Adding frequency to Long Distance (LD) service

[Willbridge]

Is there anyway to get an Amtrak train to Nashville? Could it connect with the City of New Orleans at Memphis? I don't think the Nashville to Atlanta proposal will ever happen.

The L&N had a line from St. Louis to Atlanta via Evansville and Nashville that crossed the IC main line. They also had a line between Memphis and Nashville. Someone here knows a current possibility.

 

[GDRRiley]

If we're talking about LA to Bay Area service, I would like to see service to San Francisco and not just San Jose, Oakland, Emeryville, etc. I'm not particularly interested in additional service up to Seattle. There's already a train from California to Seattle. There's zero Amtrak service to San Francisco. Amtrak Thruway buses are just another hassle. There's no reason Amtrak can't just go from San Jose to San Fran.

the issue is unless amtrak can hold a good timetable they'll be really screwing with caltrain and likely caltrain and CAHSR timetable.

 

[west point]

Interesting that Birmingham-NOLA is #2....

That would seem to indicate a second Crescent route trains with NOL arrivals around 0600 - 0900 with departures at NOL about 2000 - 2200. However, reality will depend on the final results of STB's decision on CP-KCS merger decisions especially Meridian - Marshall, TX. Once that decision can better decide what is best.

 

[Anderson]

the issue is unless amtrak can hold a good timetable they'll be really screwing with caltrain and likely caltrain and CAHSR timetable.

Well, either achieve a good timetable or accept getting knocked into an at-their-convenience slot. Also, it depends on when they're coming and going - a train arriving after rush hour could probably go in just about anywhere since Caltrain only goes about twice an hour and CAHSR probably wouldn't be running more than 2-3x/hour at that point. Send them in behind the next CAHSR train and they should be mostly out of everybody's way.

 

[jis]

Well, either achieve a good timetable or accept getting knocked into an at-their-convenience slot. Also, it depends on when they're coming and going - a train arriving after rush hour could probably go in just about anywhere since Caltrain only goes about twice an hour and CAHSR probably wouldn't be running more than 2-3x/hour at that point. Send them in behind the next CAHSR train and they should be mostly out of everybody's way.

Additionally their operating plan should not involve extended storage of rolling stock in San Francisco.

And I suppose it better be a push-pull consist.

 

[Metra Electric Rider]

That would seem to indicate a second Crescent route trains with NOL arrivals around 0600 - 0900 with departures at NOL about 2000 - 2200. However, reality will depend on the final results of STB's decision on CP-KCS merger decisions especially Meridian - Marshall, TX. Once that decision can better decide what is best.

Or just a regional/corridor train...

 

[jis]

Or just a regional/corridor train...

Indeed. The real problem segment is Atlanta to Birmingham which is the reason that even Southern ran its Southern Crescent only three times a week quite often. That ridership info indicates a regional train between New Orleans and Birmingham more than a second LD train between Atlanta and New Orleans. And the said train could maximize ridership by running via Mobile, CSX-gods willing of course.

 

[cirdan]

If we're talking about LA to Bay Area service, I would like to see service to San Francisco and not just San Jose, Oakland, Emeryville, etc. I'm not particularly interested in additional service up to Seattle. There's already a train from California to Seattle. There's zero Amtrak service to San Francisco. Amtrak Thruway buses are just another hassle. There's no reason Amtrak can't just go from San Jose to San Fran.

Is there sufficient capacity at King Street to provide dedicated platforms for Amtrak in addition to Caltrain and CAHSR?

 

[Herb]

Assuming availability of equipment would it me feasible to ad a 2nd frequency of the Coast Starlight that ran overnight between LA and the Bay Area then during the daytime to Seattle?

The current Coast Starlight route is a good one and should be kept because it services Eastern Oregon from Klamath Falls to Chemult and is connected to Bend Or via a bus service. The route I’d like reestablished is from Davis CA (Sacramento) to Eugene OR via the original Southern Pacific ‘Siskiyou Line’. There is an existing railroad right of way the entire route. The I5 corridor is a heavily traveled route with a growing population along its length. It could be a integrated route with a daily long distance train (North and South) and regional trains. From Redding south to Sacramento (via the Sacramento International Airport via a loop : Sac-David-Woodland-SMF-Sac!) has need for multiple day trips. The same can be done from Grants Pass to Eugene.

 

[zephyr17]

The current Coast Starlight route is a good one and should be kept because it services Eastern Oregon from Klamath Falls to Chemult and is connected to Bend Or via a bus service. The route I’d like reestablished is from Davis CA (Sacramento) to Eugene OR via the original Southern Pacific ‘Siskiyou Line’. There is an existing railroad right of way the entire route. The I5 corridor is a heavily traveled route with a growing population along its length. It could be a integrated route with a daily long distance train (North and South) and regional trains. From Redding south to Sacramento (via the Sacramento International Airport via a loop : Sac-David-Woodland-SMF-Sac!) has need for multiple day trips. The same can be done from Grants Pass to Eugene.

The old Siskiyou Line was laid out in the 1870s and is very, very curvy and slow. SP decided to build the entirely new Cascade Line through Klamath Falls in the 1920s rather than try to realign it. It lost all passenger service in the mid-1950s. Right now it is in the hands of a shortline, CORP, and it is largely 10 mph. However, even if the line was upgraded with new rail, large portions of it would still be 25-30 mph because of the alignment. You would have to build a new railroad on much new ROW to get higher speeds.

As to the former SP West Valley line between Red Bluff (Gerber) and Davis, right now it is cut at the north end, but you could reconnect and relay it and have a 79 mph railroad.

 

[allanorn]

If we're talking about LA to Bay Area service, I would like to see service to San Francisco and not just San Jose, Oakland, Emeryville, etc. I'm not particularly interested in additional service up to Seattle. There's already a train from California to Seattle. There's zero Amtrak service to San Francisco. Amtrak Thruway buses are just another hassle. There's no reason Amtrak can't just go from San Jose to San Fran.

CAHSR will cover that... eventually... we hope.

Link21 (e.g., the second Transbay Tube) could also do it, but that'll depend on what BART wants and what anyone's willing to pay for. It's way too early to know if it'll be a standard-gauge tunnel or one for BART's parameters.

 

[George Harris]

the issue is unless amtrak can hold a good timetable they'll be really screwing with caltrain and likely caltrain and CAHSR timetable.

Other than San Francisco to San Jose, CAHSR will be on their own rails, so freight interference or interference with Amtrak trains is unlikely. However, I have great faith in California's ability to make a mess of everything they touch.

As to the San Francisco end: The CAHSR has a planned terminal station underground near Market and the Embarcadero. I don't remember the exact location offhand. The station location, size, and approach were political decisions, not good engineering or planning. They could have done worse, but it would have been difficult to manage. Don't worry about storage of equipment sets at that location. There is no room for it.

 

[allanorn]

Is there sufficient capacity at King Street to provide dedicated platforms for Amtrak in addition to Caltrain and CAHSR?

As to the San Francisco end: The CAHSR has a planned terminal station underground near Market and the Embarcadero. I don't remember the exact location offhand. The station location, size, and approach were political decisions, not good engineering or planning. They could have done worse, but it would have been difficult to manage. Don't worry about storage of equipment sets at that location. There is no room for it.

CAHSR will use the Salesforce Transit Center as its terminal. Not a great solution but is at least mostly ready to go once they get the track there (which is the tricky part).

They should make STC a through-station but I don't expect that to happen in my lifetime.

 

[GDRRiley]

Other than San Francisco to San Jose, CAHSR will be on their own rails, so freight interference or interference with Amtrak trains is unlikely. However, I have great faith in California's ability to make a mess of everything they touch.

California runs a tighter schedulend has a higher OTP than amtrak does on the NEC.

As to the San Francisco end: The CAHSR has a planned terminal station underground near Market and the Embarcadero. I don't remember the exact location offhand. The station location, size, and approach were political decisions, not good engineering or planning. They could have done worse, but it would have been difficult to manage. Don't worry about storage of equipment sets at that location. There is no room for it.

The station size is fine 6 tracks is enough. the throat is going to be a bit of a mess as it will be 3 tracked from a slightly moved 4th and king.

CAHSR will use the Salesforce Transit Center as its terminal. Not a great solution but is at least mostly ready to go once they get the track there (which is the tricky part).

They should make STC a through-station but I don't expect that to happen in my lifetime.

Its a downtown station that is about as close to the core as you can get. Its a great location and Caltrain ridership alone was expected to double.
it could become a run though in the late 2030s or early 2040s if link 21 decides to go mainline rail

 

[allanorn]

Its a downtown station that is about as close to the core as you can get. Its a great location and Caltrain ridership alone was expected to double.
it could become a run though in the late 2030s or early 2040s if link 21 decides to go mainline rail

The location of Salesforce Transit Center is great. It's the station approach and throat that are terrible; I think it's going to be the most expensive tunnel per mile on the planet and it's not going to be a fast approach at all.

 

[poncho]

Indeed. The real problem segment is Atlanta to Birmingham which is the reason that even Southern ran its Southern Crescent only three times a week quite often. That ridership info indicates a regional train between New Orleans and Birmingham more than a second LD train between Atlanta and New Orleans. And the said train could maximize ridership by running via Mobile, CSX-gods willing of course.

What about splitting the Crescent at Meridian with one leg continuing to New Orleans and the other leg to Dallas/Fort Worth? Just like how the Empire Builder splits in Spokane with a leg to Portland and a leg to Seattle?

 

[zephyr17]

What about splitting the Crescent at Meridian with one leg continuing to New Orleans and the other leg to Dallas/Fort Worth? Just like how the Empire Builder splits in Spokane with a leg to Portland and a leg to Seattle?

That is the Crescent Star proposal and it has come and gone for years. It is getting a bit of traction again, so we'll see.

 

[lordsigma]

This is one of the items for long distance Amtrak has announced they are going to submit and support for funding along with daily Sunset and Cardinal on their own initiative without waiting for the results of the LD study. The benefits are the equipment needs for these, given management is already on board could be included in the base bid for the new LD equipment. All were announced by Larry Chester at the RPA rail nation event - the I-20 corridor had previously been spoken about in various articles.

 

[west point]

Expansion v. longer trains? There can be a whole dissertation on all the various items needed. The only way to get all these items is a congressional commitment for 10 - 15 years for funding, acquiring additional equipment, requirements for RR acceptance of additional service, majority + RR funds for eliminating repeat locations delaying passenger trains.

An on-time service with reasonable schedules without much make up schedule padding, not retiring or scrapping but letting aging cars trickle down for new routes, heavy demand days ( holidays ), surge fleet(s), charters. etc. All congressionally mandated.

Likely to happen? Not likely. However, that is what we as persons wanting more service needs to advocate and strive for.

 

[Willbridge]

The old Siskiyou Line was laid out in the 1870s and is very, very curvy and slow. SP decided to build the entirely new Cascade Line through Klamath Falls in the 1920s rather than try to realign it. It lost all passenger service in the mid-1950s. Right now it is in the hands of a shortline, CORP, and it is largely 10 mph. However, even if the line was upgraded with new rail, large portions of it would still be 25-30 mph because of the alignment. You would have to build a new railroad on much new ROW to get higher speeds.

As to the former SP West Valley line between Red Bluff (Gerber) and Davis, right now it is cut at the north end, but you could reconnect and relay it and have a 79 mph railroad.

In 1973 when the SP was still running the Siskiyou Line I had their detailed engineering drawings and it looked to be five hours slower than the Cascade Line between Dunsmuir and Eugene. Before the Cascade Line was completed the Northern Lines made a serious effort to compete by setting up a steamship service from the Astoria area to San Francisco, with a fast boat train from Portland. So the Siskiyou Line was not a good idea even when it had a monopoly.

 

[GDRRiley]

The old Siskiyou Line was laid out in the 1870s and is very, very curvy and slow. SP decided to build the entirely new Cascade Line through Klamath Falls in the 1920s rather than try to realign it. It lost all passenger service in the mid-1950s. Right now it is in the hands of a shortline, CORP, and it is largely 10 mph. However, even if the line was upgraded with new rail, large portions of it would still be 25-30 mph because of the alignment. You would have to build a new railroad on much new ROW to get higher speeds.

if you were willing to rebuild the track with 5in of superelevation a 350m curve becomes 50mph assuming the train stays on the track but that makes a slow freight not ideal. 3in means a 30mph freight and 45mph pax should play okay
you can also do some actions now much easier (ignoring environmental regs) so new cuts or short tunnels could easily be added if the goal was faster than that.