Railroad Forums 

  • TEX Rail (Fort Worth - DFW Airport Commuter Rail)

  • General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.
General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1

 #1487011  by electricron
 
mtuandrew wrote:
NIMBYkiller wrote:Thank you. So what prevents others from using these? I'm guessing whatever waivers would be on a case by case basis?
Nothing prevents their use. Any FRA Alternate Compliance equipment gets the same inspections as a piece of FRA Standard Compliance rolling stock, and they are likewise certified as a class rather than by individual waiver - no time separation or grade separation necessary. The only difference is that the Alternate Compliance rolling stock uses different technology to prevent bodily injury, so the overall compression strength is different. Most American railroads haven’t ordered it yet because they’re more familiar with traditional FRA equipment, because few Alternate Compliance vehicles are now available in America and certified by the FRA, and because the alternate refs were drafted and approved within the last couple of years.
I would like to add Stadler worked with the FRA over many years to not only get three of their trains alternate certified; GTW, FLIRT, and KISS type trains; they also helped the FRA write the alternate compliance regulations. So far, no other train manufacturer has taken the time (and spent the money) to do so.
For what it is worth, Stadler's earliest GTWs; the NJT Riverline trains, will never qualify for alternate compliance, the next GTWs sold to CapMetro were introduced before the alternate compliance regulations were made, so they rely upon time separations too. But here's the catch, now that the alternate compliance regulations are in effect, CapMetro is making just a few changes to their first GTWs to make them alternate compliant, and have submitted new requests for certifying them as alternate compliant, so they can drop their time separation waiver. DCTA GTWs and eBART GTWs are already alternate certified. TexRail FLIRTs and Caltrain KISS trains will be alternate certified too.

Even so, some freight railroad companies don't want passenger trains on their tracks at all, and prefer future passenger trains run on dedicated tracks, at least not on their tracks, whether or not they meet full or alternate FRA compliance. Some commuter passenger train operators have bought the existing corridors (Railrunner in NM), bought half the existing corridor (Frontrunner in UT), or bought land immediately adjacent to the existing corridor (A-Line in CO). That's not an all inclusive list, but shows a trend nationally. The only recent new commuter rail service I'm aware of where they run sharing existing freight tracks still owned by the freight railroad company is the Northstar in MN.
 #1487020  by electricron
 
Backshophoss wrote:From what I have heard,Front runner has it's own ROW South of Salt Lake City to Provo ,following the UP(DRGW) ROW.
After they bought half the width of the existing UP ROW.
http://utahrails.net/up/up-in-ut-1996-today.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Pay close attention to the September 20, 2002 entries.
A ceremony was held on the steps of the state capital, for the signing of the $185 million check to Union Pacific.

Union Pacific and Utah Transit Authority applied to the federal Surface Transportation Board on January 28, 2002, and the STB approved on May 22, 2002, the sale by Union Pacific of the following properties to Utah Transit Authority, for use as part of a commuter rail project:

Total of 62.77 miles
Salt Lake Subdivision: milepost 754.31 in Bountiful, to milepost 778.00 in Ogden (former D&RGW mainline)
Salt Lake Subdivision: 20 to 35-foot portion of right of way from milepost 782.48 in Salt Lake City, to milepost 818.05 in Ogden (adjacent to UP mainline)
Provo Industrial Lead: milepost P-775.23 at Point of the Mountain, to milepost P-762.00 at Hardy (UP mainline)
Provo Subdivision: 20 to 35-foot portion of right of way from milepost 705.71 at Lakota Junction, to milepost 729.29 near Riverton, and from milepost 729.50 near Riverton to milepost 745.50 in Salt Lake City (adjacent to former D&RGW mainline).
Sharp Subdivision: milepost P-752.41 in Provo, to milepost P-757.25 at Lakota Junction (UP mainline)
Sharp Subdivision: 20 to 35-foot portion of right of way from milepost 745.82 in Spanish Fork, to milepost P-749.99 in Provo, and from milepost P-750.81 in Provo to milepost P-752.41 in Provo (adjacent to UP mainline)
Tintic Industrial Lead: from milepost 0.00 in Springville, to milepost 13.06 in Payson (former D&RGW Tintic Branch)
Sugar House Spur: from milepost 0.00 at Roper, to milepost 2.74 in Sugar House (former D&RGW Sugar House Branch)
Bingham Industrial Lead: from milepost 6.60 at Bagley, to milepost 11.81 (former D&RGW Bingham Branch)
Bingham Industrial Lead: 20 to 35-foot portion of right of way from milepost 0.00 to milepost 6.60 (former D&RGW Bingham Branch)
Consummation of sale to occur on or about May 30, 2002.
UTA is acquiring tracks for future passenger operations, and does not intend to conduct freight operations.
 #1495551  by Jeff Smith
 
Debut ride: DallasNews.com: Tarrant County's TEXRail makes maiden voyage to DFW Airport
FORT WORTH — It was fitting that the tickets were golden. The celebratory color marked the inaugural ride Monday morning of TEXRail, the billion-dollar, 27-mile commuter rail line connecting Fort Worth, North Richland Hills, Grapevine and DFW International Airport.

The sleek silver and blue of the TEXRail set against a downtown skyline as Trinity Metro, its partners and elected officials celebrated the completion of the five-year project.
...
At his city's Main Street station, another milestone was noted as Grapevine Mayor William D. Tate boarded and pointed out that 50 years had passed since passenger trains had rolled through his city. Tate spearheaded the city's sales tax commitment to help make TEXRail happen, but that was in 2006.
...
With a smooth, quiet and technologically advanced ride now in place, the remaining burden of proof falls to TEXRail customers. Will it achieve ridership of 8,000 a day by the end of 2019 and 14,000 within a few years, as Trinity Metro predicts?
...
 #1496113  by Jeff Smith
 
Never mind: https://www.progressiverailroading.com/ ... nce--56440" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TEXRail launch on hold pending full FRA clearance

Issue with Stadler MU's?
TEXRail commuter-rail service did not begin in Fort Worth, Texas, as planned on Jan. 5 because of the federal government shutdown, Trinity Metro announced.

The agency has been unable to get clearance from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to operate the entire 27-mile corridor, agency officials said in an emailed alert.

"We will announce the start of passenger service as soon as we obtain full clearance from the FRA to operate the entire railroad," they said.
 #1496125  by RRspatch
 
TEXrail has received FRA approval and will now start service on Thursday January 10th.

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/traf ... 39975.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Schedules are here -

https://ridetrinitymetro.org/texrail/schedules/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 #1496161  by eolesen
 
Nice. Direct service from both downtown Dallas and Fort Worth to DFW is a huge advancement.

Meanwhile, neither HOU or IAH have any meaningful public transit option aside from a local stop-ever-two-minutes bus.