Metra recovery ratio by line

[west towns]

Metra reports their system recovery ratio, is there a way to determine the revenue, expenses and recovery ratio by line/operating day?

Pace has shown such information on each route, especially when they are holding pubic hearings.

Is such information available for Metra?

[Busjack]

I don't see that explicitly in the 2010 budget, but there are numbers from which it could be derived. Basically, page Body28 has revenue, operating expenses, and funded subsidy per carrier. If you go by those numbers, BNSF has a 71% recovery ratio, while UP has a 44% one.

However, we (primarily with Trainman) have discussed that Metra has "accounting issues" due to its open fare system that CTA and Pace do not by counting boardings (either money in the farebox or swipes of the card):

• The only line that is separated is the BNSF. UP is three lines, and all the rest of Metra is counted as one carrier.
• A ticket of a particular type can be used anywhere on the system (except the South Shore). I had previously asked trainman what was the significance of the agent at Union Station asking where I was going on a Zone E ticket, and he replied that it was credited to where I said. Thus, I could screw up the recovery ratio by saying that I was going to Lisle instead of Northbrook, but the ticket would still be good. Compound the effect of monthly passes, in one case in which I knew someone who rode from Naperville to Deerfield and back daily, but even though that was two rides in each direction, he could do it on one monthly F ticket. Obviously, the Metra Milw. N. line didn't get credit for that revenue.
• The Auditor General noted in 2007 that there were severely diminished returns beyond Zone E on most lines. The average fare per ride of $2.84 (and no better than $2.94 on any line) would indicate that.

Metra also excludes free rides, and I don't know whether the other boards do.

I guess one would also have to look at the ridership statistics and average fare per line to get some idea (see page Body39).

BTW, with regard to Pace, I have only seen it on PowerPoints presented during restructurings, and the last restructuring in my area was 5 years ago. If the only other source is slides at public hearings, do you know of any continuing source (comparable to the CTA Ridership Reports)?

[trainman8119]

I believe the answer to this is about 4 fold. On a daily basis, we are required to complete a report which details departure/arrival times, equipment, and head counts (including ADA, Circuit Breakers and Bikes). All of this is really fictional, as most of the head counts are estimates, although there are those who will go and count each and every head. That is near impossible on an 8 car train in rush hour (catch my drift !). In any event, those numbers are input and analyzed by someone (who...beats me ?). As for on time, most delays are buried by those across town...at least Metra owned lines. They concoct some new reason daily and never report actual delays. I am sure if they did, the on time would be more like 70% instead of 94% or whatever.

Anyway, I believe they do use the head counts, though, with some sort of formula based on ticket office, ticket by mail, vending machines and cash fare sales to report some sort of ridership numbers. Once or twice a year (now being one) they will spend money to hire someone to come out and count each and every board/alight at each station on each train (at one time or another). I am pretty sure they cover just about every line at every time. Again, based on this they create a formula and use that for ratios and the such. Is it accurate ? Who knows, but it is how they do it. It gives the corporate bean counters something to justify their existence by interpreting the data. Is this made public ? I doubt it, other than the corporate reports you see in print.

[Busjack]

Thanks for the explanation, and you get us off onto a new tangent:

As for on time, most delays are buried by those across town...at least Metra owned lines. They concoct some new reason daily and never report actual delays. I am sure if they did, the on time would be more like 70% instead of 94% or whatever.

You mean to tell us with all the suicides by train and train crossing accidents, when it is announced in the traffic report on the radio that "Metra Train Number ---- is stopped at the ----- station because of a police incident," there is some way to excuse it from the on time report?

[trainman8119]

You mean to tell us with all the suicides by train and train crossing accidents, when it is announced in the traffic report on the radio that "Metra Train Number ---- is stopped at the ----- station because of a police incident," there is some way to excuse it from the on time report?

Actually, this is probably the one way that a delay is actually reported. However, other delays, such heavy loads during the Taste, often find themselves listed as being on a "construction schedule", for example, and often buried, since many times, there is no construction. And with all the finger pointing between departments, legitimate delays are covered up so, for example, the mechanical department doesn't take the hit. Also, you will find that the contract carriers will show more delays than the "mother ship". I give you a guess why. I have seen reports that show what would be a normal amount falling under the contract carriers, but a big zero on the Metra end (this of course is something I probably shouldn't see, but it is always nice to be around an outlying fax machine from time to time). If it were to be brought up, it would probably be denied and insisted that record keeping is accurate. But, you can go to just about any midpoint station midday (and sometimes in rush hour too) and find trains 3-6 minutes late (5 is the max everywhere except the Electric where the max is 3 minutes). Most of the diesel lines have so much time on the back end of the schedule, you can be as late as 8 minutes late enroute and still be 3 minutes early at the end point.

[Busjack]

When I have ridden the MilwN midday (around 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 inbound), there is usually an announcement that because of construction up the line, the train will be 8 to 15 minutes late (depending on the train), the gps announcements confirm that, and it gets to CUS about 10 minutes behind schedule. I'm certainly not going up to Fox Lake to verify that, and I suppose that you are now saying it could be phantom.

[trainman8119]

When I have ridden the MilwN midday (around 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 inbound), there is usually an announcement that because of construction up the line, the train will be 8 to 15 minutes late (depending on the train), the gps announcements confirm that, and it gets to CUS about 10 minutes behind schedule. I'm certainly not going up to Fox Lake to verify that, and I suppose that you are now saying it could be phantom.

It is possible there is track work someplace that could possibly cause a 10-15 minute delay (although sometimes, I don't know why). There is as much track work in the summer as there is construction on

the highways (so much for no $$ huh !). My point is that many times things are written off as "construction

schedule" even though there may be no impact on that particular train or no construction at all. It is a very

convienent excuse that becomes "acceptable".

[Busjack]

Perusing RTAMS, there is an entry for Rail Ridership by Branch, which breaks it down a little more, but only on a monthly basis. You can use the pull downs for other ways Metra analyzes this.