Second Lynchburg train considered

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.

CHamilton

Engineer
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
5,301
Location
Seattle
State considering second Lynchburg-to-D.C. Amtrak route

The state is in preliminary discussions about adding a second daily train from Lynchburg to Washington, D.C.


The idea, raised during talks regarding U.S. 29 around Charlottesville, has no timeline or complete budget but officials say they will be actively pursuing the possibility.

“It is something we will work hard to make accomplished,” Virginia Transportation Secretary Aubrey Layne said during an appearance in Lynchburg last week.

The current Amtrak line has been highly popular since it debuted in 2009 and praised for its high ridership and revenues. It is one of two passenger trains that pass through Lynchburg each day, but the only one dedicated to the Lynchburg to D.C. route.

Shannon Valentine, who as a former state delegate was credited with bringing the train to the city, said the line has become the most profitable regional passenger rail service in the nation.

“We certainly have demonstrated that there is an incredible need and that we were indeed underserved,” she said.

Valentine, who earlier this month was appointed to the Commonwealth Transportation Board, said while the current discussions still are in their early stages, she hopes to make the idea a priority.
 
Well, this might happen relatively quickly. The state has committed to the Roanoke extension by 2017; I'd expect the second Lynchburg frequency to happen right about the same time, which would alleviate crowding issues.

Actually, looking at the schedules, the best thing to do might be to move #66/#67 over to Lynchburg service and run a different train to Newport News.
 
Not a surprise. A second train is in the state's six-year improvement plan, if I'm not mistaken, and with the addition of Roanoke three conditions make this more likely:
(1) Scheduling. It is going to be really hard to satisfactorily serve Roanoke, Lynchburg, and Charlottesville with one schedule; additionally, it is quite likely that a train aiming to get into Washington sometime between 0800 and 0900 would pick up scads of long-haul commuter traffic coming in from Charlottesville (which has a pretty decent-sized population connected to DC but no good link to DC, not to mention a significant potential for growing that population with a good link to the city).

(2) Ridership demand. From what I can tell, the Lynchburger is at a sort of wall around 180k/yr, since getting over 300 pax/day year in and year out on a train that (in the segment being measured, at least) has close to zero turnover is a tricky proposition. Trying to add 50k/yr out of Roanoke (not an implausible estimate a few years in) is going to be pretty tricky, so bleeding some ridership to a second train is probably necessary.

(3) Profitability. There is every chance that throwing a second train on the route triggers a positive feedback loop and that the net bottom line of an expanded service does better than the single train now does.

Edit: No, it's the State Rail Plan, not the SYIP. The SYIP didn't include funding for this, but it was also overly flush with funding because of its timing (it was issued only a few months after the funding bill passed). The 2013 VSRP included plans for an additional Lynchburg train in "Phase IV"...all this does is move a second Lynchburg train ahead of a Bristol extension, which makes a lot of sense right now, since a Bristol train on the present schedule would be virtually overnight.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, this might happen relatively quickly. The state has committed to the Roanoke extension by 2017; I'd expect the second Lynchburg frequency to happen right about the same time, which would alleviate crowding issues.
If Roanoke service starts in 2017, adding a 2nd Regional to Lynchburg shortly afterwards might fit in with the track improvements VA is funding. The draft FY15 Six Year Improvement Plan is available on the VDRPT website. There are 2 projects that are relevant to the Lynchburg route:

A. $31.6 million total spread over FY15, FY16 for Nokesville to Calverton double tracks (VA providing $22.1 million). This would double track about a 7 mile single track segment to make for, IIRC, about a continuous 22 mile double track segment south of Manassas. This has been in the SYIP for a while, but was postponed to cover the cost increases on the Norfolk extension.

B. new project in the FY15 plan for $9.2 million to NS spread over FY15, FY16 for "Lynchburg to Alexandria Speed Improvements" (VA providing $6.4 million). No details on what the $9.2 million is to be spent on, but ok, speed improvements sounds good.

If those projects are done by 2017, give or take, when the Roanoke service extension is supposed to start, they could add the capacity to add a 2nd Regional service to Lynchburg with improved trip times south of Alexandria.

The budget projection for the Roanoke service extension is $95.78 million spread over FY14 to FY17. The 3 projects add up to $136.6 million which is a respectable amount, especially since there are no federal funds in the total. The Crescent and the Cardinal will reap some nice free (to Amtrak) benefits from the track improvements over their sections of the ALX to LYH route.
 
The primary need before additional Lynchburg trains can be running is additional track capacity. NS is going to rightly insist on significant capacity improvement work. This line was double track for the most part in the past being reduced to alternating single and double track segments in the 1960's with Orange to the north remaining doubled until sometime in the late 70's or 80's. Therefore for the most double tracking amounts to restoration of what was there in the past. How much grading and bridge work will be needed I have no idea but is should be within reason.

Once that is done another two or three trains should be added with some/all extending to Roanoke. Extending a train to Bristol is much less likely to happen, and unlikely to be successful if it does happen. It will simply be too slow due to the realities of the railroad's alignment south of Roanoke.
 
I'm heavily against moving #66/67 to Lynchburg, although I'm biased since I'm from NN and I happen to be taking that train on Wed to BAL and I can go only in the evening...that's just me though

Here's a better solution: the current trains tend to go to WAS in the morning and come back to Lynchburg in the afternoon. They should extend train 111 from WAS on Mon-Fri to Lynchburg only (as well as train 131 SaSu). Then also extend train 198 daily from Lynchburg to WAS and then to NYP.

The train could serve a future Liberty University station (I'm thinking just one platform, not a multi-modal station that was proposed before) but not Roanoke, due to the fact that this is an afternoon roundtrip, where passengers who want to go from NOVA to Cville or Lynchburg in the early afternoon and come back in the evening. This is opposite of the current morning train, which goes north in the AM and south in the PM.

This would serve the student populations in both UVA and Liberty better. Students who have afternoon classes don't have to wait for the AM train the next morning or miss that day's class to catch the AM train to head north. UVA students have the Cardinal but it is only 3 days a week (for now) and not as reliable as it heads east.
 
Ok, I'm with you on 66/67, especially since that will be a viable choice for me once it gets the sleeper back (hopefully!), as I'm from Newport News as well. There are a whole host of reasons I don't want to see service on the Peninsula tinkered with too heavily unless trains are being added down here, but one of the biggest is the black ink (the WAS-NPN route is turning a pretty steady operating profit).

I'm not opposed to the idea of a train down to Liberty, though I think a second Lynchburg station should be a lower priority for the state. If Falwell wants to cut a check for most of it (and for a storage track), that would be fine, and it might provide a spare "storage" track as well (while the train could still be crewed off a Lynchburg base). I do also like the idea of supplementing the Cardinal...one of the biggest markets for it is CVS to points north for obvious reasons. A daily Cardinal needs to be part of the long-term picture as well, but that's another story.

The way I see it, there probably need to be three Regionals on the Lynchburg line:
(1) An early train out of Charlottesville (presumably originating in Lynchburg) timed to get folks into DC in time for work and returning after 1700. This would basically be a long-haul commuter for Charlottesville and Manassas (Charlottesville is too far out from DC to run "commuter" service, but Regionals can definitely play a role here).

(2) Something akin to the present train (even if the schedule gets altered slightly in conjunction with other trains).

(3) A "reverse peak" train akin to what you described, for both what you suggested and to enable "full" weekend trips and other travel flexibility.

Each train serves a discrete market segment (#1 serves DC commuters, #2 serves folks coming from further down the line such as LYH and ROA, and #3 serves tourists while also providing a "backup" option). My suspicion is that #1 and #2 would operate with healthy profits while #3 would operate at a modest loss that was more than offset by the others.

Notably, this whole situation would be supplemented by the Cardinal and Crescent, while #3 might be a candidate for extension from Lynchburg to points further south such as CLT if NC wanted to get involved and work towards reviving a "Piedmont Limited" type train (Southern's day train on the route, which went to Atlanta until after A-Day and to Charlotte through the mid-70s).

I will say that I see the Bristol project as not being likely in the medium term: The route is slow and the population out there thin. There is a case to extend something to Blacksburg/Christiansburg/Radford (due to the college populations in the area, not to mention the yards), and you could probably get an agreement to connect the Two Town Trolley to the station at a time that's friendly to any train schedules. Beyond that, though, I can't see anything remotely making sense from a financial perspective.

As a footnote, the one thing the TDX has going for it is political insofar as it ties Southwest VA into the statewide rail program.
 
Actually, looking at the schedules, the best thing to do might be to move #66/#67 over to Lynchburg service and run a different train to Newport News.
A later in the evening departure from RVM would be excellent for overnight service to NYP, but 66 is the last evening departure from NPN/WBG/RVM/RVR. What train would you replace it with?
 
Actually, looking at the schedules, the best thing to do might be to move #66/#67 over to Lynchburg service and run a different train to Newport News.
A later in the evening departure from RVM would be excellent for overnight service to NYP, but 66 is the last evening departure from NPN/WBG/RVM/RVR. What train would you replace it with?
Northbound, 190/150 with a large pad at WAS. Southbound, 177 plus 139 and/or 169, with a pad to allow uniform arrival times in VA (since 139 doesn't run on Saturday, while 169 leaves an hour later than 177/139).

I've gamed this out a few times. Northbound, you would shoot for about an 0200 arrival in WAS, which would probably back up to about 2340 at RVR, 2320 at RVM, and 2200 at NPN. Southbound, you'd aim for 0340 out of WAS, which would translate into 0600 at RVR, 0620 at RVM, and 0800 at NPN. You can slide the times by an hour or two if you need to...say, to accommodate tourist traffic into Williamsburg, which would likely get a boon out of this...but that's a rough outline. You could also plausibly just run the train slow in both directions on a freight-esque schedule north of RVR, which would probably make CSX happy.

Edit: My work usually centers around a Williamsburg-centric tourist/student-serving train, since I suspect you could get quite a bit of ridership for that...especially if you equip the train with LD Amfleets of some kind to make the overnight easier. The objective would be to provide a train which would allow you to spend the full day at Busch Gardens or Colonial Williamsburg, have dinner in the area, and be back in the Northeast in time for school/work.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anderson, if the train stops at RVM at 2320, that might be too late. As I'm sure you know, Main Street Station is operated not by Amtrak, but by the city of Richmond. Would they pay for staff that late? I don't know, but it's a consideration. Your idea would be excellent for an overnight to New York, what with 66 arriving in New York at the ridiculous time of around 2 am.

The thing about taking Amtrak in Richmond is that while local transit to RVM is pretty good, getting to RVR (where all the Richmond trains stop, as opposed to the 4 that stop at RVM) by local bus is kind of a joke, and cab fare is expensive.
 
Anderson, if the train stops at RVM at 2320, that might be too late. As I'm sure you know, Main Street Station is operated not by Amtrak, but by the city of Richmond. Would they pay for staff that late? I don't know, but it's a consideration. Your idea would be excellent for an overnight to New York, what with 66 arriving in New York at the ridiculous time of around 2 am.

The thing about taking Amtrak in Richmond is that while local transit to RVM is pretty good, getting to RVR (where all the Richmond trains stop, as opposed to the 4 that stop at RVM) by local bus is kind of a joke, and cab fare is expensive.
If the Acca Bypass happens and Amtrak plans to stop the Meteor at RVM, the hours are going to get extended regardless (probably to open at about 0330 or 0400 and close at about 2230 or 2300). The odds are that in the long run, RVM may end up being close to a 24-hour station. The question would just be one of cost-sharing: Does Richmond pick up the tab, does Amtrak, or does the DRPT?
 
They need to re-add a second track from Richmond to Newport News, particularly from the east end of the long passing siding at Denbigh to the main yard near the Amtrak station, before working on a bypass for Acca yard. C&O removed the other track on the Peninsula Extension in the late 1950s. They've also proposed commuter service that requires double trackage along the CSX line from NN to WBG in the HRTPO's long range plan.

Honestly, going through Acca yard is bad, but the worst part is going 10 mph between Acca Yard and Main St station. That part needs to be upgraded first as well.
 
Anderson, if the train stops at RVM at 2320, that might be too late. As I'm sure you know, Main Street Station is operated not by Amtrak, but by the city of Richmond. Would they pay for staff that late? I don't know, but it's a consideration. Your idea would be excellent for an overnight to New York, what with 66 arriving in New York at the ridiculous time of around 2 am.

The thing about taking Amtrak in Richmond is that while local transit to RVM is pretty good, getting to RVR (where all the Richmond trains stop, as opposed to the 4 that stop at RVM) by local bus is kind of a joke, and cab fare is expensive.
If the Acca Bypass happens and Amtrak plans to stop the Meteor at RVM, the hours are going to get extended regardless (probably to open at about 0330 or 0400 and close at about 2230 or 2300). The odds are that in the long run, RVM may end up being close to a 24-hour station. The question would just be one of cost-sharing: Does Richmond pick up the tab, does Amtrak, or does the DRPT?
Is there a timetable for when the Acca bypass is supposed to be done? Seems like I've been hearing about that proposal for the better part of a decade...
 
Is there a timetable for when the Acca bypass is supposed to be done? Seems like I've been hearing about that proposal for the better part of a decade...
It's still unfunded! I don't know why it keeps getting passed over for funding, but there's no timeline for it at all.

FWIW, Acca bypass and Acca - Richmond Main St would probably be done as a single project; that's how every previous study has segmented it. For Richmond, the next priority after that is Richmond Main St. - Petersburg, which is kind of expensive (bridge rehab or replacement), but finally allows trains to Norfolk and the South to stop at Richmond Main St. again.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is there a timetable for when the Acca bypass is supposed to be done? Seems like I've been hearing about that proposal for the better part of a decade...
No. An Acca Yard bypass and track upgrades between RVR and RVM have been proposed and included in various planning documents, bur has not moved beyond the proposal and concept stage. There have different ballpark cost figures stated over the years in multiple hundred of millions of dollars for a bypass and track upgrades between RVR and RVM, so it would not be a small project.

Virginia did get $44 million as an HSIPR grant for a comprehensive alternative analysis, environmental and preliminary engineering process up through a Tier II FEIS for the Alexandria to RVM segment of the Southeast HSR corridor. The RVR to RVM segment will be part of that study, but the entire study is incrementally funded through FY2019. So it will be a while before there is a Final EIS on the entire Alexandria to RVM segment. On the other hand, the draft FY15 Six Year Improvement Plan shows a respectable varying amount of uncommitted funds each year for the next 6 years even after the $96 million for the Roanoke extension, $82 million for 3 daily trains to NFK, $9 million for LYH to ALX speed improvements.

VDRPT will be able to take on additional track and station improvement projects over the next 6 years. Where remains to be seen.
 
They need to re-add a second track from Richmond to Newport News, particularly from the east end of the long passing siding at Denbigh to the main yard near the Amtrak station, before working on a bypass for Acca yard. C&O removed the other track on the Peninsula Extension in the late 1950s. They've also proposed commuter service that requires double trackage along the CSX line from NN to WBG in the HRTPO's long range plan.

Honestly, going through Acca yard is bad, but the worst part is going 10 mph between Acca Yard and Main St station. That part needs to be upgraded first as well.
I've had a few conversations with people in Richmond about this. To make a long story short, CSX is also looking to re-track segments of the line, so VA is trying to set things up whereby CSX adds what they want to add and then VA adds on top of that rather than VA effectively picking up the tab for what CSX wanted to do anyway.

The Hampton Roads plans in the SEHSR study (Richmond-Norfolk/Newport News) do seem to anticipate some of these improvements, and if the state pays for substantial double-tracking it would seem to be possible to get up to 3-5x daily service on the Peninsula. A lot of this is likely just being held up by questions of who would pay for what.
 
So any idea when will CSX re-track the segments? I know they've been planning this since the late 2000s but with the addition of the oil trains to Yorktown this past winter, looks like they need to get started on this sooner rather than later.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is there a timetable for when the Acca bypass is supposed to be done? Seems like I've been hearing about that proposal for the better part of a decade...
No. An Acca Yard bypass and track upgrades between RVR and RVM have been proposed and included in various planning documents, bur has not moved beyond the proposal and concept stage. There have different ballpark cost figures stated over the years in multiple hundred of millions of dollars for a bypass and track upgrades between RVR and RVM, so it would not be a small project.

Virginia did get $44 million as an HSIPR grant for a comprehensive alternative analysis, environmental and preliminary engineering process up through a Tier II FEIS for the Alexandria to RVM segment of the Southeast HSR corridor. The RVR to RVM segment will be part of that study, but the entire study is incrementally funded through FY2019. So it will be a while before there is a Final EIS on the entire Alexandria to RVM segment. On the other hand, the draft FY15 Six Year Improvement Plan shows a respectable varying amount of uncommitted funds each year for the next 6 years even after the $96 million for the Roanoke extension, $82 million for 3 daily trains to NFK, $9 million for LYH to ALX speed improvements.

VDRPT will be able to take on additional track and station improvement projects over the next 6 years. Where remains to be seen.
One possibility that occurs to me is that they will be stockpiling some cash for major RVR-WAS improvements and/or doing Acca in house (i.e. without Federal money). None of these projects will be cheap, and absent a bond issue of some kind it seems likely that the state would need to pile up a few hundred million in available money to make a serious dent in things. For a major RVR-WAS project, the cost will likely be comparable with what it would take to buy the RF&P outright.

As things stand, the Feds are all but useless on a lot of this: You can get some TIGER grants for a new station here or a few grade crossing closures there, but that's about it. $5-20m is one thing, but you won't get many $100-200m blocks of cash. Anything else is likely to get held up for at least the next two years, and after that the odds of getting a unified government seem rather slim for quite a while for a host of reasons. That makes rounding up money a real chore, since the traditional venues for funding something like that will probably be rather constrained.
 
So any idea when will CSX re-track the segments? I know they've been planning this since the late 2000s but with the addition of the oil trains to Yorktown this past winter, looks like they need to get started on this sooner rather than later.
That I am not sure of. Like I said, there's this kabuki dance going on between the state and CSX, and I don't know anyone at CSX. I'll poke my delegate on this the next time he and I talk, however, and he may be able to shed some light on it. The main thing is that the oil trains are likely just taking up a slot or two from coal trains.

Also, do remember that as of the mid-2000s, CSX was also amenable to a commuter rail project, and that seems to have gone flying out the window when coal traffic picked back up.
 
For a major RVR-WAS project, the cost will likely be comparable with what it would take to buy the RF&P outright.
Don't get me started on this -- you know I think Virginia should have bought the RF&P outright back when the state already owned 1/5 of it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One possibility that occurs to me is that they will be stockpiling some cash for major RVR-WAS improvements and/or doing Acca in house (i.e. without Federal money). None of these projects will be cheap, and absent a bond issue of some kind it seems likely that the state would need to pile up a few hundred million in available money to make a serious dent in things. For a major RVR-WAS project, the cost will likely be comparable with what it would take to buy the RF&P outright.

As things stand, the Feds are all but useless on a lot of this: You can get some TIGER grants for a new station here or a few grade crossing closures there, but that's about it. $5-20m is one thing, but you won't get many $100-200m blocks of cash. Anything else is likely to get held up for at least the next two years, and after that the odds of getting a unified government seem rather slim for quite a while for a host of reasons. That makes rounding up money a real chore, since the traditional venues for funding something like that will probably be rather constrained.
Don't overlook VRE and the track projects north of Fredericksburg that can be nominally done for VRE. As a commuter service, VRE is eligible for FTA and US DOT grants and funding. In the VRE long range capital plan, as I recall, the next step for the RF&P is to build a 3rd track down to Woodbridge. The Long Bridge replacement is in the post 2020 capital plan. The DC Union Station plans have continued to be worked on and advanced, so VDRPT and VRE may be expected to contribute funding. There is the Gainesville extension, but that would be VRE funded only I expect.

We should not get too focused on projects in Virginia just for Amtrak service outside of VRE territory. VDRPT may be planning to use a lot of the uncommitted funds for 3rd track and other projects north of Fredericksburg as those benefit both VRE and VA Regional services.
 
I included north-of-Fredericksburg projects in the RVR-WAS bit. VRE expansion has a lot of issues (storage space around WAS for one, and a need to get more slots on the RF&P for another).

However, I think the ability to use the passenger rail money for VRE-oriented projects may be constrained:

https://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+33.1-221.1C1.3

The IPROC funding seems to go straight to this pot, which is restricted to intercity-oriented projects. You'd want to go to the Commonwealth Mass Transit Fund for VRE-oriented stuff (and it's probably going to be tricky to spin anything aimed exclusively at one or the other for funding from the "opposing" pot, though some things like Long Bridge would fall into that category).
 
Its way too late for the Commonwealth of Virginia to purchase the RF&P line from CSX, especially with CSX investing a lot of money into the line as part of their National Gateway initiative. Also, the intermodal trains from Portsmouth that currently travel along the James River for the past few years will be rerouted back to the RF&P line and be able to carry double stacks.
 
Its way too late for the Commonwealth of Virginia to purchase the RF&P line from CSX, especially with CSX investing a lot of money into the line as part of their National Gateway initiative. Also, the intermodal trains from Portsmouth that currently travel along the James River for the past few years will be rerouted back to the RF&P line and be able to carry double stacks.
Serious question: Are those trains routed through North Carolina? I know Norfolk Southern has lines going west from Norfolk, but my understanding is that CSX's operations in Southside are limited to a line that heads south into NC.

As to the RF&P, the best bet there in the long run is probably going to be for a four-track line: Two passenger and two freight. I'm not sure if this can be done within the current alignment (or something close to it).
 
One other point: A lot of the "big ticket" items not already on the docket need an EIS so the "chosen" option can get accurately costed. For example, the Hampton Roads project still hasn't cleared Tier II, and the fact that they declared the stuff done to date to be "Tier I" indicates that a Tier II is also part of the process. Once some stuff starts clearing the EIS process, there's likely to be a lot of cash available to expand services so that things can move quickly with or without federal help (and without federal help, it is very easy to burn through a couple hundred million dollars in a hurry). On the other hand, until some of those projects happen, CSX in particular is likely to be stingy with slots, so doing much else does run into some roadblocks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top