Amtrak may trim Acela service
Equipment woes curtail reliability

By Glen Johnson, Globe Staff, 8/7/2002

WASHINGTON - Although the high-speed Acela train is challenging the popularity of airline shuttles along the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak is considering cutting back the service because equipment problems are making the trains unreliable.

On-time performance between Boston, New York, and Washington has fallen from 85 percent in January to 74 percent in July, according to Amtrak. Over the same period, the number of trains cancelled or terminated en route has risen from 10 a month at the beginning of the year to 35 in July, out of 830 monthly departures.

One option Amtrak is studying is to decrease Acela service between New York and Washington and boost service between Boston and New York.

Most frustrating to Amtrak officials, a spokesman said, is that the trains have been hampered by a variety of problems, not a single one that could be easily solved. One train had a brake system freeze, causing it to block traffic outside Washington, but the majority of problems have been less serious, involving everything from faulty valves and inadequate spare parts to annoyances such as restroom door locks that will not latch.

One consistent problem has been fluctations in the trains' electrical system, which has required Amtrak to send a technician on every Acela run to reset the electronics should trouble strike. The national railroad is running 15 Acela trains with three in reserve as backups. Amtrak's business plan for Acela calls for ultimately operating 18 trains, with two backups.

''The fact is that we have experienced a reliability problem with the train, and you can't hide that from people who take the train,'' said Amtrak spokesman William Schulz. ''It's better to be up front and honest and say you're fixing the problem. It's also important to put the extent of the problem in some perspective.''

Amtrak President David L. Gunn is considering cutting high-speed service between New York and Washington and concentrating it between Boston and New York, where the Acela's acceleration and cornering ability allow it to shave more than an hour off the normal travel time for traditional diesel locomotives. Service between New York and Washington would be supplemented with older Metroliner trains, which run only about 15 minutes slower than Acela trains on that portion of the corridor.

The run of problems with the $710 million Acela equipment means that none of the 18 current trains is now alike, making troubleshooting more difficult. Last month, Amrak refused delivery of the 19th train because the railroad said it needed 18 major and 80 minor modifications. Delivery of the 20th and final six-car train is also uncertain because the manufacturer has cannibalized it for spare parts. The train was the first one built, and the maker has used it for testing.

Officials with Amtrak and the train's manufacturer, a consortium of Bombardier Corp. of Montreal and Alstom SA of Paris, are trying to devise a plan to standardize the train's equpment. Nonetheless, Gunn told The Washington Post, which first reported the reliability problems yesterday, that he will never approve buying another Acela train set. Instead, he will look to European manufacturers when he tries to implement high-speed rail in other parts of the United States.

In a statement, Bombardier said the trains' problems were attributable to Amtrak's fluctuating design specifications, not manufacturing problems. For example, the Canadian company said it had warned the railroad that the brakes it ordered were prone to freezing up, for safety reasons, but ''the customer nevertheless insisted on the new design.''

It also said other problems were attributable to Amtrak because it ''instructed Bombardier to deliver train sets even though Amtrak knew that insufficient time was available to incorporate numerous requirement changes.''

Overall, Bombardier said, ''Acela is now the benchmark for high-speed rail technology and service in North America, with the commercial success to match.''

Acela was the centerpiece of a revitalization plan Amtrak offered in 1997, when it sought $2.2 billion from Congress with the promise of becoming self-sufficient by the end of this year. It envisioned the trains generating an extra $180 million in annual revenue, which, coupled with expansion of freight and next-day delivery service, was supposed to help push the railroad out of deficit spending.

Earlier this year, Amtrak conceded it would fall short of its goal of self-sufficiency. Gunn, a Melrose native and former director of operations for the MBTA, was hired in May to revive the railroad. He immediately proposed eliminating the bulk of Amtrak's 85 vice presidents and concentrating on the railroad's existing service. Nonetheless, he said the railroad would have to shut down by mid-July unless it received a $200 million cash infusion.

After a showdown with Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta, Gunn received the promise of loan guarantees from the Bush administration and support for an appropriation from Congress to allow it to close out its fiscal year next month. Another budget showdown looms, with Gunn projecting the railroad needs $1.2 billion to run through September 2003, and the administration offering $521 million.

Amtrak blames some of its financial problems on a delay in the start-up of Acela service. Originally scheduled to begin in 1999, Acela trains did not enter passenger service until December 2000 because they experienced excessive wear and did not meet projected service times. In response to the delay, Amtrak withheld $50 million from Bombardier.

Last November, the trainmaker sued Amtrak in the US District Court in Washington, seeking at least $200 million in damages. The manufacturer contended the delay stemmed from Amtrak's failure to improve its tracks, slowing initial testing of the new train. An Amtrak spokesman termed the lawsuit a ''stunning demonstration of irony,'' and the railroad subsequently filed a motion to dismiss it. That motion is to be heard in court today.

Gunn told the Post that he and William Spurr, the new president of Bombardier Transportation of North America, have committed to solving the reliability problems despite the ongoing legal action. Passengers appear to like the new trains, despite the problems.

From October through June, ridership between Boston and New York has increased about 23 percent, from 602,000 riders to 781,000 riders. From October through December 2001, a somewhat skewed travel period in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Amtrak grabbed a 65-percent share of the shuttle market between New York and Washington, and a 49-percent share between Boston and New York. That was a sizable shift from the previous balance of a 60 percent to 40 percent split between airline passengers and train riders in the Boston-New York market.

''When it works, the passengers love it,'' Gunn told the Post.

This story ran on page A1 of the Boston Globe on 8/7/2002.
© Copyright 2002 Globe Newspaper Company.
==========
**NOTICE: In accordance with 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.** ==========