Capitol Ltd - Extend to Virginia

Virginia has been looking to increase service to Tidewater (Newport News/Norfolk) for some time. Present plans call for an additional regional to Norfolk, and eventually a third that would just run to Richmond. My thought is, why not extend the Capitol Ltd to cover one of these runs?

Here is what I understand -

- Virginia wants more access to Tidewater, present assumption is trains to New York

- This would provide one-seat access for Norfolk(and in between Petersburg, Richmond, Ashland (maybe), Fredericksburg) to Chicago

- It's a new destination, and thus, a great offering. Military and civilians working in defense and shipping industry have access to Rust Belt

- Provides RVR-Pittsburgh service with one seat - this is presently one I anecdotally hear about from friends. It's too expensive to fly, too long to drive

Equipment-wise, it wouldn't make a difference since Amtrak only originates one Superliner train in DC. They keep an extra set on the eastbound terminal already, since the turnaround time window is too narrow. They would not need an additional set of equipment.

From a scheduling perspective, using current speeds, the westbound train could leave Norfolk at 11:15 am and arrive in time (3:30p) for a 4:05 pm departure from DC (based on schedule from #94 now).

The eastbound would arrive in Washington (sans-protection time of 20 minutes) at 12:45pm. Keep it the same, assume 1:05 with a 1:25 pm departure, and you fit nicely between the Carolinian and the Silver Star. This would have the following times in Virginia (based on Carolinian trip times);

- ALX - 1:43 pm

- FBG - 2:27 pm

- RVR - 3:30 pm

Let's suppose that for political considerations, the train goes to Norfolk via the N&W, with a bus connection to Virginia Beach

- PTB - 4:13 pm

- NFK - 5:53 pm (Bus to VA Beach arrives at 6:33 pm)

The westbound edition would go as follows:

- NFK - 11:00 am

- PTB - 12:27 pm (connections south to Raleigh, Charlotte, Charleston, Savannah, Florida)

- RVR - 1:03 pm

- FBG - 2:03 pm

- ALX - 3:08 pm

- WAS - 3:30 pm (departs 4:05 pm) (connections north to Baltimore, Philly, NYC, Boston)

From a financial standpoint, I'm not sure how much additional cost this would actually incur. You would have to run crews from NFK to WAS, but you could use current crew pools for this. Your long distance dining and sleeping car staff could still go from WAS. All you really need (if you really want to make the case for this train) is three coaches and the SSL open for the run from NFK. Maybe have one SCA for the start, and pick up the second in WAS? It could go either way.

From an operational standpoint, the Cardinal used to (and still does on occasion) run Superliner equipment, so the tunnel through DC wouldn't be a problem. CSX's busy RF&P sub is the main issue here, but to add any additional trains, this will require investment from Virginia - investment they already plan to make. I know trains take up space, but I really don't think capacity is a big issue right now on the N&W from Collier Yard in Petersburg to Norfolk.

By adding this, you really get the most bang for you buck. You add connections from Norfolk to Pittsburgh, Chicago, and points south like Raleigh, Charlotte, Charleston, Savannah and Florida. The city of Norfolk and the commonwealth of Virginia have already made significant investments in the Norfolk Amtrak facility. From a public relations/political standpoint, this would be like bringing in a new airline to a brand new airport, instead of adding one more connecting flight to New York. Here are some of the offerings:

- Leave Norfolk at 11:15, arrive Raleigh at 4:42 pm, Charlotte at 8:12 pm, Charleston at 7:14 pm, Savannah at 8:59 pm, Pittsburgh at 11:48 pm, Chicago at 8:30 am (next day one seat)

- Overnight service to Florida, connections to points west via Chicago

My dad suggested this the other day, and I've been thinking about it for probably a week. It really seems to work well when you give it thought.

I do see one thing that wasn't considered. The Capitol is serviced at Washington. Under your plan, it would need to be serviced in Norfolk. Since Norfolk doesn't have that kind of servicing operation there now, that'll add to the cost, don't you think?

jb

Good point, but they do presently service the Northeast Regional coaches in Norfolk. I imagine there would be increased work with the sleepers, but nothing that would be too great. Your diner would still be serviced (food, materials) in Washington. Theoretically, you could drop the Diner, sleepers and SSL in WAS eastbound and pick up westbound, but that just adds a switching move in a busy terminal.

Servicing a NE Regional is trivial compared to servicing an LD train with Sleeping and Diner services.

Trust me, this is not going to happen anytime soon.

Someone who currently works for Amtrak could tell you more reliably, but I don't think Norfolk currently has a crew base. Since the Capitol's current O.B.S. crews are based n Washington, those folks would have to move about 200 miles to a new home within a reasonable distance from Norfolk. This crew base would also need an extra board, which doesn't exist now AFAIK, to cover for contingencies. I don't know anything about the Mechanical staffing at Norfolk, but their operation would have to be greatly expanded. Retraining for Superliners would have to be done, or Mechanics would have to be moved 200 miles from Washington. I don't know what physical changes to the facilities would be needed in Norfolk. These could mean lengthened servicing tracks, construction of maintenance buildings, provision of tools and supplies, etc. There may be some kind of minimal Commissary facility in Norfolk now, but it would have to be greatly expanded to provide the extra food for the Capitol, plus linens and other supplies for the sleepers. Additional staff would have to be hired for cleaning, but it's not clear that cleaning crew could be used efficiently. In other words, how many 8-hours-per-day cleaning employees can you justify for one train?

I'm not saying it would be impossible, but there would be many hurdles to clear.

Tom

I also believe a number of the stations this proposal would serve are due to be converted to high-level platform which would preclude the use of Superliner equipment.

spidersfan351 said:

Good point, but they do presently service the Northeast Regional coaches in Norfolk. I imagine there would be increased work with the sleepers, but nothing that would be too great. Your diner would still be serviced (food, materials) in Washington. Theoretically, you could drop the Diner, sleepers and SSL in WAS eastbound and pick up westbound, but that just adds a switching move in a busy terminal.

Click to expand...

I think you might not understand the servicing. The regional coaches only get minimal servicing there. If there is anything more than a minor mechanical issue, in other words anything that requires more than duct tape or resetting a breaker to get it down the road the coach will be deadheaded out of there to be serviced. That equipment is not maintained in Norfolk. You can operate consists that way with coaches and a lounge car. Sleepers and diners would require a lot more maintenance than to get out a set of Amfleets. Also the consists are not wedded to that route. Todays consist to Norfolk was almost certainly used on a different route yesterday.

Norfolk doesn't presently have a crew base, though I believe that with SEHSR that is likely to change. There has also been at least some discussion of expanding the servicing options in Norfolk, if for no other reason than the difference of one train a day versus six at that point (not to mention Hampton Roads wanting its sleeper service back).

PRIIA 209 may cause some issues in terms of not having WAS as one of the termini of the train. That law seemed to restrict Amtrak to termini of LD trains that were already termini of LD trains (the list on the east coast being BOS, NYP, WAS, LOR, SAV, SFA, ORL*, and MIA), though as STL was considered in a PIP for the Cardinal and no mention was made of there being issues with doing that w.r.t. PRIIA 209 there might be some flexibility

I'd rather like this and I don't think there are any "extra consist" issues. The main hangup, as noted, really comes down to dealing with substantial maintenance. Do remember...the Cap can have equipment dealt with at LOR as it stands (since the Auto Train uses the same equipment there), something you would lose by moving the terminus to NFK. This is also part of the reason that the Sunset East terminated at ORL for most of its existence instead of MIA, IIRC.

*ORL is still nominally the terminus of the Sunset Limited.

spidersfan351 said:

From an operational standpoint, the Cardinal used to (and still does on occasion) run Superliner equipment, so the tunnel through DC wouldn't be a problem. CSX's busy RF&P sub is the main issue here, but to add any additional trains, this will require investment from Virginia - investment they already plan to make. I know trains take up space, but I really don't think capacity is a big issue right now on the N&W from Collier Yard in Petersburg to Norfolk.

Click to expand...

Capacity on CSX from RVR to the branch off to Norfolk is very much of an issue. In the just released VA DRPT FY16 Six-Year Improvement Plan, Virginia plans to spend $117 million of state funds from FY15 through FY19 on CSX upgrades for 2 additional trains to Norfolk. I think most of those funds will be going for a new bridge and track(s) across the Appomattox river, but I have not seen any specifics on what upgrades CSX wants so VA can run 2 additional trains south of RVR through Petersburg.
Virginia is not going to be interested at all in supporting a CL extension from WAS to NFK. Their interest in is Regionals running north of WAS to BAL, PHL, NYP, not a direct service over a very slow route from WAS to Pittsburgh. Also, the eastbound CL is often 1, 2, 3 hours late arriving at WAS. That means passengers boarding at WAS heading to RVR or NFK who want a mid-afternoon departure from WAS would take a hit for a frequently late train from CHI.

A better solution for those originating at NFK wanting to take the CL to PGH, CLE, CHI would be for 1 of the 3 daily Regionals to depart NFK mid-morning circa 9 to 9:30 AM. Then that NFK Regional would arrive WAS circa 2 PM allowing for a connection to the westbound CL and continue onward to NYP arriving in the early evening. Going the other way, the eastbound CL arriving at 1:05 PM (in theory) allows for connections to the current NFK Regional, albeit with a longish layover at WAS. But, given the OTP of the CL, a long connection window at WAS is needed.

Extending the CL to NFK adds a lot of costs including capital costs for a LD service yard for little real benefit. More Regionals with better trip times from NPN and NFK to WAS should provide a range of transfer options for connections to various LD trains at PTB or WAS.

Just from practical consideration as an end user: If it's too long to drive, why would I burn even more time on the train? It's a 7.5 hour drive. My beloved CL takes that long just to get to DC. And that's not counting travel time to the station or the wait time at the station. That's time I would be on the road winning that race.

Good Point Alexandria Nick. I would take it if it was just a little longer because I don't like to drive long distances especially with my feet bothering me on long drives but this isn't just a little longer - this would be like 70% more time by train than by automobile. With that amount of extra time I don't see how the CL is even competitive now as it is.

SurebetVA said:

Good Point Alexandria Nick. I would take it if it was just a little longer because I don't like to drive long distances especially with my feet bothering me on long drives but this isn't just a little longer - this would be like 70% more time by train than by automobile. With that amount of extra time I don't see how the CL is even competitive now as it is.

Click to expand...

(a) Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philadelphia traffic (the Broadway Limited would be more competitive than the Capitol Limited)(b) Connections from the Star/Meteor/Palmetto to Chicago (if you're already spending the time coming from much further south, the additional time cost is negligible).

I see now that my phone's keyboard app somehow ate the "7.5 hour drive from Pittsburgh." If Chicago was a 7.5 hour drive from DC, that would be pretty awesome.

Only down side to flying is Pittsburgh doesn't have direct flights anymore to Richmond and I don't think they do to Norfolk either. Still doesn't make CL an attractive alternative unless you just have plenty of time and hate to drive long distances.

What is the net potential demand we are talking of in the Richmond - Pittsburgh, or Norfolk - Pittsburgh sectors? Why did the direct flights not work out?

Are the westbound tracks (out to Rockville) connected somehow to the southbound tracks (to Richmond) at WAS without some backup move? :huh: I could be wrong, but I don't think they are.

the_traveler said:

Are the westbound tracks (out to Rockville) connected somehow to the southbound tracks (to Richmond) at WAS without some backup move? :huh: I could be wrong, but I don't think they are.

Click to expand...

AFAIR they are. I have seen the Cap depart from or arrive at the lower level platforms occasionally.

Yes, they are connected.

jis said:

What is the net potential demand we are talking of in the Richmond - Pittsburgh, or Norfolk - Pittsburgh sectors? Why did the direct flights not work out?

Click to expand...

I think Pittsburgh basically got de-hubbed...to say nothing of the fact that there's a tendency for a direct flight to command a premium (e.g. YUL-JFK will cost more than YUL-JFK-IAD) and cause an issue in terms of people being willing to bother with the direct flight. Honestly, the issue with ORF is that your only direct flights are really hub-bound per this map:

http://www.norfolkairport.com/sites/default/files/pdfs/Route%20Map_July15.pdf

You have 17 airports in 12 cities (I'm counting BWI as part of WAS just as I am counting EWR as part of NYC) with direct flights. The list is:

Washington (DCA, IAD, BWI)

Philadelphia (PHL)

New York (LGA, JFK, EWR)

Charlotte

Atlanta

Orlando

Miami

Houston (IAH)

Dallas (DAL)

Minneapolis

Chicago (ORD, MDW)

Detroit

You have more as "direct, multi-stop" destinations (I think those are probably all part of Southwest's oddball system), but of the list above every airport qualifies as a hub of some kind I believe (with the partial exception of DCA, which isn't supposed to be a hub but has been morphing into one to the great frustration of the MWAA). So at least in the case of ORF, the issue is simply de-hubbing...and I'd expect much the same applies to RIC (which is, I believe, a smaller airport in terms of traffic volume).

Edit: Here's how I see this proposal: If it worked, you'd get a lot of Virginia-Washington traffic. Depending on timings and what-have-you, you might even eradicate most of the train's direct losses as long as OTP is passable both ways. The timing wouldn't be horridly far off of 94/95 (especially southbound), so you might be able to go to a later time for the relevant train to NPN as a result (which, IMHO, would be a plus...the 1400-ish departure on weekdays is a non-trivial part of why I started going to/from RVR to travel, though the Meteor's steaks had a lot to do with that as well). If nothing else, the WB Cap would probably be in the black while the EB Cap would be a bit in the red (simply owing to workable connections and reliability).

Anderson said:

Edit: Here's how I see this proposal: If it worked, you'd get a lot of Virginia-Washington traffic. Depending on timings and what-have-you, you might even eradicate most of the train's direct losses as long as OTP is passable both ways. The timing wouldn't be horridly far off of 94/95 (especially southbound), so you might be able to go to a later time for the relevant train to NPN as a result (which, IMHO, would be a plus...the 1400-ish departure on weekdays is a non-trivial part of why I started going to/from RVR to travel, though the Meteor's steaks had a lot to do with that as well). If nothing else, the WB Cap would probably be in the black while the EB Cap would be a bit in the red (simply owing to workable connections and reliability).

Click to expand...

Checking Status Maps archive database, over the past 2 months, CL #30 was on average about 1 hour late into WAS. By my count, #30 was > 90 minutes late into WAS 16 out of 61 days. So reliability of a #30 departure from WAS to NFK would be a major problem.
What should be asked is which station would one choose as the terminus of an LD service?

In FY14, WAS had 5,029,928 passengers boarding or alighting. DC also has the second busiest heavy rail transit system in the country with Union Station as the busiest station in the WMATA Metro system (on weekdays at least).

In comparison, in FY14, NFK had 41,832 passengers or 0.8% of WAS. Norfolk has The Tide light rail which is currently a single relatively short starter line. And NFK does not have any service facilities for a Superliner LD train.

No, the Capitol Limited will continue to terminate at WAS, the second busiest station in the Amtrak system. With Virginia funding, service at NFK will be expanded to 3 daily trains to the NEC in a few years with improving trip times between NFK and WAS. Those few in NPN and NFK who want to take the CL to Chicago will have to connect at WAS, with a to be determined layover time at WAS.

Anderson said:

I think Pittsburgh basically got de-hubbed...

Click to expand...

It did, and the locality is now saddled with a vastly oversized airport (about four times larger than it needs to be) and will be paying off the bonds for it for decades. A big taxpayer subsidy to what was US Air, who promptly dumped Pittsburgh in favor of Philadelphia, so now it counts as an honest-to-god waste of taxpayer money.

Good example of wasting hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money on an airport, when they could have gotten a lot more by buying railroad lines and running trains.

Now that it's been de-hubbed, Pittsburgh is mostly served by small puddlejumpers. And most of the close-in service is actually gone entirely. There's not much airplane competition for a revived train going in any direction.

afigg,

I know you're right; I'm more looking at "if this could be done how would it play out". Now, it would be relatively easy to simply pad the hell out of 30 at WAS (say, instead of 30 minutes put the train there for 90 minutes). If you ran this as the "third" NPN train (for example; it would take the place of 95 and 83 would run daily) you'd probably see a lot of the "time-sensitive" traffic shift over to the later train (83 may arrive into NPN fairly late, but it allows for a lot of business traffic to/from WAS to stay for more or less a full business day) while "tourist" traffic would lean towards the Cap.

Right now the lower level of WASH has space to allow for an extended dwell. That is not going to be the case once Long Bridge is widened to 4 tracks and VRE increases its service.

neroden said:

Anderson said:

I think Pittsburgh basically got de-hubbed...

Click to expand...

It did, and the locality is now saddled with a vastly oversized airport (about four times larger than it needs to be) and will be paying off the bonds for it for decades. A big taxpayer subsidy to what was US Air, who promptly dumped Pittsburgh in favor of Philadelphia, so now it counts as an honest-to-god waste of taxpayer money.

Good example of wasting hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money on an airport, when they could have gotten a lot more by buying railroad lines and running trains.

Now that it's been de-hubbed, Pittsburgh is mostly served by small puddlejumpers. And most of the close-in service is actually gone entirely. There's not much airplane competition for a revived train going in any direction.

Click to expand...

Honestly, on the one hand there's the waste point. On the other hand, I think it is fair to say that if a government springs for something like this and there's an obvious beneficiary there should be a long-term operating agreement they force on the beneficiary (say, 20-30 years of operation at X level) that they can't simply get out of by merging it away and if they cut service, they're stuck refunding the city in some form.

west point said:

Right now the lower level of WASH has space to allow for an extended dwell. That is not going to be the case once Long Bridge is widened to 4 tracks and VRE increases its service.

Click to expand...

Yes, but...

(1) VRE service increasing is predicated on VRE not parking more trains at WAS; and

(2) I believe that VRE service increase plans tend to involve either reversing trains out of WAS and heading back down to QAN/FBG or running through-service up to somewhere in MARC-land (be it Baltimore Penn, Camden, Martin Airport, or somewhere else).

Am I remembering correctly that Keolis has both the VRE and MARC Camden/Brunswick service?

That should make it easier to through run on those lines. A one seat ride to SW and Crystal City would be a high hit with Marylanders and could draw some traffic from the crowded Penn Line to the Camden.