Railroad Forums 

  • Amtrak in Virginia updates (and other transportation)

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1586977  by Greg Moore
 
Ayup. I've argued a "daytime" Crescent would make a lot of sense and leverage better use of the stations.
Problem is, CSX HATES the fact that Amtrak ties up their main there for so long while loading/unloading.
 #1587022  by west point
 
Greg Moore wrote: Wed Dec 15, 2021 2:32 pm Ayup. I've argued a "daytime" Crescent would make a lot of sense and leverage better use of the stations.
Problem is, CSX HATES the fact that Amtrak ties up their main there for so long while loading/unloading.
Somewhere in all the VA plans there are settings for bypass tracks for CSX at Richmond RVR
 #1587033  by MattW
 
Greg Moore wrote: Wed Dec 15, 2021 2:32 pm Ayup. I've argued a "daytime" Crescent would make a lot of sense and leverage better use of the stations.
Problem is, CSX HATES the fact that Amtrak ties up their main there for so long while loading/unloading.
CSX hates it where? Alexandria?
 #1587047  by Greg Moore
 
No, the Atlanta station. I forget the exact rules, but basically, even though there's a 2nd track, CSX can't use it when a train is approaching, in, or leaving the station, so there's like an hour window when the Crescent is in Atlanta where they have to hold their trains or otherwise schedule them differently.

Adding a 2nd Amtrak train to the mix would not be welcome by them as it would tie up their main through there even longer. (now if you could guarantee that the NB and SB trains arrived and departed within say 20 minutes of each other, they might be more amicable, but nothing coming out of New Orleans will be on schedule at this point!)
 #1587050  by Bob Roberts
 
Greg Moore wrote: Thu Dec 16, 2021 11:36 am No, the Atlanta station. I forget the exact rules, but basically, even though there's a 2nd track, CSX can't use it when a train is approaching, in, or leaving the station, so there's like an hour window when the Crescent is in Atlanta where they have to hold their trains or otherwise schedule them differently.

Adding a 2nd Amtrak train to the mix would not be welcome by them as it would tie up their main through there even longer. (now if you could guarantee that the NB and SB trains arrived and departed within say 20 minutes of each other, they might be more amicable, but nothing coming out of New Orleans will be on schedule at this point!)
Think you mean NS in Atlanta.
 #1587056  by Greg Moore
 
Bob Roberts wrote: Thu Dec 16, 2021 11:42 am
Greg Moore wrote: Thu Dec 16, 2021 11:36 am No, the Atlanta station. I forget the exact rules, but basically, even though there's a 2nd track, CSX can't use it when a train is approaching, in, or leaving the station, so there's like an hour window when the Crescent is in Atlanta where they have to hold their trains or otherwise schedule them differently.

Adding a 2nd Amtrak train to the mix would not be welcome by them as it would tie up their main through there even longer. (now if you could guarantee that the NB and SB trains arrived and departed within say 20 minutes of each other, they might be more amicable, but nothing coming out of New Orleans will be on schedule at this point!)
Think you mean NS in Atlanta.
Hmm, you may be right. For some reason I was thinking it was still CSX until west of Atlanta. My mistake.
 #1587171  by STrRedWolf
 
Considering where Atlanta's station *is* and how "easily" it's accessed (read: it's not), I'm more tempted to move the station to Brookhaven-Oglethorpe in Atlanta and do a four-track station there... where there is *ROOM* to do it.
 #1587243  by west point
 
STrRedWolf wrote: Fri Dec 17, 2021 11:00 am Considering where Atlanta's station *is* and how "easily" it's accessed (read: it's not), I'm more tempted to move the station to Brookhaven-Oglethorpe in Atlanta and do a four-track station there... where there is *ROOM* to do it.
Yes, that would be a better location but IMHO another station would be needed somewhere near Austell. That way it would serve the people of Cobb County and surrounding areas. It would also serve the proposed regional trains. However, no connections to ATL airport except by a 30-minute MARTA ride to Brookhaven. Unless also an airport station which is being proposed by the HSR line?
 #1587275  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Meanwhile down in Atlanta, how about a station at Motors Industrial Way and the SRY? That's a "car dealer's alley". readily accessible from The Perimeter @ Exit 31 (GA 141; one of the many "Peachtrees" down there).

Now so far as another station in Cobb County. Sure, the county is up and coming, and affluent. But they consistently have shown that "the only good passenger rail is no passenger rail".
 #1587277  by Alex M
 
Instead of corridor trains originating/terminating in Atlanta, I recall on the ConnectUS map Amtrak put out it showed these proposed trains ending in Birmingham. If they have the space to turn and service trains and add/drop cars, why fool with Atlanta as a terminating point other than a larger and more convenient facility which would be more economical than larger and more costly layout.
 #1587799  by hxa
 
So this is how they actually attempted to "improve" the service:

Last year, CSX filed an application to the FRA, requesting the speed enforcement functionality of the cab signal system (CSS) to be removed on the RF&P:

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2020-0084-0003

While the application's yet to be approved, they filed a new one yesterday. Now they seek to remove the entire CSS, not just the speed enforcement part:

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0111-0001

What they want to do is going with standard I-ETMS with wayside signals and without cab signals (quite the opposite of what's being done along the NEC) on the RF&P. Meanwhile, many of the cut-sections will be removed, which will effectively lengthen some signal blocks. And they claim that this will lead to increased capacity, improved safety and shortened project duration.
 #1588076  by Alphaboi
 
Alex M wrote:Instead of corridor trains originating/terminating in Atlanta, I recall on the ConnectUS map Amtrak put out it showed these proposed trains ending in Birmingham. If they have the space to turn and service trains and add/drop cars, why fool with Atlanta as a terminating point other than a larger and more convenient facility which would be more economical than larger and more costly layout.
I think Amtrak aiming for all new equipment to be bidirectional so they don't have to turn trains.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

 #1588453  by KTHW
 
Virginia recently posted detailed future track diagrams of the RF&P as part of their "Transforming Rail in VA" initiative. The document covers LE interlocking all the way down to where the S line diverges south of Petersburg VA. Below are 10 interesting things I found in the documents, I tried to reference the pages that I found the info on. Link here: https://transformingrailva.com/wp-conte ... on-CRA.pdf
  • 1. Tracks will be numbered 2,3,4,5 from LE to Crystal City station, 0,1,2,3 from CC to AF, and then 1,2,3,4 from AF south. No idea why they decided to do this.
    2. Virginia takes ownership of the yard tracks south of AF interlocking, giving the state a place to short turn VRE trains between ALX and WAS, and MARC trains. They also own the "Horn Track" connecting to the NS tracks. (Pages 17-20)
    3. All stations have at least two tracks with platform access. Alexandria, Franconia-Springfield, Woodbridge, and Fredericksburg have three, and Quantico has four.
    4. Quantico, Fredericksburg, and Richmond Staples Mill are all complete rebuilds of the station waiting areas and platforms. RVR platforms will be moved to the East side of the ROW, can't tell if the existing platforms will stay in place for LD trains.
    5. The Occoquan River, Neabsco, Powells, Quantico creeks, and the Rappahannock River all get new two track bridges, and it looks like the existing single track bridge over Quantico creek will be rebuilt as a new double track bridge.
    6. Passenger tracks are moved to the East of Acca Yard to eliminate conflicts with CSX trains through the yard. Seems like the bypass will end up just helping freights in the long run. (Pages 219-224)
    7. The VA ROW looks like it actually ends just short of Richmond Main St Station, and only picks up again when they get to Bellwood Yard. Doesn't look like an additional James River crossing or more than two platform tracks at RVM are in the cards. (Pages 230-235)
    8. Don't see any new layover tracks in the Bellwood Yard to turn Amtrak trains, as the state has eluded to. Maybe they will just use CSX tracks for this. (Pages 245-250)
    9. The Franconia-Springfield bypass (Page 34) is probably one of the more cost effective decisions the state has made. It saves them from building a second platform for all stations south of it, and 100% separates passenger and freight movements. I would hope they do the same on the southern end of the ROW when they diverge to the S Line. (Page 284)
    10. In the end it looks like the whole RF&P will be double tracked for passenger trains and double tracked for freight. I expect to see some passenger trains using CSX rails from time to time, or when stopping at stations with three+ tracks. However, I don't expect to see CSX trains using state owned tracks.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8