Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
It is this Friday leaving OKC in the morning and heading north to KCY. Craig Sanders' web site has a story on it: https://csanders429.wordpress.com/2017/06/05/amtrak-to-inspect-okc-kansas-city-route/
Kansas City-Oklahoma City Expansion Inspection Train
- Thread starter Philly Amtrak Fan
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
PerRock
Engineer
hmmm not the route I would have chosen...
peter
peter
- Joined
- May 17, 2015
- Messages
- 2,807
The route hits the major cities in Kansas which should build the ridership on the HF, but the actual call times may not be the best depending on the link up with the SWC.
Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
If the times are similar to the Thruway Bus connection times and the HF schedule remains at or near the current times, there will be graveyard shift times for Wichita.
- Joined
- May 17, 2015
- Messages
- 2,807
So a passenger from Temple, TX going to KCY wanting to arrive in the morning instead of late afternoon, would change trains in FTW, OKC, and Newton unless there are any through cars FTW to Newton.
Isn't 22 detouring from TAY to LVW on the old Mopac Eagle Route till 6/22.
This means no Train to FTW unless there is a Special or the cars are carried on a Freight!
Is Kansas has enough money to pay for Heartland Flyer, along with Oklahoma (probably a little more) and Texas?
ehbowen
Engineer
I want the Lone Star (aka Texas Chief!) back!
Woodcut60
Lead Service Attendant
This is good news. I have always wondered why the Heartland Flyer just cuts off in 'the middle of nowhere', OKC, without any connections to the north (Tulsa, Wichita, Topeka).
(1) I'm a little surprised this happened before the rumored inspection train from Meridien-Dallas did.
(2) I presume that if through cars were a thing, they would run through to Chicago. As it is, Amtrak has examined adding an extra coach CHI-KCY but there wasn't sufficient business for it. Add in through-service on this route and there should be enough business to justify a pair of cars (a sleeper and a coach) running through.
(3) I think it's an open question as to what the times will be. There's a case for seriously adjusting the schedules...as it stands, the proposed schedule from 2010 gave us a five-hour turn time in FTW and about a 2:30 turn time in Newton. Based on what I've seen elsewhere, this is seriously pushing it and provides no practical room for recovery from delays on the Newton end. I know they're trying to make that timetable work with a single equipment set, but it looks too clever by half to me. I also think that the idea of running this without a through sleeper, at least, is not a wise business decision. I can tell you how thrilled I'd be at having to stagger off of one train at 0200 and board another at 0300 (or to stagger off at 0300 and board another at 0400). I really don't quite see the tens of thousands of riders being projected for Newton materializing at those times. With that being said, I also don't think there's much of a precedent for such a bad transfer time in the present system between trains. The closest would be the clumsy connections in Sacramento between the Zephyr and Starlight, in Los Angeles between the Sunset and Starlight, or in New York between the Adirondack/Maple Leaf and 66/67 (this last one being a hellish connection I've steadfastly refused to even consider).
(4) The Heartland Flyer does have a bus connection to Newton right now...and I'm sure that we're all chomping at the bit to spend the middle of the night on a bus in the middle of nowhere.
The bottom line to all of this is that I would like to see service restored here...but I'm scared that we're going to get a real turkey of a schedule out of this due to Amtrak trying to be too slick with equipment utilization. If Amtrak is dead set on trying to push a transfer, they'd be better off running the trains through to KCY and having it be an early-morning/late-evening transfer at KCY (with a direct connection to both the SWC and the River Runner) for folks heading east (leaving the messy transfer to only folks connecting to/from the west). Granted, this runs into a separate issue (such a train would need a sleeper and those are not exactly in plentiful supply these days)...but I'm going to refer back to some of the discussion elsewhere about buying some more single-level sleepers and converting the CONO to single-level service.
Source: http://www.ksdot.org/PDF_Files/PDF-Passenger-Rail-SDP.pdf
(2) I presume that if through cars were a thing, they would run through to Chicago. As it is, Amtrak has examined adding an extra coach CHI-KCY but there wasn't sufficient business for it. Add in through-service on this route and there should be enough business to justify a pair of cars (a sleeper and a coach) running through.
(3) I think it's an open question as to what the times will be. There's a case for seriously adjusting the schedules...as it stands, the proposed schedule from 2010 gave us a five-hour turn time in FTW and about a 2:30 turn time in Newton. Based on what I've seen elsewhere, this is seriously pushing it and provides no practical room for recovery from delays on the Newton end. I know they're trying to make that timetable work with a single equipment set, but it looks too clever by half to me. I also think that the idea of running this without a through sleeper, at least, is not a wise business decision. I can tell you how thrilled I'd be at having to stagger off of one train at 0200 and board another at 0300 (or to stagger off at 0300 and board another at 0400). I really don't quite see the tens of thousands of riders being projected for Newton materializing at those times. With that being said, I also don't think there's much of a precedent for such a bad transfer time in the present system between trains. The closest would be the clumsy connections in Sacramento between the Zephyr and Starlight, in Los Angeles between the Sunset and Starlight, or in New York between the Adirondack/Maple Leaf and 66/67 (this last one being a hellish connection I've steadfastly refused to even consider).
(4) The Heartland Flyer does have a bus connection to Newton right now...and I'm sure that we're all chomping at the bit to spend the middle of the night on a bus in the middle of nowhere.
The bottom line to all of this is that I would like to see service restored here...but I'm scared that we're going to get a real turkey of a schedule out of this due to Amtrak trying to be too slick with equipment utilization. If Amtrak is dead set on trying to push a transfer, they'd be better off running the trains through to KCY and having it be an early-morning/late-evening transfer at KCY (with a direct connection to both the SWC and the River Runner) for folks heading east (leaving the messy transfer to only folks connecting to/from the west). Granted, this runs into a separate issue (such a train would need a sleeper and those are not exactly in plentiful supply these days)...but I'm going to refer back to some of the discussion elsewhere about buying some more single-level sleepers and converting the CONO to single-level service.
Source: http://www.ksdot.org/PDF_Files/PDF-Passenger-Rail-SDP.pdf
Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
I still have no idea why they haven't even considered extending the HF to Houston. I don't know why Texas would spend money for a train almost entirely for Oklahoma residents (who in the DFW area wants to go to Oklahoma on a regular basis?) If I'm Texas I tell Oklahoma to chip in to extend the HF to HOS or we will pull out of funding it as it is worthless to Texas residents.
Regarding point 3, I think you can look to the make-up break-up of the Empire Builder at oh-dark-thirty in Spokane as a example. If the ridership numbers were to justify running the Heartland Flyer cars to Chicago this could be handled similar to the EB. Yes there would have to be complex deals between the State supported service and Amtrak services, though these would also needed if there was to be a through sleeper. There also might be some significant operational advantages to be able to routinely get equipment to the maintenance base in Chicago.
the_traveler
Engineer
But the EB has an option to not have to change cars in SPK. If going between Pasco and Shelby, you do have the option to book 27 or 28 and stay on the train. In Newton, unless there were run-thru cars, that would not be an option.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Remember, both the Pioneer and the Desert Wind ran as separate self standing trains with no through cars for several years before through cars were introduced. The cross platform connection was basically at some odd time for both at Ogden.
The Heartland Flyer runs as a self standing train with no through cars today.
So such is not unheard of either.
The Heartland Flyer runs as a self standing train with no through cars today.
So such is not unheard of either.
west point
Engineer
There has been several good proposals for route extensions / new routes. However we are putting the cart before the horse. We must first know that there is a supply of new cars being built to fill out present trains and add new routes / trains. Then serious planning for additional service will be able to go forward.
Realize that additional equipment is not as sexy as routes / service. Lets get our priorities in proper order.
Realize that additional equipment is not as sexy as routes / service. Lets get our priorities in proper order.
If you think about it, who really benefits if folks from Oklahoma ride the train to Fort Worth/Dallas to spend their money?
Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
Then by that logic Illinois benefits far more from the Hoosier State and Hiawatha than Indiana/Wisconsin and New York benefits far more from the Pennsylvanian than Pennsylvania.If you think about it, who really benefits if folks from Oklahoma ride the train to Fort Worth/Dallas to spend their money?
keelhauled
OBS Chief
Or...wait for it...wait for it...both states benefit! Texas gets visitors spending money, and Oklahoma gets a connection to a major metropolitan area, making it a more desirable place to live.Then by that logic Illinois benefits far more from the Hoosier State and Hiawatha than Indiana/Wisconsin and New York benefits far more from the Pennsylvanian than Pennsylvania.If you think about it, who really benefits if folks from Oklahoma ride the train to Fort Worth/Dallas to spend their money?
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Yeah. A version of the eternal argument between NY and NJ. Fortunately they have decided that the cost of the tunnels should be shared 50-50 between the two for the balance that is not covered by the Feds. Separately, there appears to be an understanding that the split between the Feds and the States would be 50-50 too9, thought that may be a bit up in the air.
A similar argument exists between PA and NJ I suppose around Philadelphia too.
A similar argument exists between PA and NJ I suppose around Philadelphia too.
west point
Engineer
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
But money that is allocated to the state from other accounts for whatever purpose are really state money. Going one step further back, that is where the Feds collected the money from in the first place. And both NJ and NY are net donor states by quiet a margin.
