If you could add routes....

Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
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.
Anthony said:
I can just imagine a trip in a decrepit, rough-riding Heritage car at 110mph. :rolleyes: :lol:
Click to expand...
A decrepit Heritage car rides ten times better on not so well maintained jointed rail at maximum timetable speed than any Viewliner car could ever dream of! Weight does make a difference! :lol: :D

Though I have been tossed around quite a bit in just about every type of car Amtrak owns. Some of the locomotives don't ride too well either, but their weight helps of course.
 
:)

That shows you how often I'm on Viewliner or Heritage equipment on rough tracks. Poor me - I have to ride on spacious Superliners. :lol:
 
Re: LAX-Las Vegas

Really bad news is that the track is owned by UP and it's probably congestion. It'll be difficult for make schedule with Amtrak high speed trainset.

I believe adding a route between these cities should be #1 priority because of HUGE potential!
 
My suggestion, build a Double Track corridor right next to the UP Main, and then let Amtrak dispatch the line, leaving UP to do with its line what it wishes.
 
battalion51 said:
My suggestion, build a Double Track corridor right next to the UP Main, and then let Amtrak dispatch the line, leaving UP to do with its line what it wishes.
Click to expand...
That be cool as long as it designed for passengers only, not freight! However, it might be "derailed" the CA high speed plan due to $$$.
 
engine999 said:
Only problem is you limit your self to 90mph.  I think the minimum would have to be 110, with 125 being better.
Click to expand...
No, all California cars including the newer Surfliner cars are rated for a maximum speed of 110 mph: Check out Amtrak California's California Car Specs Page Unfortunately the fastest any of them run in California is 90 mph (Surfliners) because of track conditions. The San Joaquin trains should be able to run at 110 mph, but it would require upgrading the track and signals on the line. The line is straight enough, though.

Does anyone know the max speed for the Talgos? I hadn't thought about that. I guess I got the discussion a little sidetracked here with all the talk about the train speeds, though. Does anyone else want to share some dream routes if you could add them?
 
Well the F-59s I believe are only geared for 110mph (maybe 100mph), so the Talgos could not reach above that speed anyway. Now with the right locomotive, I think they can run at 125mph with the tilt activated.
 
The only diesel I'm aware of that can operate at 125 is the Jet Train, which appears to be a flop. I think Talgo is developing a high speed diesel as a part of its Lakeliner series.
 
battalion51 said:
The only diesel I'm aware of that can operate at 125 is the Jet Train, which appears to be a flop. I think Talgo is developing a high speed diesel as a part of its Lakeliner series.
Click to expand...
Is that for american service? From what I rember there powerunits are not up to fra standards.
 
Well the Jet Train is definitely up to FRA Standards since they helped develop it. As for Talgo, the system is still being developed, and would have to undergo tests from the FRA at Pueblo just like any other new system would.
 
Weren't the LRC locomotives supposedly capable of 125 mph (at least on paper)? Amtrak had ithe two units on the corridor, but in diesel territory I doubt there was any track (back then) good to sprint at anywhere near those speeds. I don't know how fast they ran in Via service, though 110 sounds right.
 
I say we go for making Salt Lake City a major Amtrak hub and offer a revived Desert Wind to LA, revived Pioneer operating SEA-SLC only, and a new day train linking SLC to Denver via Wyoming. Also we should see about starting the Ft. Wort to Denver train as well. That is going to be one major Superliner 3 order to be placed.

-Firebert
 
East Coast (BOS/NYC/PHI/WAS/ATL) to Dallas/Ft.Worth.

Extend the Heartland Flyer from OKC to Kansas City.

and finally, double the frequency of all LD trains. If your train departs at 6am, the next one is at 6pm. No city gets only night service.
 
I'd like to see Dallas Fort Worth southern hub for Amtrak. Fort Worth to Lubbock, and to Denver. Also there was talk about rerouting the Sunset through Fort Worth which wouldn't be bad. They could split the Sunset in El Paso. One goes to Ft Worth and the other goes to San Anotonio and beyond. I want the service to New York also from Ft Worth.

Also there should be multiple corridor service between DFW, SA, and Houston, the Texas Triangle as it should be called.

Chris
 
I'd route Amtrak via Madison, WI. I would also return service to Duluth, MN, and get service to Winnepeg, Manitoba.

One slightly more realistic wish would be to get more than one frequency per day along the Empire Builder's route.
 
1. Reinstate Desert Wind, Pioneer, Hiawatha to Seattle, Floridian

2. Add Auto train from florida to chicago area

3. Split Palmetto into 2 trains, silver palm- NY-Miami via current line, Palmetto, NY- Jacksonville

4. Coast Daylight- San Diego- San Francisco

5. Empire builder to have 2 trains daily, one to portland, one to seattle

6. Cardinal Daily,Superliner, with through Viewliner and amcoach to boston

7. New Silver service train to run via FEC (Silver Comet?, Silver Asteroid?)

8. Silver meteor/star to have through service to tampa, Extended to boston

9. Gulf Breeze, Crescent star added as spurs off of crescent, Additional frequency via alternate route

10, 3 rivers to be routed via capitol limited route to chicago, given full consist

11. Broadway limited with full consist reinstated

12. Texas Eagle, Extended to LA, Made daily, renamed "Eagle"

13. Sunset limited made daily, Tampa, A line, to LA

14. Coast Starlight extended to vancouver

15. Parlours and slumbercoaches added to most long distance trains. all cars would either be superliner/surfliner, or amfleet/viewliner.
 
The superliner are based on the old Santa Fe bilevels first built for the El Capitan. Even though so far as I know, the ATSF never had official speed limits above 90 mph, they were known to really let it all hang out if needed to keep schedule. One retired ATSF engineer I know talked about running 110 up the valley in California. Now if someone could ask the passengers about the ride quality.

All that to say that see no problem with 110, maybe more for the superliners. They are not listed for the NEC because they can not run there.
 
I wrote the post above looking at page 1 only, so I missed the better answers on page 2 and 3.

As to the Talgo, that I know for sure, it is limited to 79 mph by the FRA as part of its permission to be operated under a permanent waiver from the current crashworthiness standards.

For service with unlimited budget:

Let' start by upgrading track, replacing / adding more sidings, second tracks, maybe a third track in some areas, adding signals to get all lines on which passenger trains will be operated up to a 79 mph limit and enough capacity to acieve reliability. Then let's go for at least twice daily service between all mafor cities, not just the ones currently served, as a minimum.

Northeast corridor: striaghten out curves, build a straight railroad through Baltimore, increase track centers, 4-track it all from New Haven south so the outside tracks are commuter / freight and the inside tracks are true high speed, and make that 200 mph, so that even with a few stops Washington ot New York gets to a little under 2 hours, and New York to Boston under 3. From there bring the Washington to Florida line up to 125 mph standards, replace the portionof the SAL main south of Auburndale that was removed, Get the old New York Central NY to Chicage.up to 125 mph, also. Carry on to other lines. In short let's make the investment in rail over the next several years like the investment in roads over the last 50.

Doing this would result in changes in travel patterns that would save tremendous amounts of fuel, which would also drastically better our balance of payments and reduce the cash flow into some of the most unstable and irrational governments on the planet.
 
George Harris said:
As to the Talgo, that I know for sure, it is limited to 79 mph by the FRA as part of its permission to be operated under a permanent waiver from the current crashworthiness standards.
Click to expand...
That's only for right now. The FRA is continuing to test the Talgo and see what imporvements if any are needed to get these beasts to run at speeds of 110 like Amtrak, the state of Washington, and ODOT are looking for in the future.
 
Either way, let's get some of those Talgo XXI Lakeliners built and pair them up with some P42s and run some 110+MPH trains. I nominate Los Angeles-Las Vegas and Chicago - Minneapolis to be the first two corridors with the new equipment. As more sets are delivered the routes can expand to San Fransisco, Bakersfield and Palm Springs from Los Angeles and to Kansas City, St. Louis, Indianapolis, Detroit and Cleveland from Chicago. Then the Horizon fleet equipment can be released to begin corridor services elsewhere like Florida or maybe Texas.

-Firebert
 
battalion51 said:
George Harris said:
As to the Talgo, that I know for sure, it is limited to 79 mph by the FRA as part of its permission to be operated under a permanent waiver from the current crashworthiness standards.
Click to expand...
That's only for right now. The FRA is continuing to test the Talgo and see what imporvements if any are needed to get these beasts to run at speeds of 110 like Amtrak, the state of Washington, and ODOT are looking for in the future.
Click to expand...
I know besides the waiver the state still needs to upgrade the tracks. They need to also add some for of Ats or Cabsignal.
 
George Harris said:
One retired ATSF engineer I know talked about running 110 up the valley in California.
Click to expand...
Yep, I've rode this line many many times and it should run at 110mph. Ridership would double/triple quickly if it did (and was reliable).
 

Latest posts

Back
Top