Amtrak Expansion Plan

[ExCon90]

Could suitable facilities be provided at tolerable cost for storing and servicing at Cleveland? I have the impression that all that's there now is one platform at one track, and whatever arrives needs to leave pretty quickly. Since the Capitol covers the distance in just under three hours I believe there would have to be at least four trips a day in each direction in order to provide a viable service, the last trip leaving well after 5 pm as fallback for meetings that run over--otherwise potential passengers will drive.

[Rockingham Racer]

Eastbound trains terminating at Cleveland could probably continue to Collinwood Yard, with some arrangement from NS--of course.

[Gilbert B Norman]

I think what need to be accepted is the immediate "down and dirty" corridor expansion at hand is NO-Mobile.

Would it represent the highest likely "yield"? Probably not; Angels-Meadows surely has it beat by any measure.

But it appears that NO-Mobile would be relatively attainable. First, it's operable from an existing base, where crew is already located (so you have to hire more, but the infrastructure to support that hiring is already there). There is already means to deadhead cars cars to "heavier" repair locations.

The opposition surmounted by AL Gov Ivey and by the Port of Mobile would seem "negotiable". Once again, not saying this is the strongest "emerging Corridor", but the most immediately reasonable and practical to achieve.

[mtuandrew]

Could suitable facilities be provided at tolerable cost for storing and servicing at Cleveland? I have the impression that all that's there now is one platform at one track, and whatever arrives needs to leave pretty quickly. Since the Capitol covers the distance in just under three hours I believe there would have to be at least four trips a day in each direction in order to provide a viable service, the last trip leaving well after 5 pm as fallback for meetings that run over--otherwise potential passengers will drive.

Eastbound trains terminating at Cleveland could probably continue to Collinwood Yard, with some arrangement from NS--of course.

Cleveland station is located on an odd section of track that used to be part of the NYC Water Level mainline, but is now a little-used connector between the CSX and NS-owned freight mains. Amtrak could very well install ground power and arrange for diesel deliveries, and neither road would have much reason to complain (though they might ask Amtrak or the rail authority to buy it.)

[lordsigma12345]

I am sure one of the next things we will hear is a plan for the Sunset Limited route. The current route is one of the least useful routes in the system. What I would do with it is:

- Eliminate the Sunset Limited East of San Antonio.
- Extend the Texas Eagle from San Antonio to Los Angeles daily or run a truncated Sunset Limited San Antonio - LA.
- Look into corridor service between LA and Phoenix.
- Look into San Antonio - Houston corridor service - part of which could or could not include a single daily through train to NOL to replace the Sunset East.

[prokowave]

I am sure one of the next things we will hear is a plan for the Sunset Limited route. The current route is one of the least useful routes in the system. What I would do with it is:

- Eliminate the Sunset Limited East of San Antonio.
- Extend the Texas Eagle from San Antonio to Los Angeles daily or run a truncated Sunset Limited San Antonio - LA.
- Look into corridor service between LA and Phoenix.
- Look into San Antonio - Houston corridor service - part of which could or could not include a single daily through train to NOL to replace the Sunset East.

Why would Amtrak discontinue the densest part of the route and keep a long segment that is one of the least populated and most expensive to run? If anything SAT-NOL is one of the ripest corridors for expansion, with Houston, Beaumont, Lake Charles, and Lafayette in the middle and potential connections through NOL to Chicago, New York and Mobile.

Now there was a plan a while back to extend the Eagle to L.A. and make the Sunset daily. It showed that there could be a dramatic decrease in subsidy per passenger due to the attraction of daily service and savings due to crewing improvements.

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

I am sure one of the next things we will hear is a plan for the Sunset Limited route. The current route is one of the least useful routes in the system. What I would do with it is:

- Eliminate the Sunset Limited East of San Antonio.
- Extend the Texas Eagle from San Antonio to Los Angeles daily or run a truncated Sunset Limited San Antonio - LA.
- Look into corridor service between LA and Phoenix.
- Look into San Antonio - Houston corridor service - part of which could or could not include a single daily through train to NOL to replace the Sunset East.

Why would Amtrak discontinue the densest part of the route and keep a long segment that is one of the least populated and most expensive to run? If anything SAT-NOL is one of the ripest corridors for expansion, with Houston, Beaumont, Lake Charles, and Lafayette in the middle and potential connections through NOL to Chicago, New York and Mobile.

Now there was a plan a while back to extend the Eagle to L.A. and make the Sunset daily. It showed that there could be a dramatic decrease in subsidy per passenger due to the attraction of daily service and savings due to crewing improvements.

You can also expand the Crescent from NOL to SAS to replace the SL over that route. If you were to also extend the CONO to ORL to give the Gulf Coast service, you can close the service facilities in New Orleans as there would be no trains that terminate in NOL anymore.

[gokeefe]

I think what need to be accepted is the immediate "down and dirty" corridor expansion at hand is NO-Mobile.

There may be Virginia-North Carolina options that could happen in the near future as well. Additional service between Charlotte and Richmond would be relatively easy to implement.

[mtuandrew]

There may be Virginia-North Carolina options that could happen in the near future as well. Additional service between Charlotte and Richmond would be relatively easy to implement.

I wouldn’t look for the S-Line to be fully rebuilt anytime this decade, certainly not to passenger standards. Unless you’re talking about an additional Carolinian on the current route, WAS-CLT via LYH is a lot more likely than WAS-CLT via RGH.

I think what need to be accepted is the immediate "down and dirty" corridor expansion at hand is NO-Mobile.

Would it represent the highest likely "yield"? Probably not; Angels-Meadows surely has it beat by any measure.

I’m not sure whether this would generate any interest with the respective states (enough to pay off UP), but Phoenix-Tucson-El Paso seems a potential winner.

[eolesen]

PHX-TUS, maybe as commuter service, but ELP? I lived in TUS for years, and there's no logical business or even cultural connection between ELP and Arizona unless you consider the DEA and other government agency travel...

[mtuandrew]

Those trainsets are literally the future rolling by and I strongly suspect by the time they retire from service that Amtrak will be operating significantly more electrified territory than they do today.

Bold prediction! What lines do you suggest we will see Acela on?

[Greg Moore]

I know there's a lot of resistance (no pun intended) but I can see three:
1) CT-Valley - CT and MA seem willing to spend money, and the frequency is getting up there. If this happens, it can allow some trains to run to Springfield instead of Boston, meaning no train change in New Haven.
2) NYP-ALB - I'm slowly seeing more signs (i.e. outside just railroad.net) of folks promoting this. The biggest obstacle besides money, honestly seems to be the sunk cost of the 3rd rail to Poughkeepsie. I only see this happening if a TON of money is tossed in all at once to convert MNRR over, or an FRA waiver is granted to allow both.
3) Virginia - same as CT Valley, frequency is increasing and the state is willing to spend money.

I'm leaving off California or Texas because all their efforts at HSR/Electrification appear to be 3rd party.

[gokeefe]

Those trainsets are literally the future rolling by and I strongly suspect by the time they retire from service that Amtrak will be operating significantly more electrified territory than they do today.

Bold prediction! What lines do you suggest we will see Acela on?

I'm in agreement with Greg on this. NYP-ALB, NHV-SPG, WAS-RVR (eventually RGH).

Auto Train will not be a concern because I think Virginia would only put wire on their side of the corridor. Kind of an "out there" thought but if there was ever going to be a "mixed-mixed" corridor (mixed pax and freight, mixed power) the RF&P is probably it. I know there are other parts of the NEC where this occurs for a few miles here and there ...

Pretty sure LOR is on the side of the corridor that CSX is keeping.

Tough to say which one would happen first. Given ownership issues of the three it's probably NHV-SPG. The other two are a tossup. The Virginia and New York projects make for interesting candidates for RRIF loans because of the potential passenger volumes and revenues that would support the investment.

Amtrak is really kicking it in to growth mode right now. Even if the Gulf Coast service proposal fails I think they are going to make inroads elsewhere and fairly rapidly at that

[lordsigma12345]

Only problem with NHV-SPG is CT’s current money difficulties. Need to finish the double tracking and fix the Warehouse Point CT River bridge before we start talking about electrification but even those could be a while off.

[rcthompson04]

The easiest place to expand “high speed” trains eta in the short term is the Keystone Service. All the “express” stations except Middletown have been converted to high level platforms and Middletown is in the process of having that done now. Ardmore is under construction for high level platforms and Coatesville, Downingtown and Parkesburg are in various stages of serious planning for high level platforms.