Brightline Trains Florida discussion

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
chrsjrcj said:
I’m curious about this as well. FDOT released drawings for the Fort Lauderdale Coastal Link/Broward Commuter Rail station and showed Brightline requiring a 500’ platform. When questioned why the proposed platform is shorter than the existing platform FDOT said this is what Brightline indicated they required.

Based on how the Tri-Rail platforms at MiamiCentral are going, it’s hard for me to take Brightline at their word. (And somewhat unrelated, the Director of Tri-Rail has announced his resignation over this issue).
Click to expand...

Isn’t this just a commuter stop and not intended for full length Orl-Mia trains?

In addition- I was under the impression that Orl-Mia will be 6-8 cars with 2 Chargers
 
The current PD&E documents are pretty preliminary. I would wait until the EIS happens. That tends to be much more concrete.

With FDOT involved I would actually worry more about what happened with Amtrak at Miami International Airport than the shoddy construction at Miami Central. Anyhow, I suspect that when it comes time to do the EIS, they will figure out exactly who needs how long platform.

Right now they don't know who will operate it and what rolling stock will be used for it. These are all YTBD, and some of that has impact on what sort of platforms will be needed.

In any case even with a 500' platform they would be able to platform 6 cars minus one end door.
 
Last edited:
It seems that actual demand for "local" trains is a great unknown. The number of trips, how their first mile/ last mile is handled, access for both originations and destinations, number of persons with autos, etc. IMO it will take actual service to start. One item the west Palm <> MIA attracted more passenger than was anticipated.
 
It is surmised that the ridership on the Coastal Link will be at least as high as and possibly much higher than the ridership on the current Tri-Rail service, because the coastal link stations are/will be in downtown areas with much larger walk in possibilities than the current service has, where stations are not as easily accessible from populated areas absent a car/shuttle/bus ride.

At present there is no immediate activity to extend it all the way to WPB and beyond, though there are future desires. The current more detailed planning and permitting activity is in Miami-Dade and Broward Counties only. As things progress I am sure service extension to Jupiter likely frist from Tri-Rail and later on the Coastal Link will happen.
 
CE7179B7-ABF4-4A9F-AB4A-DDFB423CFA39.png
ok… this does show a Brightline station at FLL …which makes sense bc it would be a huge traffic generator. The only info I saw in the report was 1000’ platforms for BL and 500’ for TR. As we know, they have to be separated with BL being high and TR low…. Unless the Coastal equipment is different - which seems unlikely
 
Last edited:
I don't why everyone assumes that commuter rail in the coastal corridor will use equipment with doors requiring low level platforms. Commuter service would benefit from high level platforms, as in NEC. It would also save building separate platforms. Does Brightline not want to share their stations?
 
jis said:
It is surmised that the ridership on the Coastal Link will be at least as high as and possibly much higher than the ridership on the current Tri-Rail service, because the coastal link stations are/will be in downtown areas with much larger walk in possibilities than the current service has, where stations are not as easily accessible from populated areas absent a car/shuttle/bus ride.

At present there is no immediate activity to extend it all the way to WPB and beyond, though there are future desires. The current more detailed planning and permitting activity is in Miami-Dade and Broward Counties only. As things progress I am sure service extension to Jupiter likely frist from Tri-Rail and later on the Coastal Link will happen.
Click to expand...

Do you think that eventually Tri-Rail might transfer to the coastal line entirely, or would there still be sufficient justification for the present route once a coastal service was operational. I mean is there anything the present line can do that the coastal line cannot, and if so, is it sufficient to justify the service's continuation?
 
NES28 said:
I don't why everyone assumes that commuter rail in the coastal corridor will use equipment with doors requiring low level platforms. Commuter service would benefit from high level platforms, as in NEC. It would also save building separate platforms. Does Brightline not want to share their stations?
Click to expand...

Sharing stations, OK. Sharing platforms, no. Even in Japan, most stations that have more than one company sharing the same station, use separate control access to the specific company's platforms. Even the one station I transferred at on my way to school that used to be a cross-platform transfer to a different company has since been isolated from the other company (JR vs Seibu).

cirdan said:
Do you think that eventually Tri-Rail might transfer to the coastal line entirely, or would there still be sufficient justification for the present route once a coastal service was operational. I mean is there anything the present line can do that the coastal line cannot, and if so, is it sufficient to justify the service's continuation?
Click to expand...

The nice thing about Tri-Rail being on the former CSX line is that there are very few grade crossings compared to the FEC line. Partly why you almost never hear about any trespasser incidents. I can see how more and more traffic being added to the FEC will annoy the locals with more and more crossing activations. That being said, the FEC seems to service a population more conducive to transit passengers, even though the two lines average barely a mile apart.

Also, if they abandon the current routing, I would assume they would lose convenient access to MIA airport.
 
Last edited:
cirdan said:
Do you think that eventually Tri-Rail might transfer to the coastal line entirely, or would there still be sufficient justification for the present route once a coastal service was operational. I mean is there anything the present line can do that the coastal line cannot, and if so, is it sufficient to justify the service's continuation?
Click to expand...
I don't think they will abandon their own owned and operated line. It is not even clear who will operate the Coastal Link service using what equipment yet. There are hopes, dreams, posturing etc., but no decisions yet.
 
Last edited:
joelkfla said:
If they're going to the new facility at OIA via the OUC connection, don't they need to be on CSX?
Click to expand...
Yeah - I know that's been discussed here, but I don't see the point in sending a train to be completely inactive at MCO just for training. They can train the crew at the current maintenance base and actually use the train in revenue service. Now, if they don't have enough room to store it, then, yeah, park it at the Orlando airport. I'm 100% ok with being totally wrong here. Just my perception of common sense, but I don't know what they need operationally.
 
VentureForth said:
Yeah - I know that's been discussed here, but I don't see the point in sending a train to be completely inactive at MCO just for training. They can train the crew at the current maintenance base and actually use the train in revenue service. Now, if they don't have enough room to store it, then, yeah, park it at the Orlando airport. I'm 100% ok with being totally wrong here. Just my perception of common sense, but I don't know what they need operationally.
Click to expand...
But they don't need another train to maintain their WPB-MIA schedule, and the Brightline CEO (or similar mucky-muck) said on TV that a freshly arriving train would be placed in the new facility shortly (within weeks, specifically, and that was a couple of weeks ago.)
 
joelkfla said:
But they don't need another train to maintain their WPB-MIA schedule, and the Brightline CEO (or similar mucky-muck) said on TV that a freshly arriving train would be placed in the new facility shortly (within weeks, specifically, and that was a couple of weeks ago.)
Click to expand...
I believe that muckety-muck was the CEO of Brightline Holdings, Michael Reininger who at one time was the Chief Development Officer at AAF (All Aboard Florida). I have met him and talked to him briefly a couple of times at a couple of FECRS (FEC Railway Society) Meetings over the years.
 
Now at the siding in Davenport. Holding short of CFRC

idk why they would have wanted to go S Line, then back up the A line. Seems like a much longer route.
 
VentureForth said:
Yeah - I know that's been discussed here, but I don't see the point in sending a train to be completely inactive at MCO just for training. They can train the crew at the current maintenance base and actually use the train in revenue service. Now, if they don't have enough room to store it, then, yeah, park it at the Orlando airport. I'm 100% ok with being totally wrong here. Just my perception of common sense, but I don't know what they need operationally.
Click to expand...

Maybe they want to recruit crews at different locations along the route so people don't have to travel too far to start work. So it would make sense to be recruiting crews in the Orlando area and also training them there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top