to-train collisions, over-speed derailments, incursions into work zone limits, and the movement of trains through a switch left in the wrong position . . .” (49 USC § 20157— Implementation of positive train control systems) FRA was tasked with overseeing and approving plans for implementation of PTC by rail cor- ridor operators and owners. While the outcomes-based definitions of the statute could conceiv- ably result in different technical approaches on different corridors, the widespread sharing of assets by freight rail carriers creates a strong incentive for adoption of common standards and approaches. Since passage of RSIA, the railroad industry and FRA have been working to imple- ment the Act. Because of the short timeline specified in the Act, the railroad industry decided to adopt an overlay version of PTC. This means adding PTC to enforce existing signals and operat- ing rules, without otherwise changing how railroad operations are managed. It is this specific approach to PTC that is referenced in this guidebook. As an overlay system, PTC cannot provide any capacity benefit, and it may introduce new operating constraints that would have the effect of reducing capacity. Any detailed analysis of rail capacity for post-2015 operations must con- sider the PTC system proposed for the rail line under study and take account of PTC-related capacity impacts. One particularly vexing challenge for the implementation of PTC is the appropriate calibra- tion of braking algorithms for the almost unlimited combinations of car types, train weights, and locomotives. Requiring trains to slow or stop prematurely will ensure a safe operation, but at the cost of significant loss of line capacity beyond that which would occur with traditional manual train operation. Considerable time and energy is being devoted by the rail carriers on this specific technical issue, attempting to tailor as precisely as possible the true required braking distances associated with each train consist. In the longer term, certain elements of the 2015 PTC architecture offer the promise of increased capacity without costly changes to the physical infrastructure by introducing “moving blocks” which protect a safety zone around a train as it travels and which can be tailored to the specific stopping distance of a specific train consist. A more detailed description of PTC and the issues raised by its implementation can be found in Appendix B. 1.3.5 Rail Line Planning Versus Highway Planning As both highways and rail lines are linear and handle high volumes of traffic in opposing directions, it is tempting to think that planning for them would be similar. However, the realities of public versus private ownership and the differences in characteristics of the traffic handled require distinct planning approaches. Highways are, for the most part, public assets. Their construction and maintenance costs are covered out of the public purse. Accordingly, they are open to all users. These range from motorists in private automobiles to delivery trucks to 16-wheel “big rig” trucks, and just about everything in between. Users both drive to work and drive as work. There are as many reasons to

Introduction 11 take to the highway as there are drivers, and the highway has to accommodate them all. Traffic patterns on highways will be more or less the same throughout the year. In maintaining high- ways, the overarching goal is to ensure safe driving conditions. Most rail lines, on the other hand, are owned by private for-profit railroads. A railroad earns fees for hauling rail traffic across its lines, and these fees contribute to the maintenance of the line. Access to a rail line is controlled by the owning entity primarily for use by its own trains. Use by other passenger or freight rail systems is only permitted if the owner issues trackage rights for those services. Volume on some lines can be very commodity specific. For example, the majority of traffic on a rail line could be coal bound to a coal-burning utility, and the volume may change depending on the season—more in summer and less in winter. Generally the line will be main- tained only to the extent required to move the traffic cost effectively as well as safely. Further complicating the comparison are the following: • There is probably a similar variation in power-to-weight ratios between rail and highway borne traffic; however, trains have much bigger variability in top speed and train length than do trucks. • Most importantly, most rail lines are only single or double track. They are like operating a one- or two-lane highway with opportunities to pass or overtake only at one place every several miles. The ability to carry large volumes of passengers or freight on each train means that a rail line is capable of very high throughput, but at the cost of flexibility. • The rail network itself is far more limited than that of highways, with few routing alterna- tives between city pairs. The impact of a derailment or other unplanned track disruption may quickly ripple across the service network of a given carrier for many hundreds of miles. Highway mishaps or failures generally impact service over a few dozen miles at most given the availability of redundant or secondary routes. • Passenger trains with their schedules create a dynamic in rail planning unlike anything on the highway side. Passenger trains have priority, and freight trains cannot impede passenger trains. Thus planning for fluid passenger and freight operations often means extending existing sidings, adding new ones, installation of double track, or even operations changes (e.g., with freight trains operating when passenger trains are not). • Raw data gathering for highway traffic volumes is a matter of observation. Planners use cameras or other tools to capture the ebbs and flows and traffic during the day as a tool for planning improve- ments. However, observations of rail traffic, to discern patterns to fluctuations, are impractical given the nature of around-the-clock rail operations, seasonality, and cyclicality inherent in rail traffic. One day observations are essentially meaningless. Rail planners, accordingly, rely on rail traffic data from the corridor’s owning railroad that spans several days, weeks, or even a month or a year in order to capture the true nature of the line operations. Given these differences, the implications for planning approaches are enormous. In a phrase, one system is an open one, open to all users. The other is a closed system, with access permitted by the owning railroad. For the former, planners will strive for fluid conditions by adding lanes and thus improving volume-to-capacity ratios. With fewer resources, private railway planners may instead prioritize rail line use to traffic that earns the railroad the highest revenues.