chrsjrcj
OBS Chief
Pretty sure he meant Meridian, MS 
What would you add?
- Thread starter StriderGDM
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
Reno89502
Service Attendant
I would add a new class between coach and sleeper service. Something the equivalent of airline first-class seating, with lie-flat seats. This could be done in the lower-level section of the superliners, and in half of a coach on the single level long-distance trains.
neroden
Engineer
OK, here's what I'd add. I'm going to focus in a very specific, high-impact part of the country. We have the Northeast Corridor + connecting corridors, and we have the Chicago Hub. We need to fill in between them to create one large area of the country with solid train service.
Not in order of priority:
(1) "South of the Lake" exclusive passenger tracks from Union Station to the Michigan Line. Immediate benefits for Michigan Line timekeeping, and also Capitol Limited / Lake Shore Limited.
(2) Connection of Cardinal to this route via exclusive passenger tracks.
(3) Connection for Pere Marquette onto this route north of Michigan City.
(4) Separation of CN traffic from passenger traffic at Battle Creek, with passenger-train control over dispatching.
(5) Connection from Toledo to Detroit, preferably with passenger-exclusive tracks.
(6) Daily Cardinal Service.
(7) Separate daily Hoosier State service (on a different schedule).
(8) Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati
(9) Exclusive passenger tracks Schenectady-Buffalo NY
(10) Connection at Charlottesville VA to put Cardinal on the faster tracks north of there.
(11) "Broadway Limited", initially as Pennsylvanian-Capitol Limited through cars
(12) Single-level equipment on the Capitol Limited to synchronize equipment design
(13) High platform at Chicago Union Station for LSL/CL/Broadway/Cardinal.
(14) Purchase & reconstruction of route via Fort Wayne for high-speed Chicago-Toledo service.
(15) Separate Boston and New York trains for the LSL (because the train is getting too long already).
(16) Reconstruction of Chicago Union Station to deal with the passenger flows; basically the original design will have to be restored and the office building demolished.
(17) Speed up the Capitol Limited route from Pittsburgh to DC, which is dang slow. Tilting trains, maybe?
In the end, there should be corridor routes from Chicago to Toledo via Detroit, via Elkhart, and via Fort Wayne, and from Chicago to Indianapolis, and from Cleveland to Columbus. In "long distance" trains, there should be five frequencies a day from Chicago to the East Coast, each on different routes (probably tracking each others' tails, mostly). On the east side, this is one to Boston, one via Albany to NY, one via Pittsburgh & Philadelphia to NY, one via the Capitol Limited route to DC, and one via the Cardinal route. On the west side, one should take the Cardinal route, one the Detroit route, one the Elkhart route, and probably the rest should take the Fort Wayne route; careful scheduling at Toledo should allow transfers between everything except the Cardinal route.
Not in order of priority:
(1) "South of the Lake" exclusive passenger tracks from Union Station to the Michigan Line. Immediate benefits for Michigan Line timekeeping, and also Capitol Limited / Lake Shore Limited.
(2) Connection of Cardinal to this route via exclusive passenger tracks.
(3) Connection for Pere Marquette onto this route north of Michigan City.
(4) Separation of CN traffic from passenger traffic at Battle Creek, with passenger-train control over dispatching.
(5) Connection from Toledo to Detroit, preferably with passenger-exclusive tracks.
(6) Daily Cardinal Service.
(7) Separate daily Hoosier State service (on a different schedule).
(8) Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati
(9) Exclusive passenger tracks Schenectady-Buffalo NY
(10) Connection at Charlottesville VA to put Cardinal on the faster tracks north of there.
(11) "Broadway Limited", initially as Pennsylvanian-Capitol Limited through cars
(12) Single-level equipment on the Capitol Limited to synchronize equipment design
(13) High platform at Chicago Union Station for LSL/CL/Broadway/Cardinal.
(14) Purchase & reconstruction of route via Fort Wayne for high-speed Chicago-Toledo service.
(15) Separate Boston and New York trains for the LSL (because the train is getting too long already).
(16) Reconstruction of Chicago Union Station to deal with the passenger flows; basically the original design will have to be restored and the office building demolished.
(17) Speed up the Capitol Limited route from Pittsburgh to DC, which is dang slow. Tilting trains, maybe?
In the end, there should be corridor routes from Chicago to Toledo via Detroit, via Elkhart, and via Fort Wayne, and from Chicago to Indianapolis, and from Cleveland to Columbus. In "long distance" trains, there should be five frequencies a day from Chicago to the East Coast, each on different routes (probably tracking each others' tails, mostly). On the east side, this is one to Boston, one via Albany to NY, one via Pittsburgh & Philadelphia to NY, one via the Capitol Limited route to DC, and one via the Cardinal route. On the west side, one should take the Cardinal route, one the Detroit route, one the Elkhart route, and probably the rest should take the Fort Wayne route; careful scheduling at Toledo should allow transfers between everything except the Cardinal route.
Do trains of "overnight" duration really require sleepers ? Was that a part of RPSA '70 ? The dining car requirement was, but I think it was required only for trains of "over 12 (or was it 18 ? ) hours' duration. Remember, this would focus on the "middle" stops, and the end points would be pretty much just that -- ends of the route.
Part of what I advocate here is a corridor, not another LD service. I'm not sure the sleeper - dining car - lounge - coach model is the way to go, here. Maybe just coaches + cafe car, for a long corridor Chicago - MSP - W'peg.
Last edited by a moderator:
DryCreek
Lead Service Attendant
Oh. Well, it certainly would make it more convenient to me.Pretty sure he meant Meridian, MS
Anyway, it's pretty amazing to live outside a small town that used to be a booming MKT (Texas Central Railroad) division yard and locomotive shop, and now there aren't even any tracks left to show that it was here.
A
Alex M.
Guest
Since we are talking about what if ideas, here is my two cents worth:
1. Lengthen the Crescent and split it at Atlanta, sending one section down the original Crescent route via Montgomery and Mobile to New Orleans with the other section continuing on its existing route.
2.Add another Silver train to Florida, naming it the Silver Champion. Reroute the Silver Meteor to go via Raleigh and Columbia once the proposed high speed rail line is rebuilt on the SAL ROW south of Petersburg. Split the Silver Star and the Silver Champion, that is routed on the Silver Meteor's route on the A line, at Jacksonville with east coast sections routed down the FEC and west coast sections terminating in Tampa. The Silver Meteor will stay on its existing route through central Florida to Miami.
3. These two ideas are predicated on there being adequate station facilities to split and combine the trains. In Atlanta, the station there would be built large enough to handle regional train service to Savannah Would it be possible to return Amtrak to the old Jacksonville Terminal?
1. Lengthen the Crescent and split it at Atlanta, sending one section down the original Crescent route via Montgomery and Mobile to New Orleans with the other section continuing on its existing route.
2.Add another Silver train to Florida, naming it the Silver Champion. Reroute the Silver Meteor to go via Raleigh and Columbia once the proposed high speed rail line is rebuilt on the SAL ROW south of Petersburg. Split the Silver Star and the Silver Champion, that is routed on the Silver Meteor's route on the A line, at Jacksonville with east coast sections routed down the FEC and west coast sections terminating in Tampa. The Silver Meteor will stay on its existing route through central Florida to Miami.
3. These two ideas are predicated on there being adequate station facilities to split and combine the trains. In Atlanta, the station there would be built large enough to handle regional train service to Savannah Would it be possible to return Amtrak to the old Jacksonville Terminal?
Run the Pere Marquette north from Grand Rapids to Traverse City, Petoskey, and Mackinaw City.
Run a Thruway bus from Traverse City to Boyne and Gaylord for those who want to go skiing/golfing in those areas.
Run another Thruway bus from Mackinaw City to St. Ignace and Sault Ste. Marie.
Run a Thruway bus from Traverse City to Boyne and Gaylord for those who want to go skiing/golfing in those areas.
Run another Thruway bus from Mackinaw City to St. Ignace and Sault Ste. Marie.
FormerOBS
Conductor
Sarah:
I'd ride it! I haven't seen Mackinac Island in years and years!
Tom
I'd ride it! I haven't seen Mackinac Island in years and years!
Tom
Good idea Sarah, that's beautiful country, but I'd only go in the Summer! LOL
Last edited by a moderator:
WoodyinNYC
Conductor
Posted 07 April 2015 - 11:27 PM
Anderson, on 06 Apr 2015 - 05:10 AM, said:
Being realistic and assuming:
(1) I'd get $1bn/yr added in constant dollars for a decade …
...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I used to think, 'Keep it simple: Double the runs on every LD route.'
But … A second Amtrak train messes up the freight operations. …
A package of upgrades to satisfy the freight host starts to loom as a large fraction of the costs of going 'whole hog' corridor service. So let's go whole hog!
My Second Priority project after South of the Lake is to aim for 12 or 15 trains a day D.C.-Richmond, with 6 or 8 continuing Richmond-Petersburg-Raleigh-Charlotte.
An hour or more could be cut from D.C.-Richmond to create corridor service, as well as benefiting Norfolk and Newport News on the Amtrak Virginia services. Meanwhile routing all NS trains thru Main Street Station in Richmond. I'm sure D.C.-Richmond can support 12 trains a day counting the thru trains.
Another 20 minutes or so could be saved from Richmond-Petersburg to benefit Amtrak's LD and medium distance Silver Meteor, Silver Star, and Palmetto; the Carolinian; and the Norfolk trains.
The shortcut being studied from Petersburg to Raleigh could take another hour out of the time of the Silver Star, and the Carolinian if it's rerouted to skip a few stops to the east.
Making D.C.-Richmond-Petersburg a 110-mph route would add another strong corridor on its own, while giving immense benefit to Amtrak's longer distance trains.
Taking an hour or two out of the schedules of the Silvers and the Palmetto would allow again a luxury of choice: better arrival times or better departure times. SB, the Palmetto arrives in Savannah at 8:59 p.m. But 7:30 p.m. would be much better. The Star reaches Columbia,SC, at 1:38 a.m., so a midnight arrival would be much better. The Meteor reaches Savannah at 6:34 a.m., so an earlier arrival would be much worse. But the Meteor leaves NYC at 3:15 p.m. and D.C. at 7:30 p.m. Departures an hour or so earlier could work out fine.
Of course, upgrading Petersburg-Richmond-D.C. with a dedicated passenger track would improve on time performance, and better reliability would help all service on the NEC.
Ah, yes, the bill. Maybe $1 Billion for a new Long Bridge for passenger trains over the Potomac. Another Billion to Richmond, half a Billion to Petersburg and another half a Billion for the shortcut to Raleigh. So roughly $3 Billion for a great package of improvements. Or more.
The Crescent diverges from the Silvers not far out of D.C., but it would benefit from a new Potomac bridge. So would the Cardinal, and the Lynchberger and the Roanoker, as well. And any future day train to Atlanta. Or the ultimate, Southeast HSR [SIZE=18.7px](probably only 110 mph but higher speed) corridor thru Charlotte to Spartanburg, Greenville, and Clemson in SC, to Atlanta. But start at the Potomac bridge and work our way south with the upgrades.[/SIZE]
Anderson, on 06 Apr 2015 - 05:10 AM, said:
Being realistic and assuming:
(1) I'd get $1bn/yr added in constant dollars for a decade …
...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I used to think, 'Keep it simple: Double the runs on every LD route.'
But … A second Amtrak train messes up the freight operations. …
A package of upgrades to satisfy the freight host starts to loom as a large fraction of the costs of going 'whole hog' corridor service. So let's go whole hog!
My Second Priority project after South of the Lake is to aim for 12 or 15 trains a day D.C.-Richmond, with 6 or 8 continuing Richmond-Petersburg-Raleigh-Charlotte.
An hour or more could be cut from D.C.-Richmond to create corridor service, as well as benefiting Norfolk and Newport News on the Amtrak Virginia services. Meanwhile routing all NS trains thru Main Street Station in Richmond. I'm sure D.C.-Richmond can support 12 trains a day counting the thru trains.
Another 20 minutes or so could be saved from Richmond-Petersburg to benefit Amtrak's LD and medium distance Silver Meteor, Silver Star, and Palmetto; the Carolinian; and the Norfolk trains.
The shortcut being studied from Petersburg to Raleigh could take another hour out of the time of the Silver Star, and the Carolinian if it's rerouted to skip a few stops to the east.
Making D.C.-Richmond-Petersburg a 110-mph route would add another strong corridor on its own, while giving immense benefit to Amtrak's longer distance trains.
Taking an hour or two out of the schedules of the Silvers and the Palmetto would allow again a luxury of choice: better arrival times or better departure times. SB, the Palmetto arrives in Savannah at 8:59 p.m. But 7:30 p.m. would be much better. The Star reaches Columbia,SC, at 1:38 a.m., so a midnight arrival would be much better. The Meteor reaches Savannah at 6:34 a.m., so an earlier arrival would be much worse. But the Meteor leaves NYC at 3:15 p.m. and D.C. at 7:30 p.m. Departures an hour or so earlier could work out fine.
Of course, upgrading Petersburg-Richmond-D.C. with a dedicated passenger track would improve on time performance, and better reliability would help all service on the NEC.
Ah, yes, the bill. Maybe $1 Billion for a new Long Bridge for passenger trains over the Potomac. Another Billion to Richmond, half a Billion to Petersburg and another half a Billion for the shortcut to Raleigh. So roughly $3 Billion for a great package of improvements. Or more.
The Crescent diverges from the Silvers not far out of D.C., but it would benefit from a new Potomac bridge. So would the Cardinal, and the Lynchberger and the Roanoker, as well. And any future day train to Atlanta. Or the ultimate, Southeast HSR [SIZE=18.7px](probably only 110 mph but higher speed) corridor thru Charlotte to Spartanburg, Greenville, and Clemson in SC, to Atlanta. But start at the Potomac bridge and work our way south with the upgrades.[/SIZE]
I don't think you can cut more than an hour from RVR-WAS...honestly, knocking 40-50 minutes off there is as far as you can get before the costs start going on a tear: The Meteor (SB) is timed at 2:10 WAS-RVR; whacking that down into the 1:00-1:10 range would imply some truly blistering average speeds (95-110 MPH), something that would be even more impressive once you consider practical limits to everything between WAS and the Potomac.
Ideally, though, VHSR is pushing for "90-90-90": 90 MPH top speed, 90 minutes end-to-end, and 90% reliability/OTP. That puts you on par with or ahead of I-95 in terms of travel time (on par on a particularly good day and far ahead at peak travel hours). Your average speed would be in the 70-75 MPH range, which is feasible without things getting massively out of hand.
Ideally, though, VHSR is pushing for "90-90-90": 90 MPH top speed, 90 minutes end-to-end, and 90% reliability/OTP. That puts you on par with or ahead of I-95 in terms of travel time (on par on a particularly good day and far ahead at peak travel hours). Your average speed would be in the 70-75 MPH range, which is feasible without things getting massively out of hand.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yup. It would be a great way to get tourists between Chicago and northern Michigan, particularly during the Cherry Festival (Traverse City).
WoodyinNYC
Conductor
So from 2:10 to 1:30, cut 40 minutes from the schedules of 8 trains that currently go beyond Richmond. I'll take it. Leave Norfolk at 5:40 a.m. instead of 5 a.m. as now? After 5:40, because we'll save some minutes Petersburg-Richmond. Sleep almost an hour later, what's that worth to ridership? LOL.
Get into Savannah on the Palmetto at 8:20 instead of 9 p.m., and into Columbia on the Star at 1 a.m. instead of 1:38.
Oh, wait, cut more minutes from Richmond-Petersburg, and for the Star, many more minutes by taking the restored short cut Petersburgh-Raleigh. Can I claim one hour cut altogether? That gets us into Columbia at an almost tolerable hour, and into Savannah at a more convenient hour.
So retreating to your more realistic times, a few Billion spent south of the Potomac would be a real boon to three of Amtrak's eastern LD trains.
It would be a sweet boon to four if we count the Carolinian. It's scheduled into Charlotte at 8:12 p.m. Can you get home in time to say goodnight to the kids going to bed? Well, maybe 15 or 20 minutes will come out of that timetable when upgrades Greensboro-Charlotte are finished by the Stimulus deadline of Sept. 2017. But cut another hour gets a later departure from NYC (currently 7:05 a.m.) or the still earlier arrival in Charlotte. Either way, going an hour faster it will be a much more popular train.
Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
I started a few posts that expand on this topic.
http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/65287-capitol-pennsylvanian-connection-progress/
http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/65290-discontinued-amtrak-routes-any-future/
In addition to those, how about expanding the California Zephyr back to Oakland? I'm not sure they cut it at Emeryville in the first place. In fact, why not extend the CZ south to Santa Clara and San Jose to give direct service from Chicago and the South Bay? San Jose has more people now than both Oakland and San Francisco. They can just use the same route as the Capitols.
http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/65287-capitol-pennsylvanian-connection-progress/
http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/65290-discontinued-amtrak-routes-any-future/
In addition to those, how about expanding the California Zephyr back to Oakland? I'm not sure they cut it at Emeryville in the first place. In fact, why not extend the CZ south to Santa Clara and San Jose to give direct service from Chicago and the South Bay? San Jose has more people now than both Oakland and San Francisco. They can just use the same route as the Capitols.
Last edited by a moderator:
Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
For service that is roughly 8-10 hours, I would like to see more overnight service. You can leave one city late night and wake up the next morning at your destination rather than spend almost a full day traveling. I actually took the Thruway Bus from San Jose to Santa Barbara and then caught a Pacific Surfliner to LA rather than take the Coast Starlight because the time was better. The negative is you would have little if any demand at intermediate points and possibly have to extend and/or reschedule station hours at those points.
Two I would like to see is
1) PIT to HAR/PHL
The Pennsylvanian is 12:42-8:05pm west from PHL to PGH and 7:30am-2:55pm returning. From HAR to PGH it is 2:36-8:05p and 7:30am-12:55pm. If you leave HAR westbound before midnight, you get into PGH before 6am. If you sacrifice HAR to a late night stop, you can do maybe 11:30pm from PHL (earlier from NYP) and then get into PGH around 7am. Eastbound, you can do the same 11:30pm-7am but you get into HAR around 5am. Or you can leave PGH after midnight to get into HAR and PHL later.
2) San Jose/Sacramento to LAX
The Coast Starlight is SAC 6:35am, OAK 8:50am, SJC 10:07am to LAX 9:00pm southbound and LAX 10:10am to SJC 8:11pm, OAK 9:24pm, SAC 11:59pm. Flip the schedules 12 hours each and the times are pretty good and the intermediate points between LAX and SJC are served by other trains.
The schedules I proposed wouldn't be too good for the first train but could work for the second (or dare to dream third) train between the cities.
I wonder if any other routes would work. CHI-KC along the SW Chief route and CHI-MINN along the Empire Builder route are two off the top of my head.
Two I would like to see is
1) PIT to HAR/PHL
The Pennsylvanian is 12:42-8:05pm west from PHL to PGH and 7:30am-2:55pm returning. From HAR to PGH it is 2:36-8:05p and 7:30am-12:55pm. If you leave HAR westbound before midnight, you get into PGH before 6am. If you sacrifice HAR to a late night stop, you can do maybe 11:30pm from PHL (earlier from NYP) and then get into PGH around 7am. Eastbound, you can do the same 11:30pm-7am but you get into HAR around 5am. Or you can leave PGH after midnight to get into HAR and PHL later.
2) San Jose/Sacramento to LAX
The Coast Starlight is SAC 6:35am, OAK 8:50am, SJC 10:07am to LAX 9:00pm southbound and LAX 10:10am to SJC 8:11pm, OAK 9:24pm, SAC 11:59pm. Flip the schedules 12 hours each and the times are pretty good and the intermediate points between LAX and SJC are served by other trains.
The schedules I proposed wouldn't be too good for the first train but could work for the second (or dare to dream third) train between the cities.
I wonder if any other routes would work. CHI-KC along the SW Chief route and CHI-MINN along the Empire Builder route are two off the top of my head.
My dream scenario:
North south route connecting SL, SWC, CZ, and EB. To wit El Paso, Albuquerque, Denver and then.....Wolf Point. Upon the last I could entertain discussion.
Then SL East and daily through out.
Then, once the new North/South route is established. Add Houston/Dallas/Amarillo/Albuquerque would be another great addition
North south route connecting SL, SWC, CZ, and EB. To wit El Paso, Albuquerque, Denver and then.....Wolf Point. Upon the last I could entertain discussion.
Then SL East and daily through out.
Then, once the new North/South route is established. Add Houston/Dallas/Amarillo/Albuquerque would be another great addition
Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
Has Amtrak or a previous rail service had the service you suggested? Do tracks exist for the routes you have suggested?
To be technical, I believe the Coast Starlight does connect with all four of these trains although I'm sure you are looking for something around the Mountain Time Zone. I've never even heard of Wolf Point, what state is that even in?
keelhauled
OBS Chief
As I recall, there is no where to turn the train past Emeryville, and the route from Oakland is unsuited to backing a train for an extended trip, to say nothing of San Jose. I suppose there might be a way to turn it in San Jose with Caltrain tracks branching off, but then you have no place to service it.
Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
I thought the CZ once did go to Oakland directly without the use of Thruway Buses. Were there too many problems?
keelhauled
OBS Chief
I think you're right that they did. My guess would be that when Jack London Square station opened the street running or some other factor changed to prevent it.
andersone
Conductor
I traveled the CZ a bunch in the 80's when it terminated in Oakland, then a bus to the Ferry Building
If you are going to do that a better option would be a Thruway bus route. And even that is problematic from Denver to Wolf Point (btw, Philly, Wolf Point is in Eastern Montana). Or at least a Thruway bus route between Denver and Wolf Point. Actually, a more direct bus route would connect in Williston. That one would (in a way) give Amtrak service to Wyoming and South Dakota via the bus route. But if you insist on an EB connection in the Central Time Zone, a Thruway route via I-25 to Buffalo, WY, I-90 to Billings, I-94 to Glendive, MT, and 90+ miles over the Montana state highway system would get you to Wolf Point.
ainamkartma
Service Attendant
- Joined
- May 26, 2015
- Messages
- 137
If I could magically do one thing to improve Amtrak and the national passenger rail system, it would be to make the trains reliably faster than driving. This could be accomplished by attacking on three fronts:
1) Rework the contracts with the freight railroads to _make it worth their while to run the passenger trains on time_. This would be a major operating investment, of course. The essence would be large enough performance bonuses that the freight railroads are willing to make the effort to keep the amtrak trains on schedule.
2) Purchase key sections of track, and double track key sections for the fright railroads under the condition that Amtrak runs on schedule. This forum has identified many of the key sections, such as the south of the lake tracks near Chicago and the empire corridor. Also, invest in upgrading tracks to higher speeds in some kind of prioritized way. The minimum goal should be average speeds above 75 mph on all corridor services, so as to be faster than the cars.
3) Within Amtrak, a total commitment to on-time performance. Delays caused internally to Amtrak should be completely unacceptable.
So when a potential customer is deciding whether to drive or take the train, the calculation should be "Should I save money by driving or pay more and get there reliably faster by train?" instead of the present "Should I save money and get there faster by driving or pay more to get there later, possibly much later, by train?"
Just dreaming, obviously...
Ainamkartma
1) Rework the contracts with the freight railroads to _make it worth their while to run the passenger trains on time_. This would be a major operating investment, of course. The essence would be large enough performance bonuses that the freight railroads are willing to make the effort to keep the amtrak trains on schedule.
2) Purchase key sections of track, and double track key sections for the fright railroads under the condition that Amtrak runs on schedule. This forum has identified many of the key sections, such as the south of the lake tracks near Chicago and the empire corridor. Also, invest in upgrading tracks to higher speeds in some kind of prioritized way. The minimum goal should be average speeds above 75 mph on all corridor services, so as to be faster than the cars.
3) Within Amtrak, a total commitment to on-time performance. Delays caused internally to Amtrak should be completely unacceptable.
So when a potential customer is deciding whether to drive or take the train, the calculation should be "Should I save money by driving or pay more and get there reliably faster by train?" instead of the present "Should I save money and get there faster by driving or pay more to get there later, possibly much later, by train?"
Just dreaming, obviously...
Ainamkartma
I think you probably went to the beautiful old station, completely different neighborhood.
The old 16th and Wood SP station was pretty much halfway between Jack London and Emeryville. They did run the CZ out of OKJ for awhile, but they had do a back-up move out of the yard to position it and EMY and OKJ are really only about 10 minutes apart or less by car, so they decided to cut the back up move and expenses. 16th and Wood was a forward move out of the coach yard.
Latest posts
-
The track circuit triggering issue (CN, Amtrak)
- Latest: Dutchrailnut
-
-
-
San Clemente landslide affects Pacific Surfliner 1/24/24- Latest: Eric in East County
-
-
Amtrak Dining and Cafe Service discussion 2024 H1
- Latest: Eric in East County
