Oregon Cascades budget cuts

[fairviewroad]

I'm not sure about the time savings on the other improvements being made from Portland to Seattle -- most of them are designed for schedule reliability rather than speed -- but it should add up to something as well.

Reliability is justifiably a key goal here. I've heard so many people in PDX and SEA tell me that they "want" to take the train but the last time they did, they got stuck for a half hour near Centralia (or wherever) for some slow freight train to pass them. These stories are so common...and yes, if you fly enough you'll encounter the same kind of problems. The point being is that shaving 10 minutes off the posted timetable is meaningless if the trains can't reliably arrive when advertised. People don't base travel choices based on 3.5 hours versus 3.25 hours...they just want to know that they can reasonably expect to arrive when they expect to.

 

[neroden]

Reliabity is crucial. Speaking of air travel, the second-to-last airplane flight I took (part of the reason I haven't taken another), we were delayed an hour *circling over Yuma*. Miserable.

 

[seat38a]

I'm not sure about the time savings on the other improvements being made from Portland to Seattle -- most of them are designed for schedule reliability rather than speed -- but it should add up to something as well.

Reliability is justifiably a key goal here. I've heard so many people in PDX and SEA tell me that they "want" to take the train but the last time they did, they got stuck for a half hour near Centralia (or wherever) for some slow freight train to pass them. These stories are so common...and yes, if you fly enough you'll encounter the same kind of problems. The point being is that shaving 10 minutes off the posted timetable is meaningless if the trains can't reliably arrive when advertised. People don't base travel choices based on 3.5 hours versus 3.25 hours...they just want to know that they can reasonably expect to arrive when they expect to.

Ding Ding Ding. Absolutely correct here. 2 hours or 4 its all about being on time or maybe couple min past the advertised time. People do freak out when the train does stop on the siding thinking they are going to be late. Good conductors, will make an announcement that the stop at the siding is built into the sched and that we won't be late. Now being stuck because of freight thats another story.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

I'm not sure about the time savings on the other improvements being made from Portland to Seattle -- most of them are designed for schedule reliability rather than speed -- but it should add up to something as well.

Reliability is justifiably a key goal here. .... People don't base travel choices based on 3.5 hours versus 3.25 hours...they just want to know that they can reasonably expect to arrive when they expect to.

From the Daily News Online, serving the Lower Columbia. October 17, 2015 • By Tom Paulu

http://tdn.com/news/rail-projects-will-speed-freight-make-more-amtrak-trains-possible/article_9694d143-9262-5526-9992-d1091011a892.html

Well, 88% On Time ain't the best, but it's a helluva lot better than 73%.

The work will result in fewer late trains — and two more northbound and southbound trains a day, according to Frank Green, the project manager for the state Department of Transportation.

Train rides between Portland and Seattle should get at least 10 minutes faster, Green said, and the goal is for trains to arrive on time 88 percent of the time, compared to 73.1 percent now.

 

[afigg]

After the rest of Kelso-Martin's Bluff was done (funded and under construction), along with the Centralia crossover (don't know), and a 3rd main track from Reservation to Stewart in Tacoma (NOT funded), the plan was to add *two more* round trips (total of 8 Cascades each way + 1 Coast Starlight), This was also supposed to require new locomotives (on order). This was supposed to require two more trainsets, beyond the Oregon ones.

WSDOT may have wimped out on this plan, but BNSF was apparently OK with it back in 2008. (Although they also asked for an extra track up Napavine Hill.) And they're very close to being able to implement it: buy the extra trainsets, put in the third track from Reservation to Stewart, and they should be ready.

Washington state passed a gas tax increase last summer as part of a transportation funding package. Prior to this, the state was facing revenue shortfalls for road, highway, and infrastructure projects which was probably constraining what WA DOT could plan and spend for passenger rail projects. WA DOT page summarizing the $16 billion Connecting Washington Transportation Package (over 16 years).

The transportation package includes this: "$1.3 billion on non-highway projects, such as bike paths, pedestrian walkways, rail, and transit." although this is funding spread over 16 years. But it may provide WA DOT additional funding to be able to acquire the 2 Talgo trainsets stored in Indiana at a bargain price, to pursue upgrade projects for the corridor after 2017 that had been on hold due to lack of funds and various federal funding grant programs that are available (TIGER, etc) for smaller projects that requires matching state funds.

 

[neroden]

A fraction of that $1.3 billion really should be enough money to finish the plan for 8 Cascades each way -- there's not much more which needs to be done for that in terms of trackwork, and the Talgos stored in Indiana should be a bargain. Everything is waiting for Point Defiance Bypass to start operations, however.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

As for Oregon: Alternative 1 gets a go-ahead.

This surely represents a giant step in paper shuffling. Not sure how much of a step toward actually doing a dayum thing, because that would require spending money. LOL. But it met the "by the end of 2015" deadline, which is an accomplishment. LOL.

Dec. 10, 2015

Oregon Passenger Rail Leadership Council recommends preferred alternative for intercity improvements

SALEM –The Oregon Passenger Rail Leadership Council reached agreement on Dec. 8 to support the recommended preferred alternative to improve Oregon’s intercity passenger rail over the next two decades. The Oregon Department of Transportation will advance this alternative to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

The Leadership Council ... agreed with ODOT’s ... Project team that Alternative 1 is the preferred option because it provides more frequent and reliable rail service in a cost-effective way.

The recommended preferred alternative follows the existing alignment on the Union Pacific Railroad line and increases Amtrak Cascades ... service between Eugene and Portland from two daily round trips to six daily round trips over the next 20 years. This planned increase in passenger rail service in Oregon will ... match [ the levels of ] scheduled train service north of Portland Union Station into Washington and British Columbia [ that will take effect in about two years ]. The recommendation was developed after years of technical analysis, robust public engagement, and ... Council deliberation.

[ It ] is a major milestone toward making Oregon eligible to compete for future federal funding when [ or if any ] becomes available, such as the recently approved FAST (Fixing America’s Surface Transportation) Act ... bill.

A Council member wrote, “Alternative 1 is the best opportunity to advance passenger rail in Oregon. It provides a cost-effective choice that will increase the reliability and frequency of rail service near population centers in the Willamette Valley, with shorter travel times and an ability to implement incrementally when funding becomes available. ... Alternative 1 has the support of ... the Federal Railroad Administration and is something Oregon should support building.”

... more information... at http://www.OregonPassengerRail.org or contact Jill Pearson ... (503) 986-3313, [email protected].

##ODOT##

(Posting almost in full, a published public ("taxpayers owned") document not subject to fair-use limitations.)

 

[natebofto]

As for Oregon: Alternative 1 gets a go-ahead.

This surely represents a giant step in paper shuffling. Not sure how much of a step toward actually doing a dayum thing, because that would require spending money. LOL. But it met the "by the end of 2015" deadline, which is an accomplishment. LOL.

Dec. 10, 2015

Oregon Passenger Rail Leadership Council recommends preferred alternative for intercity improvements

SALEM –The Oregon Passenger Rail Leadership Council reached agreement on Dec. 8 to support the recommended preferred alternative to improve Oregon’s intercity passenger rail over the next two decades. The Oregon Department of Transportation will advance this alternative to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

The Leadership Council ... agreed with ODOT’s ... Project team that Alternative 1 is the preferred option because it provides more frequent and reliable rail service in a cost-effective way.

The recommended preferred alternative follows the existing alignment on the Union Pacific Railroad line and increases Amtrak Cascades ... service between Eugene and Portland from two daily round trips to six daily round trips over the next 20 years. This planned increase in passenger rail service in Oregon will ... match [ the levels of ] scheduled train service north of Portland Union Station into Washington and British Columbia [ that will take effect in about two years ]. The recommendation was developed after years of technical analysis, robust public engagement, and ... Council deliberation.

[ It ] is a major milestone toward making Oregon eligible to compete for future federal funding when [ or if any ] becomes available, such as the recently approved FAST (Fixing America’s Surface Transportation) Act ... bill.

A Council member wrote, “Alternative 1 is the best opportunity to advance passenger rail in Oregon. It provides a cost-effective choice that will increase the reliability and frequency of rail service near population centers in the Willamette Valley, with shorter travel times and an ability to implement incrementally when funding becomes available. ... Alternative 1 has the support of ... the Federal Railroad Administration and is something Oregon should support building.”

... more information... at http://www.OregonPassengerRail.org or contact Jill Pearson ... (503) 986-3313, [email protected].

##ODOT##

(Posting almost in full, a published public ("taxpayers owned") document not subject to fair-use limitations.)

What I'm interested in seeing is the fact that they want 6 round trips between Eugene and Portland within 20 years. While I would absolutely love that, I also question how that would be done? I assume double main track as much as they can, but their needs to be a dedicated funding source because apparently only a $5 mill. difference almost shut down the service for good

 

[neroden]

Oregon picked the all-UP alternative -- better described as the "NO PROGRESS WILL BE MADE AT ALL" alternative, because any capacity they build, UP will use for freight instead. Unless they're planning to buy the track; it'll be expense. Worth noting is that I see no evidence that UP was consulted during the Alternatives Analysis; I see no "UP is happy to share its corridor with more trains" statements or anything even close.

So I'm disappointed. If they'd picked the other alternative, I'd expect it to be built in 10 years. With this alternative, I expect absolutely no improvements in 10 years. It would be nice if UP proved me wrong.

So, no improvements in Oregon for the next decade or more. Go Washington.

 

[Palmetto]

What is UP's position on this?

 

[Karl1459]

UP's Position? As always if they don't have to pay for it they are OK. They will be real concerned if the talk turns to 110+ or electric due to safety concerns with separation etc however.

Was UP consulted? Yes. I have seen a copy of a letter from UP detailing their concerns. It was published in the PNWC-NRHS newsletter.

Option 1 is far less costly than any of the others as they would have required entirely new ROW.

Look at the problems. Salem and Albany stations are not compatible with a different ROW and would need to be abandoned and replaced. Portland has a difficult exit south, except for the SP/UP route. Any other route would abandon the Oregon City station. A PDX-Salem using the OE and SP-Tillamook branch is possible but would be slow due to extra mileage and excess curvature. Using the OE Salem to Albany would require MAJOR line construction in downtown Salem and be hideously expensive. Exiting Albany-Eugene on the OE would again require major construction in downtown Albany, though as a smaller city it would only be very expensive. I do see a possibility that the OE line could be used as a separated double track from Junction City through the Eugene yards, OR-DOT owns it so that would hold costs down and might even get done first.

There is no way Oregon can pay for a entire new railroad... period. Nor can they pay for an additional lane on I-5 much less a parallel highway. An effective Cascades rail service seems to be the only way out of the highway dilemma and option 1 is the only one with any hope to be achieved. And that can get done only by incremental upgrades in partnership with UP, and a double tracked line should be more than sufficient for whatever additional freight UP can run and an expanded Cascade service.

 

[neroden]

What's actually going to happen, I predict, is

-- no new railroad (Oregon could pay for it, but won't)

-- no new highway (Oregon doesn't want it)

-- no new highway lanes (Oregon doesn't want them either)

-- insignificant improvements to the UP route from Portland to Eugene (UP won't allow significant improvements without asking for so much money that Oregon will refuse)

...

...

So what will happen is simply a relative depopulation of Salem/Albany/Eugene as people simply move to Portland -- if they all continue to grow, growth will be much faster in Portland than in Salem/Albany/Eugene, and Salem/Albany/Eugene will get poorer as Portland gets richer. Tight zoning restrictions on construction in Portland will make that difficult, but the trend is already in progress.

Which is probably just fine for Oregon, but sucks for Salem/Albany/Eugene.

 

[niemi24s]

I think the key will be getting the Portland to Seattle time to 3 hours and even better. . .

Is that even possible? At present, the timetable distance of 187 miles is covered in about 4h20m 4h50m , for an average speed of 43mph 49mph. That same distance with the same stops in 3 hours would require an average speed of 62mph - a 44% 27% increase.

Does any of that track work reduce the distance?

 

[seat38a]

Can't Oregon work out the same type of deal California worked out for the Capitol Corridor? Speeds are increasing and the tracks and signals are all being maintained by the State at higher speed capability. UP still owns the tracks, but CA maintains it to a much higher standard in return for certain number of slots. Mind you the Capitol Corridor has an on time performance in the mid 90's. From what I have read, it is the goal of the JPA, to increase average speed close to 100 and reduce journey times between the bay and Sacramento even further.

 

[west point]

The ability to decrease times from Seattle to Portland would require eliminating the many slower sections of the BNSF RR. Believe there is a hill that is significantly slower on the route. Again it is not so much getting higher speed sections but eliminating the slower sections. Granted when PTC is in effect on the route getting those sections to be class 5 - 90 MPH track will be not too expensive.

 

[niemi24s]

I've no idea how much bridges and tunnels slow things down, but there are about 25 bridges of various types and 2 tunnels between PDX and SEA. Don't know about any hill.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

... the same type of deal California worked out for the Capitol Corridor? ... UP still owns the tracks, but CA maintains it to a much higher standard in return for certain number of slots. Mind you the Capitol Corridor has an on time performance in the mid 90's. ...

The Capitol Corridor is probably a model for the nation. A steady series of incremental improvement over years, regularly increasing number of frequencies, shorter schedules, sustained growth.

Actually, isn't the Surfliner Corridor down your way on the same model? Incremental improvements etc etc.

I'm sure this will be the model for the so-called Coast Daylight along with the other Surfliners on the route LA-Santa Barbara-San Luis Obispo/Bay Area.

Oregon's ambitions seem to be quite modest, too modest. They aim for six Cascades roundtrips Eugene-Portland by 2035? Washington will have six roundtrips in FY 2018. (Cascades frequencies plus the Coast Starlight, in both cases we presume.) Does Oregon assume that Washington will wait 15 years for the little kid Oregon to catch up?

 

[WoodyinNYC]

I think the key will be getting the Portland to Seattle time to 3 hours and even better. . .

Is that even possible? At present, the timetable distance of 187 miles is covered in about 4h20m, for an average speed of 43mph. That same distance with the same stops in 3 hours would require an average speed of 62mph - a 44% increase.

Can you recheck the timetable please? On Amtrak.com the usual schedule for the Cascades is 3 hrs 40 min. Not good enuff, but helluva lot better than your 4h20m.

And then redo your mph calculations, which I'm really not good at ( ) so I'd like to see yours.

Cutting the run time from 3 hrs 40 min to "only" 3 hrs 30 min by FY 2018 would take the Cascades a full one- fourth of the way to Seat 38a's 3-hour number.

Actually, iirc, the target is a trip time, after the next phase of another Billion or so in upgrades, of 3 hrs 20 min.

 

[niemi24s]

Can you recheck the timetable please?

Oops! Thanks for catching my misteak. :blush: It's actually 3h50m either way for an average speed of about 49mph. The target of 3h would require an average speed of 62mph which is really only 27% faster - not 44% faster. Fixed up my original goof.

Couldn't see where my initial error came from, but I suspect the Amtrak timetable with its twelve hour clock (instead of a 24 hour clock, like most other timetables in the world) had something to do with it.

Thanks again.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

For years we've heard that HSR can sort of compete with airplanes against end-to-end trips of about 4 hours, and can beat the planes when HSR takes 3 hours city center to city center. So of course, Washington State may dream of a 3-hour trip. But a 3 hr 30 min time is getting close to good enuff. Alas, getting more and more minutes out of the schedule gets harder and harder to do.

Now as Oregon tries to play catch-up with Washington State, it has a few advantages. Seattle-Portland is 187 miles, while Portland-Eugene is only 123 miles. If the states invested the same per-mile amount, Oregon's job is only about 2/3rds that of its neighbor. The topography is also easier, I understand (never been there, never done that) with the Willamette Valley route less curvy and less challenging.

Meanwhile Washington's segment now only averages 51 mph after funding incremental improvements on the main route for almost 20 years, a dozen years before the Stimulus breakthru. By now the low-hanging fruit has been plucked.

In Oregon, the low hanging fruit must resemble a pumpkin patch waiting for harvest. So for an investment of say, $500 million, Washington might cut another 10 minutes from its segment, ever closer to that sweet spot of 3 hours. For the same $500 million, hey wait, the Oregon segment takes only 2 hrs 35 min now! Give me back my half a Billion! LOL. Oh, now I remember. Nobody is flying Eugene or Salem to Portland; cars are the competition.

On Portland-Eugene, the Coast Starlight now takes 2 hrs 45 min, compared with the Cascades 2 hr 35 min. (As an aside, this shows what the Talgo tilt can do for a timetable.) So now the Starlight is moving at an average 44 mph, and the three Cascades are doing 47 mph.

Speed things up for the Cascades and that 51 mph gets the trip down to 2 hrs 25 min. Get up to 55 mph and down to 2 hrs 15 min. At only 59 mph we're down to 2 hrs 5 min. Have to blast thru at average 65 mph to get below 2 hours. I think we'll have to do better than that. OK, so, to make the run in 1 hr 45 min, the trains need to average 70 mph. An average train speed matching the Interstate speed limit is likely gonna be good enuff.

(My thanks to http://www.calculatorpro.com/calculator/miles-per-hour-calculator/ for the invaluable help on the above paragraphs.)

How much will it cost to get all the slowest spots out, some faster stretches in, and a trip Portland-Eugene up to 50 minutes faster than now? It will be interesting to see the proposals in the Service Plan, promised for next year iirc.

Edited for typos only.

 

[seat38a]

... the same type of deal California worked out for the Capitol Corridor? ... UP still owns the tracks, but CA maintains it to a much higher standard in return for certain number of slots. Mind you the Capitol Corridor has an on time performance in the mid 90's. ...

The Capitol Corridor is probably a model for the nation. A steady series of incremental improvement over years, regularly increasing number of frequencies, shorter schedules, sustained growth.

Actually, isn't the Surfliner Corridor down your way on the same model? Incremental improvements etc etc.

I'm sure this will be the model for the so-called Coast Daylight along with the other Surfliners on the route LA-Santa Barbara-San Luis Obispo/Bay Area.

Oregon's ambitions seem to be quite modest, too modest. They aim for six Cascades roundtrips Eugene-Portland by 2035? Washington will have six roundtrips in FY 2018. (Cascades frequencies plus the Coast Starlight, in both cases we presume.) Does Oregon assume that Washington will wait 15 years for the little kid Oregon to catch up?

Majority of the Surfliner Corridor is owned by Metrolink And Coaster Commuter. The part north of Moorpark is UP. And yes, there is a massive double tracking work going on in the corridor.

 

[west point]

Although a long time since there. The route over Steel bridge - Brooklyn yard - east Milwaukee all has many slow spots. At one time the Steel bridge was limited to 20 MPH MAS although that might be different now. Then CP East Portland is what a 15 degree curve ? Brooklyn yard was also very slow. The Steel bridge and CP do not appear to be able to increase MAS. That Certainly causes difficulties to increase average speed Portland = Eugene.

 

[fairviewroad]

...

So what will happen is simply a relative depopulation of Salem/Albany/Eugene as people simply move to Portland -- if they all continue to grow, growth will be much faster in Portland than in Salem/Albany/Eugene, and Salem/Albany/Eugene will get poorer as Portland gets richer. Tight zoning restrictions on construction in Portland will make that difficult, but the trend is already in progress.

Which is probably just fine for Oregon, but sucks for Salem/Albany/Eugene.

I think that's a lot to of pin on the presence or absence of a few additional rail frequencies. The Cascades haul such an abysmally tiny percentage of traffic between those three cities and PDX that you could quintuple the ridership and few people would notice a difference.

As it is, Salem/Albany/Eugene are all doing just fine, thank you. Salem has state government as its economic base, which isn't going anywhere any time soon. Eugene has the huge economic driver called the University of Oregon. Albany, well that could be your exception but it's by far the smallest of the three, though if you combine it with nearby Corvallis (home to Oregon State) then it's not terribly shabby either. These cities aren't going to rise or fall based on a handful of passenger trains. They're nice to have, yes. But similar corridors flourish around the nation in the absence of any passenger rail at all.

 

[neroden]

Well, they are practically suburbs of Portland. Our experience in the East says connectivity with the urban hub matters more than you may think it does. It all looks great as long as the region as a whole is growing. (Portland is growing fastest, similarly to Seattle, with the smaller cities growing more slowly -- this isn't historically necessary or even typical.) But if population growth reverses, current trends indicate Portland will keep the most population while the car-dependent cities decline. Decline isn't necessarily that bad, of course.