Amtrak Heartland Flyer Discussion and Possible Extension

Now that the Heartland Flyer extension into Kansas is politically dead, at least for a few more years, maybe Oklahoma can push through the extension to Tulsa it has always wanted. At least Oklahoma has purchased an abandoned rail corridor, controls a turnpike it could use, and their studies have been continuing.

If Oklahoma is friendly to passenger service right now...

Make it so, Number One


???
Does contracting with Amtrak for Thruway service require a state subsidy? If yes, then forget kansas.

electricron wrote:Now that the Heartland Flyer extension into Kansas is politically dead, at least for a few more years, maybe Oklahoma can push through the extension to Tulsa it has always wanted. At least Oklahoma has purchased an abandoned rail corridor, controls a turnpike it could use, and their studies have been continuing.

Are you talking about the ex-Frisco route between OKC and Tulsa? While the state owns it, I don't think it's abandoned (doesn't the Stillwater Central(or something like that) operate the trackage?
While OK has supported the HF, I don't see them putting the many millions it would take to bring the OKC-Tulsa route up to passenger standards. The best hope for Tulsa service is via BNSF to St. Louis or via KCS and BNSF/UP to Kansas City. Sorry if this is getting too far off-topic

John_Perkowski wrote:So, to the Northern Flyer Alliance's dreams of extending the Heartland Flyer, I simply offer the drumhead on the back of the Citys of Everywhere departing LA and Chicago April 30, 1971

May I add this linked photo to that submitted by Col. Perkowski?:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25005098@N03/5680655126/

This is how the "real deal" looked on 103 departing Chi A-Day Eve; I was aboard Chi-Savanna for my final UP steak and half-bottle of Cabernet and ride over my MILW's D&I Division.

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/p ... p?id=30974

E-Ticketing for those of you on the Flyer.

Earlier this week, Amtrak added the Heartland Flyer service, which operates daily in Oklahoma and Texas, to its eTicketing service.

The service, which Amtrak has been rolling out in stages on some routes, enables passengers to make reservations and print their tickets electronically from their home or office, Amtrak officials said in a prepared statement. The new system also enables smartphone users to present their eTicket to the train conductor by opening the eTicket document from their e-mail to display the barcode for scanning.

Station Aficionado wrote:Are you talking about the ex-Frisco route between OKC and Tulsa? While the state owns it, I don't think it's abandoned (doesn't the Stillwater Central(or something like that) operate the trackage?
While OK has supported the HF, I don't see them putting the many millions it would take to bring the OKC-Tulsa route up to passenger standards. The best hope for Tulsa service is via BNSF to St. Louis or via KCS and BNSF/UP to Kansas City. Sorry if this is getting too far off-topic

How much is too much money? The latest I've dread is that rail service could be introduced between OKC and Tulsa for around $50 Million.
Source: http://www.kjrh.com/dpp/news/progress-o ... il-service
Chairman Rick Wescott says a private carrier could get the project done in just six months and at a much lower cost than earlier estimates. "Our initial figures were it would cost $120 to $150 million to have the job completed. But we talked to a private carrier who is in the business of doing this, and they say they can repair the track, bring it up to passenger standard," Westcott said. "And they will provide the service and provide the trains for a state investment of only $50 million."
The state of Oklahoma owns the rail way from Oklahoma City to Sapulpa. But Burlington Northern Santa fe Railroad owns the stretch of track from Sapulpa to Tulsa. Wescott had worried that only Amtrak would be allowed to use that corridor. But he says after talking with company representatives at Thursday's meeting, that's no longer the case.
In December the state task force will present it's plan to the Governor and lawmakers. It will be up to them to create legislation to fund the Eastern Flyer.

It's 105+ highway miles between OKC and Tulsa, rail miles should be slightly more. That's less than $2 Million/mile - including buying or leasing the rolling stock.

Is the state in talks with Herzog to Build/Run this service??
Herzog seems to "play nice" with BNSF.

I'm not sure who the private carrier is. It could be Herzzog, it could be Iowa Pacific, and it could be someone else.
Herzog is more into managing commuter rail operations - not sure where they plan to get railcars from. Could it be the TRE's old RDCs?
Iowa Pacific is more into running tourist train operations - they have plenty of heritage single and double level coaches, and full dome cars they could use. They are familiar with maintaining tracks and equipment.

I suppose BNSF is familiar with both of the operators I've listed, and would trust them to operate safely over their tracks at both ends of this line in OKC and Tulsa. The new bridge in Tulsa over the Arkansas River can have a rail component added fairly cheaply to lessen impacts to BNSF's freight operations. Amtrak is already using the old Santa Fe depot in OKC, there's plenty of space at that station for more trains.

The only problem I foresee is where will the trains be serviced? Typical maintenance shops for even small commuter rail agencies costs can run up to $20 to $25 Million. That would be almost half of the projected $50 Million startup costs.

Another possibility for rolling stock would be the two free Talgo train sets in Wisconsin. They're already painted red and white, OU colors. I suppose they're available for leasing, if not up for sale.

Is this the document that suggests that Tulsa to OKC rail service could be started and operated for $50 million? If so, I suggest you read it carefully and you'll quickly realize that it's a naive piece of conjecture that isn't going to build very much real world railroad.

Iowa Pacific would be an extreme long shot. I currently work there and while the company is finishing up purchase and/or operating agreements for two railroads in Texas and California, they're just your standard steam train foamer fare. I've heard nothing about anything in Oklahoma.

I notice the Heartland Flyer is routed OKC-FTW. It raises the question in my mind: Why doesn't the train go all the way to San Antonio or at least get routed ten minutes east to Dallas?

Obviously this is a one-or-the-other situation, but I'm curious why the train terminates at Ft. Worth. An Austin/San Antonio extension has significant population and a Dallas extension over TRE property would be mighty convenient for people on the east side of the metroplex.

Unless something has changed, OK picks up most of the tab for this train and FTW was good enough for them. TX never offered additional funds for the extra distance.

That's not quite true. Oklahoma was the only state subsidizing the Flyer initially, but Texas subsidizes half now.

As for the original question, Fort Worth is the crew changeover location - not Dallas. They refuel both the Flyer and Eagle locomotives in Fort Worth. Amtrak regional offices are in Fort Worth too. BNSF's corporate headquarters, and dispatching is located in Fort Worth. The only time the Flyer goes to Dallas is Friday and Sunday on UT-OU weekend over the TRE tracks. UP doesn't want the Flyer on their tracks, and they would like to see the Eagle move to the TRE tracks as well between Dallas and Fort Worth. That's awaiting completion of some TRE track work, with the FWTA ante upping the insurance funds for Amtrak. Hopefully, the Texas Legislature will step in this session and give Amtrak some tort protection that the local transit agencies have, then the local transit agencies wouldn't have to pay this additional cost.

Texas is just now studying whether to subsidize corridor trains between various Texas cities, including Fort Worth to San Antonio. Then local funding will have to be found, the amount depends upon what type of train service is implemented. Any extension of the Flyer south of Fort Worth will require at least one additional train set. Any extension of the Flyer north of Oklahoma City will too. Amtrak doesn't have many spare Superliner coaches for expansion, all those in service today on the Flyer are refurbished and repaired Superliner wrecks paid for by Texas and Oklahoma (not literally but financially).

The problem that continues to haunt Superliner based corridor services is a lack of available Superliners. Any extensions or expansions basically requires ordering new Superliners. At $2 to $3 Million per car, a new train set is expensive to provide for a startup. And there aren't many, if any, wrecked Superliners left to repair cheaper rather than buying new.

Virginia has been lucky that they can tap NEC regional trains, extending them south of DC late in the day. It also saves Amtrak storage tracks in DC for overnight storage. It also saves Virginia the full expense of providing train sets.

There's service to Dallas(EB) via TRE from Ft Worth Mon-Sat,on Sun you can connect with the Eagle to get to Dallas.
TRE Dallas-Ft Worth (WB)service offers a better connection to the NB Flyer Mon-Sat, on Sun there's a long wait at
Ft Worth from the Eagle(1:25p till 5:25p)to the NB Flyer.

From what I'm reading ( a document dated 1/17/13) TX does not subsidize half of the Heartland Flyer. As I previously indicated, OK foots most of the bill (I did not say all) and they were fine with FTW when the service began. It would fall on TX to subsidize service to DAL.

As for the rest of your statement Electricron, I must assume this is why no one was interested in extending the service. UP rivals CSX in terms of friendliness towards passenger trains so I believe you must have hit the nail on the head.

Western OPs is not my bag, so I'll ask: Assuming the hosts are agreeable, how hard would it be to send a live train & crew FTW-DAL, discharge the pax and DH the train back to FTW for servicing? The next day, the crew can DH the equipment to DAL and originate the service there. From an operation standpoint, this is basically what is done with the Downeasters, so I don't see why this can not be done with the Flyer.