Heartland Flyer 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

metrorail

Train Attendant
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
38
Location
Lufkin, Texas
A while back, I came across many articles claiming that the Heartland Flyer would soon be expanded to Kansas City. Now, 2 years later, I can't find anything on why the project was put on hold. Does anyone know what happenend?
 
A while back, I came across many articles claiming that the Heartland Flyer would soon be expanded to Kansas City. Now, 2 years later, I can't find anything on why the project was put on hold. Does anyone know what happenend?
www.northflyer.org
 
There has been a recent flurry of articles on expanding to KC, many of which have been linked to on this forum. They just completed a massive study and have narrowed things down to 4 different plans.
 
I've been curious about the HF for a while. Is there anything to be learned from this example? For instance, it's largely funded by the states. People spoke out and apparently saved their train. And now they're asking for extended coverage. And maybe they'll get that as well. Or at least that's how it looks at first glance. Is the HF a success story that can be repeated elsewhere or is it simply a one-off that bears little or no relation to any other considerations?
 
A while back, I came across many articles claiming that the Heartland Flyer would soon be expanded to Kansas City. Now, 2 years later, I can't find anything on why the project was put on hold. Does anyone know what happenend?
In the world of rail, things move at a molasses pace. I remember some guy whose name I forget who, around the time he retired, started pushing for light-rail from Hoboken to Tenafly. The approval for the plan (not to say its actual construction) happened a few days before the guy died. Despite some fairly well spread approval for the plan, and a relatively pro-transit mindset- at least compared to Oklahoma/Kansas.

I often say, I will not believe a train is happening until I see it turn a wheel in revenue service. We have had trains printed in Amtrak's national timetable, even tickets sold, that never ran. The Skyline Connection (a third NY-CHI train via Pittsburgh, after the Three Rivers and Pennsylvanian) comes to mind.

I've been concentrating my efforts on modifying a project in the NJ area known as ARC- a second pair of tunnels from Jersey into mid-30s of Manhattan. I don't even remember exactly how many various Environmental Impact Studies there have been. The "ground breaking" has supposedly already begun.

The Second Avenue Subway has had ground broken on its construction several times. Not only is it not built, there are currently no plans to do so.

Keep in mind, this is in an area where nobody ever talks about "nobody will ride it!" With some 5-6 million riders a day, there is no question about whether New Yorkers would make use of an additional subway line. In fact, in terms of capacity, the system sort of needs it to be built yesterday.

At my group, the Lackawanna Coalition, we have been spending considerable effort for many, many years towards the goal of rebuilding a commuter using the former Lackwanna Cutoff, from Port Morris to Scranton, with hopeful eventual service via Amtrak to Binghamton and, Buffalo and even Chicago (Pheobe Snow?).

The more grander schemes notwithstanding, there is clear demand for service up to at least Scranton. Conrail discontinued service over the line in 1979. Conrail completed removal of the track in 1984. A bond issue by the state of New Jersey for the purpose of acquiring the Cut-off with an eye towards future service occured in 1989. So lets place that as the start of the general plan on the part of the state for this service.

The actual purchase occurred in 1994. In 2006 (12 years later!) the Final Environmental Review was submitted to the FTA. Now, in mid-2009 a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was reached by the EPA, making the project eligable for federal funding.

Finally, a part has been approved for construction. New Jersey is currently working on the restoration of the line from Port Morris Yard to Andover. Of the almost 90 miles of route intended to be restored to service, 7.3 miles have been approved. It has been 21 years since the project has been somewhat adopted by the NJDOT, and all we have finally approved building (but have neither actually built, nor started actual service on) is a 7.3 mile line.

And while our current administration is a bunch of republican jerks who are presiding over a fairly dysfunctional system, compared to OK and KS, New Jersey has a lot of rail.

So don't get your hopes up for anything happening. I personally would be astonished if I can ever ride a train from Hoboken to Scranton via the Cutoff in my lifetime.
 
The Second Avenue Subway has had ground broken on its construction several times. Not only is it not built, there are currently no plans to do so.
Keep in mind, this is in an area where nobody ever talks about "nobody will ride it!" With some 5-6 million riders a day, there is no question about whether New Yorkers would make use of an additional subway line. In fact, in terms of capacity, the system sort of needs it to be built yesterday.
Um, while its far from built and operational, the first MOS is well under construction at this time. Second Avenue has been torn up in multiple places where construction is currently ongoing. IIRC they don't currently have quite all the money needed to finish MOS-I, although the bulk of the funding is indeed in place. There is at present no funding for MOS-II & MOS-III.
 
Um, while its far from built and operational, the first MOS is well under construction at this time. Second Avenue has been torn up in multiple places where construction is currently ongoing. IIRC they don't currently have quite all the money needed to finish MOS-I, although the bulk of the funding is indeed in place. There is at present no funding for MOS-II & MOS-III.
Geh, you got me on that one. I wonder how I managed to miss that.

In anycase, I don't believe there will be a second avenue subway until wheels turn on track carrying revenue passengers.
 
In anycase, I don't believe there will be a second avenue subway until wheels turn on track carrying revenue passengers.
Well I'm not holding my breath either, but I will say that this time things are moving further and faster than they were for the first attempt at a Second Avenue subway. One thing however that makes this attempt more serious and more likely to suceed, is the fact that the MOS-I segment only has to get from just north of 96th Street to 63rd Street. Once at 63rd St. it will tie into the 63rd St tunnel that connects to the Broadway line. One can view some pictures of the boring machines and read an update on the progress here. The plans called for the Q train to be extended up to 96th Street. Of course with the new plans because of the budget cuts, the Q will now run into Queens. So I've no idea if they'll cut that train back and run it up the East side or if they'll find a new train to run up the East side.

MOS-II would extend the line up to 125th Street, while MOS-III would extend the line south of 63rd by continuing down Second Ave and subseguent streets further south in Manhattan. That would also bring a new letter into the system, currrently it's planned as the T train. Of course with the V & W trains being killed off this month, those letters would once again become available too, if we ever get MOS-III built.

By the way it occurs to me that while I've no doubt you know what MOS-I stands for, I suspect that many other's reading this topic may not know. So for those wondering what the heck I've been talking about, it stands for Minimum Operating Segment 1. The MOS is the shortest segment that can reasonably be operated even while construction in theory continues on the other sections.

And now back to the Heartland Flyer. :)
 
saddly I see that neither of their plans include routing it thru Tulsa; which I would think would be a great stop for them to have.

peter
 
saddly I see that neither of their plans include routing it thru Tulsa; which I would think would be a great stop for them to have.
peter
Absolutely. I am dreaming of a day when we can get the old Frisco mainline back up and running from STL to OKC, with stops in Sullivan, Rolla, and Lebanon, Springfield, and Joplin in Missouri and Tulsa, OK. Sadly, the MoDOT study done in 2007 predicted a loss of $3 million per year on the section from STL to SGF (Springfield, Mo.), and cited the lack of a universal crossover west of KWD as reasons not to go forward with the project. Well, the stimulus money has bought us that universal crossover, which we needed for the MORR anyway. So if Oklahoma is willing to work with us and we can add both Tulsa (pop. 385,000/metro. 650,000) and Joplin, Mo. (pop. 50,000/metro. 400,000) to the line--not to mention additional riders from Springfield, Mo. (pop. 150,000/metro. 425,000) due to the possibility of WB service--we may just have enough riders to justify the cost. MoDOT simply won't act until we do.
 
saddly I see that neither of their plans include routing it thru Tulsa; which I would think would be a great stop for them to have.
peter
I noticed that in the last edition of the system timetable, AMTRAK removed the shuttle bus that runs from Oklahoma City to Kansas City via Tulsa. If they canceled this bus connection due to low ridership, how can they expect a train to follow the same route? Wouldn't they keep the bus connection until the train starts running?
 
saddly I see that neither of their plans include routing it thru Tulsa; which I would think would be a great stop for them to have.
peter
I noticed that in the last edition of the system timetable, AMTRAK removed the shuttle bus that runs from Oklahoma City to Kansas City via Tulsa. If they canceled this bus connection due to low ridership, how can they expect a train to follow the same route? Wouldn't they keep the bus connection until the train starts running?
Except that Amtrak didn't cancel the shuttle bus. It was (is) a regular Jefferson Lines intercity bus, but evidently Jefferson Lines is no longer interested in serving the Amtrak stations in Kansas City and/or Oklahoma City.
 
saddly I see that neither of their plans include routing it thru Tulsa; which I would think would be a great stop for them to have.
peter
I noticed that in the last edition of the system timetable, AMTRAK removed the shuttle bus that runs from Oklahoma City to Kansas City via Tulsa. If they canceled this bus connection due to low ridership, how can they expect a train to follow the same route? Wouldn't they keep the bus connection until the train starts running?
It is more complicated than that. Jefferson wants more intermodal connections. But they have to connect with Greyhound, which shifted its schedules. To keep its Greyhound connection, Jefferson couldn't keep its connection with Amtrak.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top