Seaboard92
Engineer
I've been thinking from a lot of these threads. They all tie into something at one point or another and that's what I feel the system is going to morph into.
Initially I thought this was a bad idea but then I saw it's merits.
Pros
-increased service along key parts of the route. For instance Omaha-Iowa-Chicago or The three C route in Ohio.
-higher intermediate ridership on the LD trains especially in these corridors if the LDs are timed right so a gap in the corridor services. Which saves the state money from an additional service while benefiting service.
-reserve fleets of engines at both ends of the corridors to rescue broken down trains as needed.
-new markets get added to the national network.
-Faster run times
-inter corridor service
Cons
-service over duplicate routes would be cut such as TOL-CHI via SOB or Omaha to Chicago via Galesburg.
-timing runs to have connections to other corridors.
-increased amount if equipment.
-state support needed.
I see the LDs becoming inter corridor trains so let's say my Ohio State Limited it uses the Empire Corridor. Then the Buckeye Corridor(three C) or Philly's Broadway Limited which uses the NEC, Keystone-then the FT Wayne HSR line. So their purpose is still there.
I also see some inter corridor service being between two regional corridors. Like in an example I've been thinking about today running the Palmetto Corridor (SC GRV-CHS) and having two Piedmont slots fill gaps in the Palmetto corridor to help both states ridership. More on that tomorrow.
I would be interested in what other members have to think about this vision. I can see some good discussion about it.
Initially I thought this was a bad idea but then I saw it's merits.
Pros
-increased service along key parts of the route. For instance Omaha-Iowa-Chicago or The three C route in Ohio.
-higher intermediate ridership on the LD trains especially in these corridors if the LDs are timed right so a gap in the corridor services. Which saves the state money from an additional service while benefiting service.
-reserve fleets of engines at both ends of the corridors to rescue broken down trains as needed.
-new markets get added to the national network.
-Faster run times
-inter corridor service
Cons
-service over duplicate routes would be cut such as TOL-CHI via SOB or Omaha to Chicago via Galesburg.
-timing runs to have connections to other corridors.
-increased amount if equipment.
-state support needed.
I see the LDs becoming inter corridor trains so let's say my Ohio State Limited it uses the Empire Corridor. Then the Buckeye Corridor(three C) or Philly's Broadway Limited which uses the NEC, Keystone-then the FT Wayne HSR line. So their purpose is still there.
I also see some inter corridor service being between two regional corridors. Like in an example I've been thinking about today running the Palmetto Corridor (SC GRV-CHS) and having two Piedmont slots fill gaps in the Palmetto corridor to help both states ridership. More on that tomorrow.
I would be interested in what other members have to think about this vision. I can see some good discussion about it.