Experimental Routes

[Benson]

In the past, there have been Amtrak reauthorizations that contained language authorizing Amtrak to start 2-year experimental routes. The Lake Shore Limited, Pioneer, Gulf Coast Limited, etc. were such routes. Could such a provision be feasibly included in the next Amtrak bill? Perhaps this would apply to short-distance routes only, with Amtrak funding the initial 2 years and the states after if they want the service to continue.

 

[Eric S]

Could such a provision be included? Sure, why not.

What's the likelihood of such a provision being included and funded, given the political realities? Pretty much nil.

 

[jis]

I would prefer to see suspended routes be reinstated before starting too much experimentation elsewhere.

 

[west point]

Provision not needed for at least 3 years until there is enough equipment to cover present routes during the summer traffic surge. Until the new California cars are delivered to California and the Midwest do not pull cars from existing trains reducing existing trains revenue.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Daily Sunset East NOL-JAK ( possibly extending the CONO), Daily Texas Eagle CHI-LAX, Daily Cardinal ( to STL instead of CHI) and a Broadway Limited from NYP- CHI should be the priority for more Amtrak LD Service once equipment is available!

 

[neroden]

I am largely in agreement with Jim:

-- #1 daily Cardinal

-- #2 daily Texas Eagle / Sunset Limited (as proposed in PIP)

-- #3 Broadway Limited NYP-CHI (or the "through cars" proposed in the PIP)

-- #4 Silver Palm

In short, frequency improvements are more important than new routes at the moment.

 

[Tennessee Traveler]

As a Nashvillian I am only interested in the restoration of Amtrak's Floridian except send it from Nashville to Chattanooga and Atlanta to Florida instead of the undesirable old route through Birmingham and Montgomery.

 

[DryCreek]

Well, if we're just throwing out a wish list, mine is short and pretty easily done. I would absolutely love to see the Heartland Flyer extended up to meet the SWC in Kansas. That would make so much sense - at least to me. If I wanted to take my wife to Colorado on a train, then we would board the daily TE at CBR and connect in FTW to (I dunno, Wichita?) where we could meet the SWC and head west. Otherwise we'd have to travel to an endpoint for the route and then backtrack.

I would also love to see the old SL route completed back to the east coast. It's not very conducive for us to try and get to the wife's native Virginia by rail due to the roundabout routing. Yeah, I know, CBR to SAS (overnight) and then SAS to NOL on the SL and then Crescent to RVR and a NE Regional to NPN. I would like to be able to go up through GA/SC/NC though. There are a lot of "southern charm" type destination stops there - most notably Savannah and Chahhhhhhl-stun.

Equipment. Well, I haven't given this much thought until I was bored the other day. I looked on the Amtrak site and brought up their Train Tracker. It was then that the epiphany hit me - with the TE having continuing service though the LA, as well as a daily component, there could be a time when you need three sets of equipment for the route! Or at least it looked that way to me at that instance in time. Of course, those are just the cars cut off in SAS for LAUS (on the SL), but even those consists cross somewhere in Arizona. So, to extend the HF I guess that they'd need at least one more consist of Amfleet cars. I wasn't very impressed with them when we used to ride them in the early 90's, but they were better than driving to WUS or flying short-haul there for just a weekend getaway.

 

[Bradenmeridian]

While we're wishing, I'd like to see a second LSL that left Chicago in the morning and NYP late at night, so that they both crossed NY State in the wee hours and served the cities between Buffalo and Chicago during normal waking hours. I think it would be popular, both as a night train across NY state and would more than double the ridership in cities like Cleveland, etc. If the night train left NYP after 11:00p, maybe replacing #261, it would enable visitors to New York to take in a Broadway show and then jump in a sleeper, instead of staying in a hotel. (Or rewording that, visitors could take in more New York nightlife if they didn't have to leave at 3:40p.) I'm terrible at counting trainsets, but I'm guessing there are currently three on the LSL - doubling the service might only require two more sets, not double the current number.

 

[afigg]

In the past, there have been Amtrak reauthorizations that contained language authorizing Amtrak to start 2-year experimental routes. The Lake Shore Limited, Pioneer, Gulf Coast Limited, etc. were such routes. Could such a provision be feasibly included in the next Amtrak bill? Perhaps this would apply to short-distance routes only, with Amtrak funding the initial 2 years and the states after if they want the service to continue.

The challenge with "experimental" routes is the start-up costs in capital improvements that freight railroads will demand for any route that does not already have passenger trains running on it. For example, Virginia spent $114 million to extend Amtrak service to Norfolk and is budgeted to spend $82 million for upgrades on CSX to be able to expand service to 3 daily trains to NFK. The price tag for the 60 some mile extension to Roanoke from Lynchburg is $95 million which is also for only 1 new station in Roanoke with no stops in-between. The federal funding portion for the new service from Chicago to Quad Cities is $170 million.

The only routes where Amtrak could realistically start up a new experimental service would be over existing routes such as a portion of an LD route (CHI-Memphis for example) provided of course that the freight railroad is ok with an additional daily train or circumstances where the tracks are in good enough condition for passenger trains and have under-utilized capacity.

The reality is that we are in an era where Amtrak has to look to the states to provide the subsidy and capital funding for any service of under 750 miles. Amtrak can propose a service and work with the state DOT or DOTs, but can't take the lead in starting service on its own. Amtrak could restore or expand LD services, but given the realities of the funding situation, beyond taking SL or Cardinal daily, the Amtrak board is going to take their cue from Congress in what LD trains are run. Unfortunately, that would include a restored Boardway Limited/Three Rivers which would be the most logical LD train to bring back if Amtrak ever runs more than 15 LD trains again.

 

[neroden]

The Amtrak board should not be stupid. Running a daily Cardinal would quite clearly reduce the required Congressional subsidy -- I don't think there's any reason to wait for Congress before doing so. Running the Pennsy/Cap through cars would also reduce the required Congressional subsidy.

 

[edjbox]

Daily cardinal would mean Indiana would not have to worry about the Hoosier State anymore

 

[Paulus]

I find it odd that people are so focused on adding long distance routes rather than corridor services which are far more useful.

 

[zephyr17]

I find it odd that people are so focused on adding long distance routes rather than corridor services which are far more useful.

Most corridors would be under 750 miles and thus up to the states to decide what they want to run.

 

[Paulus]

I find it odd that people are so focused on adding long distance routes rather than corridor services which are far more useful.

Most corridors would be under 750 miles and thus up to the states to decide what they want to run.

OP referred to a new authorization bill which means that wouldn't neccesarily be true.

 

[jis]

I find it odd that people are so focused on adding long distance routes rather than corridor services which are far more useful.

Most corridors would be under 750 miles and thus up to the states to decide what they want to run.

OP referred to a new authorization bill which means that wouldn't neccesarily be true.

But it is also very unlikely to be false. There appears to be bipartisan agreement on at least that part in both houses. I think hell is likely to freeze over before the federal Congress will pass an authorization where they take on bigger financial responsibility than now for passenger rail. Hence PRIIA 209 is not going away no matter how much some might wish.

 

[DryCreek]

Well, with this miserably cold and grey weather here, I'm starting to wish for an extension of the Walt Disney World monorail from a town near me straight to the Ticket and Transportation Center where I can transfer to a resorts monorail.

I know, it's a pipe dream - but still somewhat on-topic. Disney fans and frequent visitors have been longing for an extension of the monorail within the boundaries of WDW for years, but they, like us, will probably never see any expansion of the system. There will always be more buses added to service any new attractions or resort hotels. It all comes down to the usual canned excuses about cost per mile and equipment/track maintenance.

 

[Paulus]

I find it odd that people are so focused on adding long distance routes rather than corridor services which are far more useful.

Most corridors would be under 750 miles and thus up to the states to decide what they want to run.

OP referred to a new authorization bill which means that wouldn't neccesarily be true.

But it is also very unlikely to be false. There appears to be bipartisan agreement on at least that part in both houses. I think hell is likely to freeze over before the federal Congress will pass an authorization where they take on bigger financial responsibility than now for passenger rail. Hence PRIIA 209 is not going away no matter how much some might wish.

But that would be true of any other experimental route, long or short distance.

 

[William W.]

Daily Sunset East NOL-JAK ( possibly extending the CONO), Daily Texas Eagle CHI-LAX, Daily Cardinal ( to STL instead of CHI) and a Broadway Limited from NYP- CHI should be the priority for more Amtrak LD Service once equipment is available!

Why does everyone want the Cardinal to go to STL? That would break so many connections, and would eliminate service in Indiana entirely (assuming the HS stays dead).

 

[Bob Dylan]

Daily Sunset East NOL-JAK ( possibly extending the CONO), Daily Texas Eagle CHI-LAX, Daily Cardinal ( to STL instead of CHI) and a Broadway Limited from NYP- CHI should be the priority for more Amtrak LD Service once equipment is available!

Why does everyone want the Cardinal to go to STL? That would break so many connections, and would eliminate service in Indiana entirely (assuming the HS stays dead).

Check the schedules: The Cap Ltd, the Lakeshore and the Cardinal all serve Indiana ( which really, truly doesn't want to fund trains)and if the Broadway Ltd is brought back, it would serve Indiana also!

Having the Card serve St Louis ( like the old National Ltd.) would make connections to Kansas City,New Orleans and the Texas Eagle possible without having ALL of the LD Westbound Eastern Trains serve Chicago which frankly could use some relief as a hub for All Western LD Trains!!

 

[andersone]

Daily cardinal would mean Indiana would not have to worry about the Hoosier State anymore

does Indiana worry about anything?

I think a Daily card is the top la any list

 

[jis]

I guess I will again be blamed for eastern bias. But whichever way you look at it, in the LD network, a daily Card followed by through cars from the Pennsy to the Cap provide the most bang for the buck, and are within earshot of realizability with the evolving equipment situation over the next couple of years.

 

[Metra Electric Guest]

A Saint Louis-Vandalia-Terre Haute-Indy-Richmond-Dayton-Columbus-onward train would do pretty well I'd think. I don't know how congested the tracks are, their condition, who owns them, etc, but it seems like a long term no-brainer, lots of connections along the way too, such as the Illinois service and cono, Cardinal, etc, plus it would create an additional east-west link not through Chicago.

There are also a fair number of colleges and universities along the route, Greenville, IL, Rose-Hulman and ISU in Terre Haute, etc, which would help generate riders. Obviously the reality is it won't happen.

(I can't believe that I originally wrote Vincennes instead of Terre Haute, that's way off the route)

 

[Eric S]

Daily Sunset East NOL-JAK ( possibly extending the CONO), Daily Texas Eagle CHI-LAX, Daily Cardinal ( to STL instead of CHI) and a Broadway Limited from NYP- CHI should be the priority for more Amtrak LD Service once equipment is available!

Why does everyone want the Cardinal to go to STL? That would break so many connections, and would eliminate service in Indiana entirely (assuming the HS stays dead).

Check the schedules: The Cap Ltd, the Lakeshore and the Cardinal all serve Indiana ( which really, truly doesn't want to fund trains)and if the Broadway Ltd is brought back, it would serve Indiana also!

Having the Card serve St Louis ( like the old National Ltd.) would make connections to Kansas City,New Orleans and the Texas Eagle possible without having ALL of the LD Westbound Eastern Trains serve Chicago which frankly could use some relief as a hub for All Western LD Trains!!

Unless there is a connecting train CHI-IND or the Cardinal splits in IND into both CHI and STL sections, I think more is lost than gained by shifting the train from CHI to STL.

 

[jis]

Unless there is a connecting train CHI-IND or the Cardinal splits in IND into both CHI and STL sections, I think more is lost than gained by shifting the train from CHI to STL.

I do agree with that. We should not lose the through service to CHI just by going to STL instead. It should be a split.