If you could restore a defunct Amtrak route

[gokeefe]

Thanks for that post. That was very informative. I had never realized that part of the constriction on the Shore Line wasn't just the draw bridges but the exceptionally slow opening and closing times. Very helpful. Also helpful to consider the availability of passing tracks (existing, planned, future and potential).

I do think of all the "defunct" routes that Amtrak is likely to restore that a Long Distance train originating from BOS is among the most likely (top ten if not top five).

Since this topic is about service restorations I think its worth listing (in no particular order) the trains that seem to be most likely to be restored based on the understanding I have derived from this conversation, Amtrak documents and other information openly available:

• Lone Star Chicago (or Kansas City) to San Antonio (with through car to Houston) via Wichita and Oklahoma City
• Broadway Limited New York Penn to Chicago via Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Cleveland
• Silver Meteor Boston South Station to Miami
• Gulfcoaster Orlando to New Orleans
• Silver Palm New York to Miami (via FEC)
• Northeast Regional from Bristol, Virginia (a route portion (Bristol-Lynchburg) that Amtrak chose not to continue as part of their startup)
• Northeast Regional Inland Corridor Service, New York Penn to Boston South Station via Springfield and Worcester

There are other services that are already scheduled or in the process of being restored. The Montrealer is the most obvious example and at this point is probably further along than virtually any other service restoration project. Everything else is mostly just proposals and ideas at this point to include my own of a restored State of Maine from New York Penn to Portland, Maine.

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

Yes. And the new Shoreline bridges like Thames lift and Niantic draw are similarly much zippier mechanisms than what they replaced. With the replacements widening the channels underneath to ease the boat speed restrictions when passing through, shortening the time the bridges have to stay open. Now it's just a matter of getting that last biggie that sets the ruling limit taken care of so the train schedules can take advantage of the improved efficiency at all those new Shoreline bridges.


Echo effect on the New Haven Line. Walk Bridge is #2 in openings, so the impending replacement of that span is going to do exactly the same: replace the old swing bridge with a MUCH faster and adjustable-height lift, and widen the channel (which tends to be most constrained under a swing vs. any other type) so the boats and barges can cruise instead of inch through. That is going to make a meaningful difference.

The rest of the New Haven Line replacement priorities are just a pick-'em of which is most likely to fail first, so they can't be all that selective on which one comes next. But when Cos Cob--the bridge that accounts for 50% of the total openings for all 5 movables--gets its replacement, that's when you'll actually see the bridge-related traffic limiter get lifted. As previously noted the yacht club upstream has a ridiculous density of moorings, but Cos Cob's bascule has a punitively narrow 60 ft. shipping channel and an old, slow mechanism. If that one gets replaced by a lift with twice the channel width like 150 ft. wide Thames lift, it'll really get those boats in and out fast. And most of the time won't have to be raised to more than partial height, making an already faster mechanism that much speedier.

Combo of a new Cos Cob and a new Walk basically removes the bridges as service limiters. Then Saga and Devon just fall in line...negligible impact on actual openings, only an aggravating factor to address because of how often they get stuck when they do have to open. With those problems solved, the New Haven Line's service limiter simply becomes the incredible traffic density on all 4 tracks. And the need to grade separate Shell Interlocking. Concerns, no doubt, but the breathing room afforded by faster, wider movable bridges and reliable state-of-repair is substantial enough to keep pace for at least the next 20 years of growth.

[Woody]

Re: Lynchburg Regional (ext. to Roanoke and Bristol)
Post by Balerion » Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:33 pm

Bristol gets $100,000 for study on extending passenger rail south from Roanoke

http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/a ... 87541.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A grant from the Appalachian Regional Commission nearly completes the funding ...
Last year, City Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding that seeks to enlist towns and cities along a proposed route ... city leaders have had preliminary conversations with officials in Knoxville and Chattanooga.

Grabbed this nice post by Balerion from another thread. It belongs in this one, too. The very informative story appears on the site of the Richmond Times-Dispatch, written by David McGee of the Bristol Herald Courier.

Skeptics hooted when I last talked up a (mostly) restored train Norfolk-Richmond-Lynchburg-Roanoke-Bristol-Knoxville-Chattanooga-ATL/Birmingham-Maintenance Facility. They reported bad tracks over and around many big hills. They consulted their old timetables and explained that a train would go sooo slow, why, it just wouldn't be worth it.

But I'd seen a couple of other mentions of the Memorandum of Understanding, signing up support down the line. It's gonna happen. It is happening, salami slice at a time. Lynchburg-Roanoke is the first slice. Or was the first Norfolk train the first slice? Roanoke-Bristol would be the thickest slice of work, thru areas with less dense population.

The route offers many city pairs that could develop quasi corridor service: Norfolk-Richmond, Richmond-Lynchburg/Roanoke, Richmond-Bristol, Richmond-Chattanooga, and Knoxville-Chattanooga. It would serve a swath of the country that badly lacks Amtrak trains now.

The main reason it will happen is because Virginia wants it to happen. Virginia has a track record. Nobody said 'soon' or 'cheap'. But it will happen.

Also, don't let CHI-Indy-Louisville-Frankfort-Lexington-Knoxville-Chattanooga-ATL take you by surprise. From that same article, the study is

about bringing Amtrak rail service from Roanoke to Bristol and possibly linking to cities in Tennessee, Georgia, and Kentucky. ... to work with Amtrak and the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation on a preliminary effort looking at the ridership piece. Amtrak has agreed to do that ... drafted a scope of work provided to DRPT, they are reviewing it and providing comment before sending the final scope of work for that piece to Amtrak.”

(Also, too, note the quasi-corridor that would be created from two overlapping LD trains Knoxville-Chattanooga-ATL. Using LD routes to initiate or build corridor service is a favorite fantasy of mine.)

Often folks will sneer at routes where politics is an obvious factor. Let's make this very clear: 2 Senators from Tennessee, 2 more Senators from Georgia or Alabama, depending on where the train goes to get maintenance, maybe 2 more Senators from Kentucky, and 8 or 10 House Members in districts along the way. Amtrak needs to get more supporters in Congress, or at the least, to get some of the haters to shut up. Here's a great route to make new friends on Capitol Hill.

[gprimr1]

Los Angeles<->Las Vegas

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

I'd argue one of the biggest mistakes by Amtrak was to not at least continue LAX-Vegas after the Desert Wind was cut. That was way before the 750 mile rule was in place so Amtrak didn't need state funding to do it. Now they do and Desert Xpress is on the way. That's a huge market/tourist attraction Amtrak has lost.

[bostontrainguy]

The Niagara Rainbow! Seriously?

I would like to see Amtrak run a new "21st Century Limited" through southern Canada. The May 2016 issue of Trains has a great map of the area. Utilizing what will soon be mostly fast 110 mph tracks between Chicago - Detroit and New York - Buffalo, it would be the fastest Amtrak LD overnight train ever. A resurrected fast overnight New York City - Chicago streamliner avoiding all of the crazy congestion south of Lake Ontario.

NYP to Buffalo (Empire Route), Buffalo to Detroit via VIA/CN tracks, and Detroit to Chicago (Wolverine Route). Not only is the Chicago - New York potential appealing (lets all agree that the Lake Shore is no speedster), the poorly served NYP - Detroit market would have great potential.

I know the first thing people will say is that the border crossing will make this a non-starter, but a sealed train would probably make this possible. The train would be running through Canada in the middle of the night anyway.

[gokeefe]

Newsworthy:

Amtrak is seriously investigating the possibility of running daily service between Atlanta and Dallas. I had not seen news of this previously anywhere else.

Amtrak is considering someday running a daily train from Atlanta to Dallas.

Right now, to get to Texas from Atlanta by train, passengers have to go to New Orleans, then connect to a train that only runs three days a week, explained Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari.



“[The potential route] would give you a daily connection to Texas that would be faster than the current route, and more direct,” he said.

Magliari said Amtrak has been talking with people in East Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana for a long time about the route. Eventually, he said, Amtrak hopes to do more research on it.

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

The Niagara Rainbow! Seriously?

I would like to see Amtrak run a new "21st Century Limited" through southern Canada. The May 2016 issue of Trains has a great map of the area. Utilizing what will soon be mostly fast 110 mph tracks between Chicago - Detroit and New York - Buffalo, it would be the fastest Amtrak LD overnight train ever. A resurrected fast overnight New York City - Chicago streamliner avoiding all of the crazy congestion south of Lake Ontario.

NYP to Buffalo (Empire Route), Buffalo to Detroit via VIA/CN tracks, and Detroit to Chicago (Wolverine Route). Not only is the Chicago - New York potential appealing (lets all agree that the Lake Shore is no speedster), the poorly served NYP - Detroit market would have great potential.

I know the first thing people will say is that the border crossing will make this a non-starter, but a sealed train would probably make this possible. The train would be running through Canada in the middle of the night anyway.

Might as well go from Detroit to Buffalo via Toledo and Cleveland to avoid the border issues.

[David Benton]

Newsworthy:

Amtrak is seriously investigating the possibility of running daily service between Atlanta and Dallas. I had not seen news of this previously anywhere else.

Amtrak is considering someday running a daily train from Atlanta to Dallas.

Right now, to get to Texas from Atlanta by train, passengers have to go to New Orleans, then connect to a train that only runs three days a week, explained Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari.



“[The potential route] would give you a daily connection to Texas that would be faster than the current route, and more direct,” he said.

Magliari said Amtrak has been talking with people in East Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana for a long time about the route. Eventually, he said, Amtrak hopes to do more research on it.

I would think this would be the route through Shreveport, first mooted under Warrington.

[GWoodle]

I'd like to see Amtrak combine some Midwest runs to allow 1 seat schedules. Chicago-St Louis-Kansas City Ann Rutledge. Milwaukee-Chicago-St Louis. Milwaukee-Chicago-Detroit. Milwaukee-Chicago-Memphis. Indianapolis -Chicago-Minnesota.

The idea is to not dwell very long in Chicago more than 10 minutes.

[mtuandrew]

Oh hell no are you saddling us with the Hoosier!

CHI-STL-KCY makes sense to me: all-UP routing, big travel market between the three which probably wouldn't entirely turn over at STL. The others don't make as much sense - the problem is with the handoff between railroads at Chicago. CP to/from NS, UP, and CN sounds like a disaster, let alone the pairing of the reasonably fast & reliable CP to MSP and the hideous CSX route to IND.

Maybe try push-pull on the Illinois BNSF routes first.

[Gilbert B Norman]

Youngsters, lest we forget, what Mr. Woodle has proposed is a "been there done that". Through Chicago service to St. Louis started with a November 1971 timetable; later added to Detroit.

Finally, why it is necessary to have station (dwell in newspeak) time be what it is at major stops would be astounding to a European over here. At major stops such as Innsbruck, Salzburg, and Vienna, the OBB Rail Jet (premium service) "alights 'em, boards 'em, and we're gone" - two minutes max.

[bostontrainguy]

Might as well go from Detroit to Buffalo via Toledo and Cleveland to avoid the border issues.

Part of making this a shorter overnight journey is eliminating the freight congestion through that area. This idea would have the train on as much high-speed passenger rail as possible. Also the Niagara Rainbow did that distance in under 5 hours with customs stops. The Lake Shore/bus combo now takes about 7 hours and an all rail trip would be even longer probably.

[Ridgefielder]

Another thought. When the Conn river bridge is replace it would be prudent to at least build the piers for another future 2 track bridge. Underwater pier work at each location would only require a bit more work whereas later work will require more work. From what others have posted commuter traffic on the NH - BOS is going to increase and will soon be in the same position that MARC is having into WASH on its 2 track areas.

Interestingly, that's what the NYNH&H did when the current bridge was built way back in 1907. The abutments, piers and approach fills all have room for four tracks.

Might as well go from Detroit to Buffalo via Toledo and Cleveland to avoid the border issues.

It's ~250 miles from Buffalo to Detroit via Hamilton and London, ON, vs ~365 via Cleveland and Toledo. That's enough of a saving to offset any border issues. North of the lake was the old New York Central routing for NY-Detroit-Chicago service.

Potentially a bigger issue is that neither the current Detroit nor the current Windsor stations are on the old Michigan Central-Canada Southern route via the Detroit River Tunnel, although I suppose you could always just skip downtown and have Dearborn as your "Detroit" stop on this service. It's about the same distance from downtown Detroit as Buffalo-Depew is from downtown Buffalo.

[mtuandrew]

Potentially a bigger issue is that neither the current Detroit nor the current Windsor stations are on the old Michigan Central-Canada Southern route via the Detroit River Tunnel, although I suppose you could always just skip downtown and have Dearborn as your "Detroit" stop on this service. It's about the same distance from downtown Detroit as Buffalo-Depew is from downtown Buffalo.

It's a quick backing move (all things considered) to DET, so I'd personally keep it. Maybe you'd need a bus connection from Windsor VIA to another point, whether cross-border to DET or a platform in southern Windsor. (That's if we aren't running a new Rainbow sealed through Canada, that is.)

Otherwise, there's always the northern CN route through Port Huron, thence either west through Lansing or southwest through Detroit. It's fast in Canada at least, though I have a feeling that the route southwest from Port Huron to Detroit is less than 60 mph max right now.