Virginia Service expansion

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Anderson

Engineer
Joined
Nov 16, 2010
Messages
10,409
Location
Virginia
Last year, Virginia's DRPT announced a rough timeline of trains being extended into Virginia. The 2022 expansions (Roanoke #2 and Norfolk #3) went smoothly. The plan at the time was to extend a third train to Newport News in 2026, followed by four additional trains into Richmond in 2030.

On a call today, I was told that the plan is now for there to be an additional train into Richmond in 2026 (VRE was going to add a train, but the slow demand return up there - a lot of gov't offices are still only part-time in the office - means that they really don't need an additional slot, so the state is taking that one). I'm also given to understand that the state is looking at the possibility of adding another few trains into Hampton Roads (and getting more trains into Richmond Main Street) over time but looking as to whether they can do it without going through the whole NEPA process since both routes are already in existence and they're just fiddling with service levels.

(I'll make an associated post discussing frequencies in a moment.]
 
So, this is the existing set of Northeast Regionals, their WAS-NYP times, and when those trains either do depart Richmond Staples Mill or would depart from there if they were extended/re-routed (presuming 2:40 between RVR-WAS and the hold at WAS).
Code:
Train Origin   RVR      WAS     NYP

180    WAS    [0150]    0430    0746
172    WAS    [0435]    0715    1044
98**   MIA     0452     0725*   1118*
86     RVM     0605     0845    1212
182    WAS    [0640]    0920    1238
174    NPN     0727     1010    1335
84     NFK     0825     1110    1433
176    ROA    [0925]    1205    1520
184    WAS    [1035]    1315    1646
94     NFK     1108     1355    1712
148    WAS    [1225]    1505    1830
92**   MIA     1239     1504*   1910*
178    WAS    [1312]    1552    1924
80**   CLT     1411     1631*   2035*
196    WAS    [1425]    1705    2028
138    NFK     1510     1805    2139
90     SAV     1641     1957    2323
186    NPN     1735     2030    2358
66     ROA    [1920]    2200    0155
*Trains are discharge only from Richmond north (92/98) or starting around DC (80).

My thinking: Unless you add a few Regionals (which does seem likely), the most likely candidates for extension to Richmond are:
-182 (departing RVR at 0640 and RVM at 0610 or so)
-184 (departing RVR at 1035, and plausible to extend to NPN with a departure around 0830)
-178 (departing RVR at 1312, and plausible to extend to NPN with a departure around 1120)

The possibility of an exchange with the Roanoke route seems to be a non-zero one.

I will note that extending 182 back to RVM would be awfully tight timing vs 86. Setting 180/172 aside (due to extreme hours of operation), I think that 196 isn't likely because of how tight it is vs 80 (the Carolinian). 148 is an interesting proposition since while it is "on top of" 92 (the Silver Star), 92's last stop for picking up pax is RVR. 178 doesn't conflict with anything too badly, and it would fill the "last hole" in the schedule (aside from the Roanoke train) if paired with extending 184, giving roughly hourly service from the 0500 hour to the 1700 hour (save for 0900's train going to Roanoke).

Lacking direct access to most ridership data, we do have access to something close to the ridership numbers for 86 (paired with 85, and their weekend counterparts). Those are probably on track to log about 100-120k pax this year (best guess is about 110k). The NPN trains (there are two) are holding in line just a bit below their results from FY19 (and early FY20, but FY19 is good because we have "normal" full year results).

If I'm a betting man, I'd pick 184 (to be extended to NPN, getting the Peninsula a "sanely" timed train back in the morning) and 178 (to be extended to RVM). One thing I would note is that once you add the new trainsets into the mix (which are push-pull), I think it is possible to plausibly pair 178 with a morning Regional (I might take a slightly earlier version of 183) and have the set roll into RVM, go to a yard for a bit, and then return back north same-day.

Southbound, in addition to a version of 183 (pairing with 178) I'd probably shuffle things to extend 85 from RVM to NPN (the arrival time at NPN would be around 2315 - but the big thing there is that you can leave WAS after work). The other train for extending (to RVM, since I've just "borrowed" an existing RVM train for NPN) would...well, if it's up to me, I'd be very tempted to pick 193, which would probably get into RVR at 2341 before the engine swap is eliminated. Pull that out and it's probably closer to 2330, meaning you can get to RVM before midnight. The other "obvious" candidate is 129 (about an hour and 15 minutes earlier). Either works, but the prospect of enabling an after-work departure from New York is particularly juicy (alongside the ability to have a leisurely dinner in DC - for a night owl like me, that would be dangerous since I could drive up to Richmond, grab a train to DC, have a slightly late-skewing dinner, and then head home). My ideal would probably be between the two - a version of 193 running about half an hour earlier.

Extending 85 and 184 could in theory allow a few connecting buses to be cut. I'd probably keep them (unless ridership on said buses just tanked off horribly) to ensure that it remains easier for people to start and finish at the same station.
 
I decided to add a southbound NYP-WAS-RVR timetable for consideration.
Code:
Train Dest.  NYP   WAS    RVR
67    NPN    0320  0700   0929
151   ROA    0420  0740  [1020]
89    SAV    0602  0929   1210
183   WAS    0705  1030  [1310]
79    CLT    0725  1045   1327
185   NFK    0810  1133   1424
141   WAS    0935  1308  [1548]
95    NFK    1035  1405   1647
91    MIA    1102  1435   1513
125   NPN    1135  1504   1816
171   ROA    1235  1617  [1857]
93    NFK    1402  1723   2010
85    RVM    1505  1836   2121
97    MIA    1515  1846   2139
173   WAS    1535  1910  [2150]
129   WAS    1625  1952  [2232]
193   WAS    1741  2101  [2341]
137   WAS    1825  2157  [0037]
175   WAS    1940  2315  [0155]

Assumptions:
-30 minutes at WAS
-2:10 WAS-RVR
 
Last edited:
I decided to add a southbound NYP-WAS-RVR timetable for consideration.
Code:
Train Dest.  NYP   WAS    RVR
67    NPN    0320  0700   0929
151   ROA    0420  0740  [1020]
89    SAV    0602  0929   1210
183   WAS    0705  1030  [1310]
79    CLT    0725  1045   1327
185   NFK    0810  1133   1424
141   WAS    0935  1308  [1548]
95    NFK    1035  1405   1647
91    MIA    1102  1435   1513
125   NPN    1135  1504   1816
171   ROA    1235  1617  [1857]
93    NFK    1402  1723   2010
85    RVM    1505  1836   2121
97    MIA    1515  1846   2139
173   WAS    1535  1910  [2150]
129   WAS    1625  1952  [2232]
193   WAS    1741  2101  [2341]
137   WAS    1825  2157  [0037]
175   WAS    1940  2315  [0155]

Assumptions:
-30 minutes at WAS
-2:10 WAS-RVR
What this would mean is that a much larger proportion of WAS- NYP trains will be continuing to or from Richmond. There are a couple of things to consider:

On time performance for the northbound departures from Washington. Trains are frequently delayed in Virginia. Is the state or Amtrak going to take over dispatching from CSX?

More NEC trains will be leaving from the lower-level tracks. I hope there are plans to put in high level platforms down there. I generally prefer to board on the upper-level tracks with the high platforms. There's also the issue of ADA compliance, which is currently handled with the hand-cranked wheelchair lifts. Unless they get high platforms on the lover level, loading wheelchair users will become more cumbersome for more riders. Also, for those of us who use the lounge, it would be nice to restore the direct boarding to the lower level, or at least make announcements for Regionals in the lounge and have priority boarding for Select Plus/Executive, seniors, families with children, military in uniform ,etc. at the gate like they used to have. In short, I'm really not fond of boarding crowded New York-bound trains from the lower-level platforms at Washington.
 
I hope there are plans to put in high level platforms down there.
The plans are to eventually have two high level platforms with four high level platform tracks at the lower level. Additionally, there will be one low level platform serving two tracks. Those will be for VRE's use.
 
What this would mean is that a much larger proportion of WAS- NYP trains will be continuing to or from Richmond. There are a couple of things to consider:

On time performance for the northbound departures from Washington. Trains are frequently delayed in Virginia. Is the state or Amtrak going to take over dispatching from CSX?

More NEC trains will be leaving from the lower-level tracks. I hope there are plans to put in high level platforms down there. I generally prefer to board on the upper-level tracks with the high platforms. There's also the issue of ADA compliance, which is currently handled with the hand-cranked wheelchair lifts. Unless they get high platforms on the lover level, loading wheelchair users will become more cumbersome for more riders. Also, for those of us who use the lounge, it would be nice to restore the direct boarding to the lower level, or at least make announcements for Regionals in the lounge and have priority boarding for Select Plus/Executive, seniors, families with children, military in uniform ,etc. at the gate like they used to have. In short, I'm really not fond of boarding crowded New York-bound trains from the lower-level platforms at Washington.
Well, Richmond and other destinations in VA. Remember, Virginia (and NC) should have 1-2 tracks under their control essentially from Charlotte to Washington once the current plans are complete: VA has half of the RF&P ROW in their possession, as well as the S-Line south of Richmond (down to the border, where NC takes over until Raleigh). I forget the exact situation of the Raleigh-Charlotte line (IIRC it's state-owned but leased to NS).

At least as far as WAS-RGH, my understanding is "Two passenger tracks WAS-FBG, then one with passing sidings FBG-RGH". Remember, even with massively ramped-up service you've really only got about 1tph/hour on that line - you don't really need full double track until you get rather more than that.

I'm not sure who exactly is going to run the dispatching (there's a provision that allows VA and CSX to use one another's tracks in the event of a derailment, but in general the pax/freight traffic is supposed to stay separate), but I suspect that VA owning their tracks is going to limit the stupid games (or at least supplement them with stupid prizes). The bigger risk would be VRE/Amtrak getting in one another's way - this has been an issue with CSX (who get bigger payments for OTP from VRE), but in theory the two should be able to work out their schedules. But that should take care of trains on the "spine". The trickier point is those going to Roanoke/Lynchburg and Hampton Roads (though Newport News, in particular, may resolve itself if CSX decides to dump the Peninsula Subdivision - we're hoping for that).

===== ===== ===== ===== =====

If I'm in Amtrak's shoes, I'll be honest - I'd probably look to split the branding between the VA trains and the NEC-restricted trains. You're basically at the point where even if Amtrak re-adds a batch of trains, Virginia (and/or North Carolina) will probably be accounting for a majority of those trains (and the vast majority that aren't leaving during times that would yield awkward times in VA). Actually, the "better" move might be to exercise the options on the Acela IIs (the extra cars), possibly put in for a few more sets, and (outside of those shoulder hours) just have the Acela brand/equipment (or whatever the heck they come up with) be the NEC brand. This would be closer to the proposal that some group or another came up with (they suggested three-class service on the high-speed trains and some other odds and ends).

I think this particularly makes sense since between the VA plans, the NC plans, and some other suggested stuff you're probably looking at VA being able to account for most Regionals (basically, any train that would leave Richmond after 0500 or arrive in Richmond before 0000). The 2030 plans (four additional Regionals to Richmond) probably exceeds the number of currently "available" Regionals that comply with this: There are five Regionals available which comply with the above standard, and it looks like VA has plans to add six (presuming that the extra train in 2026 isn't just pulled forward from 2030). You could make it work with 172/137 (astoundingly, you could run that pair with a single crew south of Washington), but the endpoint times at RVR are getting extremely early. Admittedly, with the VA track improvements those trains' times get quite close to 0000/0500 (172 probably gets there for RVR while 137 is touchier; both probably fall out of that timeframe at RVM) and there's also the option to add a few stops (essentially running 172 as a version of VRE 304) to nudge utilization up. 137 wouldn't replace an existing train on a similar schedule, but doing that would make it akin to the late MARC "sweep" train (the one that leaves WAS after 2200).

By the way, I think VA will also want/need to look at one or two round-trips that don't continue to New York (due to obscene operating times) - the lack of any departures after 1600 from Hampton Roads (or after 1700 from Richmond Main) is a bit of a deficiency, as is the plausible presence of only one train arriving before 1000 (and nothing before 0900) at Richmond and nothing before 1100 in Hampton Roads. The VA plans and the dual modes should help here somewhat, but it's still really thin since a "sane" departure from NYP really locks up your morning options out of WAS southbound (in particular - northbound isn't quite as handcuffed because there's more "after work" time).

Again, given my druthers I'd talk to MARC about the possibility of "taking over" a pair of super-early/super-late trains going to Baltimore (the post-2200 one from WAS and one of the pre-0600 ones from BAL) and running them as "reserved south of WAS, unreserved/MARC tickets honored north of WAS". There was a VA ridership projection I read like 6-8 years back that said (in so many words) that once VA starts approaching full build-out, the #1 stop out of VA is going to be WAS...but BAL and BWI move way up the list (BAL becomes #2, and IIRC BWI was ahead of PHL and NYP as well). The other option, of course, would be to fiddle with things so that such a pair of trains is also running overnight from BOS, but I'm wary about ridership potential for anything that dumps WAS (in particular) too late at night - and believe me, I want a train that would pair with a "flipped" copy of 66/67 (i.e. something like the old 0315 departure from WAS, which would probably leave Richmond around midnight/arrive in New York around 0700, and a matching number aimed at hitting Richmond around 0730 and Hampton Roads around 0900).
 
Last edited:
Here is a hypothetical 2030-ish timetable:
Northbound:
Code:
Train Origin NFK    NPN   RVR     WAS    NYP
                                           
180   WAS   [0020] [0100] [0230]  0430   0746
172   WAS   [0305] [0345] [0515]  0715   1044
98**  MIA    ----   ----   0532   0725*  1118*
86    RVM   [0435] [0515]  0645   0845   1212
182   WAS   [0510] [0550] [0720]  0920   1238
174   NPN   [0557]  0637   0807   1010   1335
84    NFK    0655  [0735]  0905   1110   1433
176   ROA   [0805] [0845] [1015]  1205   1520
184   WAS   [0905] [0945] [1115]  1315   1646
94    NFK    0938  [1018]  1148   1355   1712
148   WAS   [1055] [1135] [1305]  1505   1830
92**  MIA    ----   ----   1319   1504*  1910*
178   WAS   [1142] [1222] [1352]  1552   1924
80**  CLT    ----   ----   1451   1631*  2035*
196   WAS   [1255] [1335] [1505]  1705   2028
138   NFK    1340  [1420]  1550   1805   2139
90    SAV    ----   ----   1731   1957   2323
186   NPN   [1605]  1645   1815   2030   2358
66    ROA   [1750] [1830] [2000]  2200   0155

===== ===== ===== ===== =====

Southbound:
Code:
Train Dest.  NYP    WAS    RVR    NPN    NFK
67    NPN    0320   0700   0859   1029  [1109]
151   ROA    0420   0740  [0940] [1110] [1150]
89    SAV    0602   0929   1130   ----   ----
183   WAS    0705   1030  [1230] [1400] [1440]
79    CLT    0725   1045   1247   ----   ----
185   NFK    0810   1133   1344  [1514]  1554
141   WAS    0935   1308  [1508] [1638] [1718]
95    NFK    1035   1405   1607  [1737]  1817
91    MIA    1102   1435   1433   ----   ----
125   NPN    1135   1504   1726   1856  [1936]
171   ROA    1235   1617  [1817] [1947] [2027]
93    NFK    1402   1723   1930  [2100]  2100
85    RVM    1505   1836   2041  [2211] [2251]
97    MIA    1515   1846   2049   ----   ----
173   WAS    1535   1910  [2110] [2240] [2320]
129   WAS    1625   1952  [2152] [2322] [0002]
193   WAS    1741   2101  [2301] [0031] [0111]
137   WAS    1825   2157  [2357] [0127] [0207]
175   WAS    1940   2315  [0115] [0245] [0325]

These alterations are on the basis of three assumptions:
(1) WAS-RVR runtime for Regionals is reduced from 2:10 to 1:45 (a reduction of 25 minutes) with the 90-90-90 plan. Yes, 1:45 is more than 90 minutes, but I'm assuming that the DC tunnel is still a speed issue and that stopping patterns keep some trains from running as fast as is theoretically possible.
(2) Time at WAS is reduced to 15 minutes due to removing the locomotive swap (allowing for a crew change and accommodating the relatively large loads at WAS), down from (generally) closer to 30 minutes. To the extent that the savings here are less than 15 minutes, I think there's slack in item (1) to balance it.
(3) The time is pulled out of the schedule south of Washington rather than being used to alter times between Washington and New York (or beyond). Improvements north of Washington (or south of Richmond Staples Mill) are not considered.

The net is 40 minutes of savings, with the total time between WAS and RVR reduced from 2:40 to 2:00 for "hypothetical" trains (i.e. those with bracketed times). Most timetabled trains are simply moved by 40 minutes (since some have radically different stopping patterns, checked baggage as a time issue, and/or boarding restrictions). I will note that the shift to high-level platforms might allow a bit more time to be squeezed out of some trains, and that a few trains are intentionally held at Washington for timing purposes. The exceptions are:
-90 is moved by 50 minutes (since there is a longer stop and I presume that with the adoption of fixed trainsets, the attachment of cars to this train at Washington will cease).
-176 is moved by 50 minutes (due to a longer stop in Washington, which I presume is due to operating over the Piedmont route meriting a bit more of a "pad"; as this listing is looking at times to Richmond and Hampton Roads, that isn't relevant).
-67 is only moved by 30 minutes (since the timetable only allows a 20-minute stop at Washington).
-125 is moved by 50 minutes (the timetable presently allows for a 45-minute stop at Washington).
-97 is moved by 50 minutes (also owing to a lengthy stop in Washington in the present timetable).
90/97 aren't impactful in most respects, but 125/67 are.

Under this schedule, only 180/175 remains irrecovably lousy. 172/137 is actually a stomachable timetable (and probably just flat-out works with minimal adjustments - moving 172 5 minutes later and 137 10 minutes earlier probably results in the times at RVM being 0500 and 2359, respectively).

I have also included hypothetical times for arrival in Newport News and Norfolk. I take the assumption that runtime to Newport News will be reduced by 20 minutes due to a combination of improvements RVR-RVM and moving the Newport News station by approximately 7 miles. The current runtime here is 1:50, so this reduces to 1:30 (total savings of an hour NPN-WAS).

On the other hand, I presume that the Norfolk times will "wash" (improvements RVR-RVM will be offset by the additional mileage needed to go through RVM plus making that stop), leaving them at the current 2:10.

I'm also using the northbound times as the basis of this (since the southbound times have in-built padding). Times are not included for trains bound to NC for obvious reasons. The Roanoke trains are included, however, since they are arguably Virginia's to swap around as wanted/needed.

Finally, it should be noted that Newport News/Norfolk is an either/or proposition (as Virginia did not opt to build an additional rail bridge, as a study looked at some years ago).
 
Last edited:
Some items"
1. There are 2 Main tracks between Raleigh and Cary. North track owned by NCRR. South track owned by CSX ( ex SAL ). Since this was SAL's main line Richmond - MIA was dispatched CTC by SAL and now CSX. CSX does run a peddler or 2 from Hamlet - End of track at Norlina. Once NC buys the section RGH - Norlina wonder if if NCRR would buy the RGH - CARY from CSX? CSX would still have freight rights.

2. What will happen when the 2nd Long bridge is operational? VA will get 2 main tracks (MT) for passenger trains from 1st street tunnel past ALX west of CSX's 2 MTs. The 2 VA MTs will continue west of CSX until they will fly over CSX somewhere around Frnaconia to then remain east of CSX somewhere around Richmond.

3. Va is commitedto a second siding on CSX north of FBG + csx sidings at Nebasco, Aquia creek, and anothe to begin with. Also others later on.

All thisdepends onthe 2nd Long bridge getting complete. The rest of the additional maintracks can be finished with small beidges and trackwork finished at same time If the construction firms that built Brightline's bridgeges were used maybe 2 years to build the 2nd 2 MT long bridge.

With the new VA tracks west of CSX access to / from NS's line to Manassas.
 
Last edited:
Some items"
1. There are 2 Main tracks between Raleigh and Cary. North track owned by NCRR. South track owned by CSX ( ex SAL ). Since this was SAL's main line Richmond - MIA was dispatched CTC by SAL and now CSX. CSX does run a peddler or 2 from Hamlet - End of track at Norlina. Once NC buys the section RGH - Norlina wonder if if NCRR would buy the RGH - CARY from CSX? CSX would still have freight rights.
Having clear ownership for NCRR of all of this would be ideal but getting the dispatching moved to NS might be just as good for Amtrak movements without the cost of purchasing a dozen or so miles of track from Cary to Raleigh. Of course CSX could force the issue and make NCRR take this part of the line (for a price higher than fair) for NCRR to get what they want, which is Raleigh to Norlina.

I could be wrong but both NS and CSX run this like a double track though it is technically two single tracks by ownership. I assume both NS and CSX can work any businesses with a spur regardless of the rail line the spur is connected to, but it might be that the track is run as a double track for through trains but only the freight company with the spur to a business works that business. The last time I was in this area I noticed the natural gas business that used to get rail traffic that was on the north side (NS) was no longer taking rail from what it appeared though the switch may still be in place. There is a cement plant on the south (CSX) side that seems active and that is it. Two spurs and only one might be active. A state maintenance facility near the state fairgrounds shows a spur (CSX Side) but on street view on Google Earth the switch seems to have been removed. There is not much for either NS or CSX to fight over.

I am not even sure what happens at Boylan, just to the west of Raleigh Union Station. I sort of know but the cross over of NC and CSX is not obvious just looking at Google Earth. I assume part of the wye must be jointly owned for all of this is work. The only thing I am certain about is how the line to Fayetteville works to get to the NS yard in Raleigh.
 
A suitable thread to bring back up. Personally I have no complaints. I feel that I'm lucky to live barely a block from the Williamsburg Amtrak Station and that I can just walk the short distance and get on the train to DC. Makes it easy to think of IAD as my home airport and going to DC then connecting to the Red Line at Union Station is a breeze -- I look forward to finally getting to use the Silver Line all the way to Dulles. I also use to access the Appalachian Trail at Harpers Ferry by Amtrak. It's always been a relaxed comfortable ride from WBG to WAS.

I do wish there was a more robust regional network outside of just the NEC. It's a shame that the schedule or frequency is such that I cannot truly make a real day trip to Richmond.
 
A suitable thread to bring back up. Personally I have no complaints. I feel that I'm lucky to live barely a block from the Williamsburg Amtrak Station and that I can just walk the short distance and get on the train to DC. Makes it easy to think of IAD as my home airport and going to DC then connecting to the Red Line at Union Station is a breeze -- I look forward to finally getting to use the Silver Line all the way to Dulles. I also use to access the Appalachian Trail at Harpers Ferry by Amtrak. It's always been a relaxed comfortable ride from WBG to WAS.

I do wish there was a more robust regional network outside of just the NEC. It's a shame that the schedule or frequency is such that I cannot truly make a real day trip to Richmond.
Well, that'd be up to the state of Virginia to sponsor any service south of Washington beyond the limits of the NEC. Talk to them.
 
Well, that'd be up to the state of Virginia to sponsor any service south of Washington beyond the limits of the NEC. Talk to them.
Actually, the State of Virginia is sponsoring relatively frequent service, south of Washington, at least to Richmond. Not sure whether they have any plans to increase frequency on the Newport News line that serves Williamsburg.
 
Well, that'd be up to the state of Virginia to sponsor any service south of Washington beyond the limits of the NEC. Talk to them.

Actually, the State of Virginia is sponsoring relatively frequent service, south of Washington, at least to Richmond. Not sure whether they have any plans to increase frequency on the Newport News line that serves Williamsburg.
Right. Virginia has budgeted $595 million towards passenger rail in the recent budget which is a 29% increase over the previous budget. Which is among the reasons for a third train out of/into Norfolk. Trains out of Norfolk go on to Petersburg and Richmond, and It would be cool to one day see an intermediate stop in a city like Suffolk. But I can only dream of a broader system.
 
More service is definitely needed. Except for maybe one more Amtrak or VRE more service is waiting for the second Long Bridge to be in full service . As well the 4 tracking from 1st street tunnel bores to ALX. That new bridge needs a lot of political push for funds.

There is a another point for pushing the second bridge completion. What if a major incident on the present bridge takes it out of service for several weeks? Not only screwed south passenger service ( turns at ALX (?) but a CSX freight stoppage severely impacting east coast feight.
 
Actually, the State of Virginia is sponsoring relatively frequent service, south of Washington, at least to Richmond. Not sure whether they have any plans to increase frequency on the Newport News line that serves Williamsburg.
As I said in the first post in this thread, there's a plan for a third train on the Williamsburg line in a few years (2026 is the target).

There are plans to add a whole slew of additional trains into Richmond, but the disposition of said trains south of there is still somewhat unclear - North Carolina wants to beef up service with the "main" SEHSR project, and there are long-term plans to add three more trains to Norfolk.

There's also the proposed east-west corridor, and that would add a train or two to the Peninsula, but you'd have to connect to go north...but if you have at least 15x/day Richmond-Washington, that's a lot less of an issue than it once was.

(Heck, connecting to/from the Silver Star on the FL side has become far less of a pain in the rear than it used to be - a few years back, it generally involved like a six-hour stop at RVR. That's generally down to about 2-3 hours, with the probable ability to use PTB if one of the trains is running late.)
 
Extension of service to Bristol and then possibly further into Tennessee is being discussed....

https://www.timesnews.net/business/...cle_47055ebe-1118-11ee-8637-43734b5ebd83.html
Grew up in Bristol. Route Ronoke - Knoxville not very fast. Took 7 -8 hours ROA <> Knoxville. AFAIK there has been no straightening of the route although SOU RR part now has CTC. But still street running in Johnson City and on a crooked bluff above downtown Jonesborough. Link to SOU RR 1952 timetable with no real changes to end of passenger service.
Link tables G,H, I
http://streamlinermemories.info/South/SOU52TT.pdf

Some one who lives in area now could tell us what time it takes freights from ROA <> Knoxville.
 
What's the point of expanding service when CSX imposes assanine "heat restrictions" on 85 degree days keeping trains at 50 mph, making the trip over 3 hours if on time?

The DRPT should Crack down on this absolutely insane practice. The last time I rode it was in the low to mid 80s and we still had "heat" restrictions. I understand when it's actually hot out but 85 degrees in May in Central VA is nothing unusual.
 
I suspect the Richmond numbers are just for the trains that originate/terminate in Richmond, and don't count people boarding Roanoke, Newport News, and Norfolk trains in Richmond.

This is good news and I suspect growth will continue once the new bridge is completed which in turn should improve on time performance by reducing freight train interference.
Now all they need to do is to build at least one set of high-level platforms at the lower level tracks in Washington, as more of the WAS-NYP-BOS trains will be coming through from Virginia.
 
The DRPT should Crack down on this absolutely insane practice. The last time I rode it was in the low to mid 80s and we still had "heat" restrictions. I understand when it's actually hot out but 85 degrees in May in Central VA is nothing unusual.
It isn't the air temp that's important. It is the temperature that the object is heated to. For instance, the air temp can be around 85 to 90, but on an astroturf field, the surface temperature can be closer to 170 to 175. I don't know what railroad tracks heat like. You've got a long string of metal, which leads me to believe that it doesn't take a significant amount of heat to cause trouble. Amtrak's own heat restriction temperature is 90 degrees. It isn't like CSX is outrageously different.
 
Back
Top