Jump to content




Help Support AmtrakTrains.com by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.

Photo

Oklahoma City - South Texas Corridor


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Anthony V

Anthony V

    Service Attendant

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 80 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 January 2017 - 08:11 PM

You may have heard about a proposed Oklahoma City - South Texas Corridor being in the works. The corridor is currently in the Draft EIS phase, which should be complete fairly soon, according to an July 2016 news article.

 

An Aug 2016 news article mentions the following:

 

"Two potential South Texas routes were selected for further study, according to [Rep. Henry] Cuellar. The first would originate in San Antonio and travel south outside of existing transportation corridors to a station near the Laredo-Columbia Solidarity Bridge. That route would then cross on a new railway bridge to join a new rail line which would continue to Monterrey, Mexico.

Cuellar said that route would have the potential for high-speed rail service, with trains traveling at speeds of 180 to 220 miles per hour.

The second route would begin in San Antonio and travel southeast to Alice. At Alice, the route would divide into three legs. The first leg would travel to San Diego, Texas and then to the Laredo area. The second leg would travel south along abandoned railroad tracks to McAllen and east to Harlingen and Brownsville, while the third would travel east along the KCS Railway to Corpus Christi."TexasOklahomaPassengerRailStudyRoutes.pn

I'm in favor of the second route because it would serve all of South Texas' major cities (Laredo, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, and McAllen), while the first option would only serve Laredo. For the OKC - SAS segment, I presume it would be cheapest to use the existing routes of the Heartland Flyer and Texas Eagle, as the stations already exist. To simplify negotiations with BNSF, the FTW - SAS portion could use the time slot currently used by the Texas Eagle, with the TE being rerouted to continue west of FTW and make the Sunset Limited connection in El Paso. This would also simplify operations on the TE by allowing it to run on an all Union Pacific routing.

 

http://offthekuff.com/wp/?p=75450

 

http://offthekuff.com/wp/?p=75688

 

Tell me what you think about this.


Edited by Anthony V, 19 January 2017 - 12:23 PM.


#2 neroden

neroden

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,215 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ithaca, NY
  • Interests:Please feel free to moderate my posts

Posted 19 January 2017 - 06:45 PM

I think this is no closer to getting funding.  It's a sop to Cuellar who represents the southern part of Texas, but he doesn't have enough allies.

 

Laredo, McAllen, Brownsville, and Corpus Christi all need passenger trains, like, yesterday, but, well, good luck.


--Nathanael--

Please feel free to moderate my posts.

#3 Bob Dylan

Bob Dylan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,300 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin Texas
  • Interests:Passenger Trains/Travel/Sports/Gov't/ Politics/History/Reading/
    Movies/Music/Space-Ancient Aliens

Posted 19 January 2017 - 07:20 PM

Chances of this happening are about the same as a Democrat getting elected to Statewide Office in Deep Red Texas! 😒
"There's Something About a Train! It's Magic!"-- 1970s Amtrak Ad
 "..My heart is warm with the friends I make,and better friends I'll not be knowing,
Yet there isn't a train I wouldn't take,No matter where its going!.." -Edna St. Vincent Millay

#4 Palmetto

Palmetto

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Across the Rio Grande from Matamoros, MX

Posted 20 January 2017 - 09:02 AM

Agree, unfortunately. 



#5 WoodyinNYC

WoodyinNYC

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,454 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NYC

Posted 20 January 2017 - 01:09 PM

I think this is no closer to getting funding.  It's a sop to Cuellar who represents [Laredo].

 

Laredo, McAllen, Brownsville, and Corpus Christi all need passenger trains, like, yesterday, but, well, good luck.

It's a solid step forward.

 

Don't know when we'll see a second step, but I'm sure we will. So it's good to have the paperwork in order when the panicked call comes for "More shovel-ready projects, PLEASE!"

 

That call could come after another massive crash from a lightly regulated Wall Street (nah, that'll never happen) or a thermonuclear temper tantrum in the Middle East (or at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue) or a storm surge of globally warmed sea water into the lobby of Mar-a-Lago (well, a boy can dream, no?).

 

Under another scenario, the HSR line linking Houston-Dallas is a great success. Then in the usual sort of sibling rivalry, Austin and San Antonio clamor for a similar link to the DFW Metroplex.

 

Anyway this step helps us get ready for any sudden change. It could happen.



#6 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 20 January 2017 - 02:07 PM

The day that San Antonio worries about trains instead of building a few more lanes of highway is a day that won;t happen in many decades in my reckoning. But we can all dream.

 

And through service to Mexico? yeah right! Wake me up when that happens. :)



#7 norfolkwesternhenry

norfolkwesternhenry

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minneapolis, MN
  • Interests:Trains, Boating, Trains, Mountain Biking, Trains, Having Fun, Trains, working on my bikes, Trains, planning my next trip, PV, trains, planning trips for family

Posted 20 January 2017 - 07:49 PM

For political reasons, getting into Mexico could have a YUGE roadblock

Empire Builder MSP-CHI (2) CHI-MSP (2) MSP-PDX (1) MSP-CBS (5.5 H late) (1) MKE-MSP (1) MSP-SEA (1) Coast Starlate PDX-EMY (1.5H late) (1) California Zephyr DEN-SLC (1H late) (1) Hiawatha CHI-MKE (1) NE Regional WAS-BAL (1) WAS-NYP (1) Acela Express BAL-WAS (1) BOS-WAS (1) Late Shore (Limited service) CHI-BOS (On Time) (1) Capitol Limited WAS-CHI (1) Texas Eagle SAS-CHI (1.5 HR late, 1 HR late) (2) CHI-SAS (1) (55 min early) Wolverine DET-DER-ARB-CHI (35 Min late) (1) Cascades SEA-VAC (1)
Non-Amtrak: VIA: Corridor Service Q.C.-Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto-Windsor (1) Canadian: VAC-Winnipeg 4.5 H late (1) D. C. metro, Montreal Metro, Toronto subway, Portland streetcars, BART, Metra, NYC subway, Boston subway, Twin cities Blue/Green line


#8 Lonestar648

Lonestar648

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,596 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 01 February 2017 - 04:13 PM

I don't see the ROW being purchased for a true High Speed train.  what might make more sense is to improve the rail between OKC and SAS so speeds of 90 or 110 could be reached because freight interference has been minimized by dual track where single track exists.  If you take out the freight delays and increase the speeds, the trip will take less time.  A Georgetown to San Antonio 90 MPH commuter corridor has been proposed but UP isn't interested in even discussing or negotiating.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users