77 replies to this topic

[thully]

I think I'd concur with having a direct train from Michigan to the East Coast - whatever route it may take, though most likely via Toledo. I've taken the Toledo bus connection before - while it works, I'd much rather get on the train here in ARB rather than have to take a bus to Toledo first. If you went via the Wolverine's route to Dearborn, it may actually be even time wise with the LSL once they get the whole corridor up to 110mph.

If you really wanted to go the "when pigs fly" route, one could create a hypothetical LD train that starts in CHI, travels via the Wolverine's route to somewhere near Detroit, crosses the Detroit River, and then runs sealed through Canada until it crosses back over in BUF to go to NYP (using the same tracks as VIA for this segment). I know there used to be a route like this (the Niagara Rainbow), though I figure with the increase in security since 9/11 there's no way this would ever fly with U.S/Canadian Customs today.

In the same vein (though perhaps a bit less "when pigs fly"), I'd like to see a Chicago-Detroit-Toronto train via the Wolverine route and the VIA Corridor. Would essentially operate like the Maple Leaf and the old International - it would operate like a Wolverine in Michigan, but then would essentially become a VIA Corridor train in Windsor. This would be a much better option for going from Chicago (and points west) to Toronto rather than the long connection to the Maple Leaf in BUF or the Detroit-Windsor self-transfer (though you probably couldn't do same-day connections unless you made it an overnight train with sleepers, which would mean ugly boarding times in Michigan).

In a completely different area of the country, I have one more suggestion - an overnight train LAX-EMY via the Coast Starlight's route (though I'd have it extend south to SAN as well). Perhaps just make it a full-fledged second frequency of the Coast Starlight (maybe the Coast Twilight - Coast Daylight doesn't seem like a good name for this). Running overnight would definitely make Amtrak more attractive for this route - as it stands, your choices here are to burn a whole working day on the Coast Starlight (a great train for this, but not very practical time-wise) or take a convoluted combination of buses and trains that involves a similar all-day trip or connections in the middle of the night.

Oh, and extend the Coast Starlight to San Diego on the south end and Vancouver, BC on the north end as well.

Edited by thully, 05 July 2012 - 09:55 PM.

[johnny.menhennet]

I think I'd concur with having a direct train from Michigan to the East Coast - whatever route it may take, though most likely via Toledo. I've taken the Toledo bus connection before - while it works, I'd much rather get on the train here in ARB rather than have to take a bus to Toledo first. If you went via the Wolverine's route to Dearborn, it may actually be even time wise with the LSL once they get the whole corridor up to 110mph.

If you really wanted to go the "when pigs fly" route, one could create a hypothetical LD train that starts in CHI, travels via the Wolverine's route to somewhere near Detroit, crosses the Detroit River, and then runs sealed through Canada until it crosses back over in BUF to go to NYP (using the same tracks as VIA for this segment). I know there used to be a route like this (the Niagara Rainbow), though I figure with the increase in security since 9/11 there's no way this would ever fly with U.S/Canadian Customs today.

In the same vein (though perhaps a bit less "when pigs fly"), I'd like to see a Chicago-Detroit-Toronto train via the Wolverine route and the VIA Corridor. Would essentially operate like the Maple Leaf and the old International - it would operate like a Wolverine in Michigan, but then would essentially become a VIA Corridor train in Windsor. This would be a much better option for going from Chicago (and points west) to Toronto rather than the long connection to the Maple Leaf in BUF or the Detroit-Windsor self-transfer (though you probably couldn't do same-day connections unless you made it an overnight train with sleepers, which would mean ugly boarding times in Michigan).

In a completely different area of the country, I have one more suggestion - an overnight train LAX-EMY via the Coast Starlight's route (though I'd have it extend south to SAN as well). Perhaps just make it a full-fledged second frequency of the Coast Starlight (maybe the Coast Twilight - Coast Daylight doesn't seem like a good name for this). Running overnight would definitely make Amtrak more attractive for this route - as it stands, your choices here are to burn a whole working day on the Coast Starlight (a great train for this, but not very practical time-wise) or take a convoluted combination of buses and trains that involves a similar all-day trip or connections in the middle of the night.

Oh, and extend the Coast Starlight to San Diego on the south end and Vancouver, BC on the north end as well.

As much as I'd love to see San Diego with some LD service, the lack of a maintenance base means that all trains kind of have to terminate at LA. Vancouver on the other end is feasible, but not with the current CS schedule. With respect to the second frequency of the CS/overnight LA-Bay Area, what do you think about this? This is a proposed schedule of a train running as a second frequency that I posted in the Shasta Daylight thread.

"Since this is complete fantasy, I'm saying yes. But in all honesty I would want this as a third frequency on the route. I have a better proposal. You would have to add a stop on the CS route at RSV and push back some of the padding on the end of #5 to the end of the route. Have a train that leaves LAX at 11P, SJC at 9:30A, EMY at 11:00A, SAC at 1:00P, RSV at 1:30P, PDX at 5A, SEA at 8:30A, VAC at 12:30P. Southbound leave VAC at 6P, SEA at 10P, PDX at 1:30A, SAC at at 5:30P, EMY at 7:30P, SJC at 9:00P, LAX at 7:30A. Screws mid-Oregon and PDX, but hey. provides the SoCal-NorCal overnight and provides another frequency needed on the route north of SAC. It allows a no-transfer connection from anywhere south of Eugene to go straight to VAC "

[edding]

(1) Cincinnati-Columbus-Cleveland-Buffalo-Albany-NY, using the proposed "3C" route

Columbus is the largest metropolitan area in the US with no intercity rail service at all.

(2) Grand Rapids - Lansing - Detroit (Dearborn) - Toledo - Cleveland - Buffalo - Albany - NY

Apparently Detroit-NY is the route which Amtrak gets the single largest number of requests for by phone, out of the routes which simply do not exist by train.
Amtrak is apparently losing a lot of business when people hear that they have to take a bus from Detroit to Toledo.

I am biased by being in upstate NY; the variants which go Cleveland-Pittsburgh-Philadelphia-NY would presumably be just as good.

(3) Obviously, the Sunset Limited should return to downtown Phoenix. (And be daily.)
(4) Denver-Boulder-Ft. Collins-Cheyenne
(5) West Side of Vermont route: Burlington to Rutland extension of the Ethan Allen Express
(6) NY-Scranton-Binghamton-Cortland-Syracuse (yes, local bias again)
(7) Chicago-Madison-Minneapolis
(8) Minneapolis-Bismark, ND...

I'd use every single one of these routes. (That's why I haven't suggested anything in the horribly underserved southeast of the country; I wouldn't *use* those routes.) I think it is not a coincidence that every one of these has been proposed by one or another state or local group; they'd get used.

Oh, while we're dreaming...
(9) Mexico City - LA

Chi - DTW - Tor - NYC and at the same time restore the train LAX - PHX as long as it stops at Tempe. And while we're at it, let's have every single route mentioned in this thread.

[sitzplatz17]

Oh, while we're dreaming...
(9) Mexico City - LA

If customs is squeamish about Canadian border crossings... i can only imagine their thoughts on that routing!

[George Harris]

There's one train that I would like to see is a New Orleans to Cincinnati Ohio Train which goes from New Orleans to Cincinnati Ohio with stops at Bay St.Louis, MS, Gulfport, MS, Biloxi, MS, Pascagoula, MS, Mobile, Al all the way to Montgomery, AL, Birmingham, Al, Nashville, TN, Louisville, KY, And Cincinnati, OH. with a connection with the Cardinal.

Do we call this the Pan American or the Humming Bird? Which end gets the overnight? The north end or the south end? I would be inclined to go for a train that arrives in Mobile at a reasonable morning hour southbound and Nashville northbound. Do that and you can have some reasonable same day connections from/to points north of Louisville and Cincinatti. This si sounding like an approximation of the Pan American just before its death on A-day.

[BNSFboy]

I have a few in mind so I will start with my first choice of Kansas City - Denver
The route would follow existing Amtrak route of SWC from KC to Topeka, then switch to UP tracks to Denver. Stops would include Lawrence (home of Univ. of Kansas), Topeka (State Capital and Washburn University), Manhattan (home of Kansas State University), Salina (couple small colleges), Hays (Fort Hays State U.), Limon.

Because of the length, not sure if you need sleepers especially if you could run all in daylight. The east bound could be scheduled to leave Denver after the CZ arrived from the west, would make for a great option of travel from California.


The route could be an extention of the Missouri River Runner which connects Kansas City to St. Louis, and would give a good way to get to Colorado from KC for skiing or whatever.With all the traffic on I-70 KC to Denver, think this would be a valid option for travel.

And with that you can reroute the SWC south through Amarillo, so no towns in southern Kansas and Colorado will lose Amtrak service and Amarillo will get passenger train service again.
A win-win if you ask me

[Swadian Hardcore]

I have a few in mind so I will start with my first choice of Kansas City - Denver
The route would follow existing Amtrak route of SWC from KC to Topeka, then switch to UP tracks to Denver. Stops would include Lawrence (home of Univ. of Kansas), Topeka (State Capital and Washburn University), Manhattan (home of Kansas State University), Salina (couple small colleges), Hays (Fort Hays State U.), Limon.

Because of the length, not sure if you need sleepers especially if you could run all in daylight. The east bound could be scheduled to leave Denver after the CZ arrived from the west, would make for a great option of travel from California.


The route could be an extention of the Missouri River Runner which connects Kansas City to St. Louis, and would give a good way to get to Colorado from KC for skiing or whatever.With all the traffic on I-70 KC to Denver, think this would be a valid option for travel.

And with that you can reroute the SWC south through Amarillo, so no towns in southern Kansas and Colorado will lose Amtrak service and Amarillo will get passenger train service again.
A win-win if you ask me

Except that you lose service over the Raton Pass, AFAIK, and Albuquerque service needs to backtrack.

[johnny.menhennet]

I have a few in mind so I will start with my first choice of Kansas City - Denver
The route would follow existing Amtrak route of SWC from KC to Topeka, then switch to UP tracks to Denver. Stops would include Lawrence (home of Univ. of Kansas), Topeka (State Capital and Washburn University), Manhattan (home of Kansas State University), Salina (couple small colleges), Hays (Fort Hays State U.), Limon.

Because of the length, not sure if you need sleepers especially if you could run all in daylight. The east bound could be scheduled to leave Denver after the CZ arrived from the west, would make for a great option of travel from California.


The route could be an extention of the Missouri River Runner which connects Kansas City to St. Louis, and would give a good way to get to Colorado from KC for skiing or whatever.With all the traffic on I-70 KC to Denver, think this would be a valid option for travel.

And with that you can reroute the SWC south through Amarillo, so no towns in southern Kansas and Colorado will lose Amtrak service and Amarillo will get passenger train service again.
A win-win if you ask me

Except that you lose service over the Raton Pass, AFAIK, and Albuquerque service needs to backtrack.

AND that all of the cities and towns in Colorado and Kansas would LOSE service because it would run over UP tracks. UP/BNSF would not be pleasurable to deal with if you tell them a train is going onto the Joint Line. There would need to be new station stops constructed in North Lawrence and North Topeka as well since the there is no track connection between BNSF and UP here, unless you want to have to change directions twice. So really no win win for anybody at all, except a few people in Amarillo.

[Ocala Mike]

New York - Portland, ME direct, bypassing Boston via the old "State of Maine" route.

[Swadian Hardcore]

My ideal network modifications (intended to expand long distance service without reducing cost recovery)
- Restored Desert Wind and North Coast Limited- I believe both of these would be decently performing routes- Amtrak admits the NCL would be successful in its PRIIA studies. The Desert Wind connects Las Vegas to the national system, which is the most needed additional destination IMHO. Also, for much of the way from Chicago to Salt Lake City, the Cal Zephyr sells out. The added capacity of the wind here, whether it is a section of the Zephyr or its own train would help clear space on the Zephyr for long distance passengers.
- Expanded consists on western LD trains. From what I hear they would pay for themselves. Most notably the Chief, Zephyr and Builder.
- Daily service systemwide. (Sunset and Cardinal) Cardinal can easily be accommodated by the new viewliner order. Perhaps Florida service would have been more successful had it been daily.
- New Superliner order to cover these. (I think it is obvious that all of these would require a Superliner III order.) With the opportunities provided by a new order, I think I would order new parlours too, for the Chief, Builder, Zephyr, and Auto Train, and to replace those on the Starlight.

1. Phoenix would be pretty important, too.
2. Add the Capitol Limited and Coast Starlight. Zephyr is not being sold out in summer so maybe not that. CONO might need some.
3. Latter is possible if the BB gets the upgrade, SL is hard because of UP opposition.
4. Again, please add CL, CS; CONO and SL probably don't need First Class lounges.

[johnny.menhennet]

For R30A
1 - Yes, these would be amazing additions to the national system. And I like your point about increasing the capacity only to where it's needed.
2 - Great. They almost do pay for themselves. With only needing maybe one more crew member, everything past that is almost profit. Of course maintenance not factored in.
3 - While it would be hard to achieve, the regular connectivity would be a big boost for those trains. Even though the trains would have the frequency increase by 233%, I believe that the ridership gains would be more than that, and would be a great modification
4 - Looking three or four years down the road, we may just see an order if the political climate in Washington remains fairly similar and Amtrak continues to post ridership gains despite more and more "SOLD OUTS"

For Swadian
1 - Yes, but that is not a new route. It is a minor (and I mean by track mileage and distance, not by benefits gained) reroute to an existing train. I like the idea though
2 - Wrong. Routine sellouts common on the entire train route except between Grand Junction and Reno at most times of the year. If demand were not blocked out, you'd see a LOT more short haul traffic on the CZ.
3 - Daily Cardinal would be almost as hard if not as hard as daily SL. UP is currently much more active in enhancing the RoW and capacity, while BB is taking a slower approach (lengthening a few sidings rather than making full two main track, which is understandable due to terrain, but still, you get my point. Pretty soon, there will not be many barriers left to a daily SL except the actual headquarters of UP, which I bet you, if challenged in court in a few years, would rule with Amtrak. With traffic soon to be increasing all over the midwest and east while declining in the west due to the Panama Canal expansion, there will be even fewer trains taking up space on the Sunset line and the BB will get busier. If Virginia can try to expedite the process of BB improvements and get the Card to daily service before the Panamax expansion, then the chances are better for that train. Reliability will always be an issue though, although once some sidings are lengthened, it will be LESS severe.
4 - Here is the dictionary.com definition of REPLACE:

to assume the former role, position, or function of;substitute for

I think when R30A said that the new lounges would replace the PPCs, that does not necessitate a response telling him to add them to the CS as well.

Edited by johnny.menhennet, 06 July 2012 - 11:47 PM.

[Swadian Hardcore]

For Swadian
1 - Yes, but that is not a new route. It is a minor (and I mean by track mileage and distance, not by benefits gained) reroute to an existing train. I like the idea though
2 - Wrong. Routine sellouts common on the entire train route except between Grand Junction and Reno at most times of the year. If demand were not blocked out, you'd see a LOT more short haul traffic on the CZ.
3 - Daily Cardinal would be almost as hard if not as hard as daily SL. UP is currently much more active in enhancing the RoW and capacity, while BB is taking a slower approach (lengthening a few sidings rather than making full two main track, which is understandable due to terrain, but still, you get my point. Pretty soon, there will not be many barriers left to a daily SL except the actual headquarters of UP, which I bet you, if challenged in court in a few years, would rule with Amtrak. With traffic soon to be increasing all over the midwest and east while declining in the west due to the Panama Canal expansion, there will be even fewer trains taking up space on the Sunset line and the BB will get busier. If Virginia can try to expedite the process of BB improvements and get the Card to daily service before the Panamax expansion, then the chances are better for that train. Reliability will always be an issue though, although once some sidings are lengthened, it will be LESS severe.
4 - Here is the dictionary.com definition of REPLACE:

to assume the former role, position, or function of;substitute for

I think when R30A said that the new lounges would replace the PPCs, that does not necessitate a response telling him to add them to the CS as well.

1. I know. I was just quoting his "most needed additional destination".
2. Well, the Sleepers are not sold out this summer. Short haul traffic would probably not need a Sleeper.
3. Nice to know. I'm not from California or around it so that was interesting.
4. Yeah, that was my own fault. I just kinda copied CS from #2.

[railiner]

New York - Portland, ME direct, bypassing Boston via the old "State of Maine" route.

I'd like that...but why stop at Portland? Keep going on to Bangor, and then onto Halifax....

[jis]

New York - Portland, ME direct, bypassing Boston via the old "State of Maine" route.

Which one? There were three different ones that it followed in CT, RI and MA. I think the one via Springfield and Worcester would probably be the most feasible at present.

[VentureForth]

Oh, while we're dreaming...
(9) Mexico City - LA

If customs is squeamish about Canadian border crossings... i can only imagine their thoughts on that routing!

Back in 1991, I rode a train from somewhere in Mexico (Aguascalientes, I think) through Monterrey and up to Nuevo Laredo. This was the year before Mexico killed off ALL intercity rail passenger service. I was a spry 18 year old at the time and didn't even bother to pay attention to what I was experiencing. Before news of the total annihilation of the FerroMex passenger system, we were talking about chartering a train all the way from Longview, TX to Aguascalientes and/or San Louis Potosi. Proposals seemed to be optimistic and infinitely more comfortable than 24 hours of bus riding. But alas, it was never meant to be.

Since then, Nuevo Laredo has become even more dangerous to US Citizens as it is so close to many of the border drug traffic wars. So sad.

Edited by VentureForth, 07 July 2012 - 10:22 AM.

[MrFSS]

Here is a 1968 Table showing the two main routes from mexico to the US.