I am kinda bored and I was kinda missing trains, and tired of driving.. I had an idea to take a train down to San Antonio and hang out there for a few days, but I was realizing it doesn't seem very easy to do. Apparently it's $85 each way, they don't do student discounts, and it's a 12 hour train ride... the last time I booked a 12 hour train ride was across Poland, it cost me about $15, and it ended up being an insane 18 hour train ride.

There is something wrong with Amtrak if it costs this much (like $160) and is 12 hours just to go to Texas. People may find it odd that some folks who don't use the transportation infrastructure are the ones who argue the hardest for more trains and stuff, or same with bus system and the local streetcar advocates, but this transit infrastructure is simply not usable. It just isn't worth a damn. San Antonio is a 7-8 hour drive. Trains should at least be able to keep up with car travel, both time-wise and cost-wise, especially if the route only has a 1-hr layover in Ft. Worth.

Considering that it is only $54 per person round trip, OKC to FTW, maybe you should just consider going there. Plenty to do in FTW as well. The reason it takes 12 hours is because the Heartland Flyer only goes to FTW. You have to connect to the Texas Eagle which runs between Chicago and San Antonio. Trains have layovers too my friend. European trains and Asian trains are better off than the US run Amtrak which is already subsidized, hence your evil ticket pricing.

Also, regarding your post about about keeping up with the cars. The speed limit for the Heartland Flyer in Oklahoma is 80mph, but once it crosses into Texas they slow down to 55mph. Texas state requirement for Amtrak. Therefore it even effects the Eagle. Kinda lame, but that's why it takes soooooo long. Amtrak operates as scenic trains, not get from point A to point B 3/4 as fast as a plane.

Lets fill up the Western United States with 1,000 people per square mile all throughout the scenic mountain ranges, make sure they're capable of paying taxes and being honest workers, and by then I'm sure the federally run system will be much cheaper. Probably not though, so enjoy your drive! ;-)

My recommendation would be to rent a Jeep Wrangler with the top down and road trip it to SA. You'd have a better experience than riding a slow moving train. Wear lots of sunblock.

Oh, also I would take I-44 to Wichita Falls and then take 281 South straight into SA. It's a better scenic route than I-35. There are lots of neat small towns along the way including the historic and haunted looking Baker Hotel in Mineral Wells, TX.

I am kinda bored and I was kinda missing trains, and tired of driving.. I had an idea to take a train down to San Antonio and hang out there for a few days, but I was realizing it doesn't seem very easy to do. Apparently it's $85 each way, they don't do student discounts, and it's a 12 hour train ride... the last time I booked a 12 hour train ride was across Poland, it cost me about $15, and it ended up being an insane 18 hour train ride.

There is something wrong with Amtrak if it costs this much (like $160) and is 12 hours just to go to Texas. People may find it odd that some folks who don't use the transportation infrastructure are the ones who argue the hardest for more trains and stuff, or same with bus system and the local streetcar advocates, but this transit infrastructure is simply not usable. It just isn't worth a damn. San Antonio is a 7-8 hour drive. Trains should at least be able to keep up with car travel, both time-wise and cost-wise, especially if the route only has a 1-hr layover in Ft. Worth.

Spartan, I"m not sure what you were looking at, but normal adult roundtrip fares from OKC to San Antonio are $130.00. It would certainly be iffy if you could drive for that amount. And you're wrong about student discounts. They offer a 15% discount for holders of a Student Advantage Discount Card.

The drive is 470 miles, so if you average 20MPG and gas is $3.50 a gallon, that's about $82 just for gas each way. If you use the IRS standard mileage rate at .55 per mile, that is over $250 each way.

And yes, it's about four more hours each way on the train, but train time is YOUR time to read, sleep and relax.


You can't compare European trains due to the density of their population. How many times do you think you'd have to change trains for a 12 hour ride there??

The drive is 470 miles, so if you average 20MPG and gas is $3.50 a gallon, that's about $82 just for gas each way. If you use the IRS standard mileage rate at .55 per mile, that is over $250 each way.

And yes, it's about four more hours each way on the train, but train time is YOUR time to read, sleep and relax.


You can't compare European trains due to the density of their population. How many times do you think you'd have to change trains for a 12 hour ride there??

Gas prices are why I came up with this.

https://sites.google.com/site/okcrail/home

Gas prices are why I came up with this.

https://sites.google.com/site/okcrail/home

Your line from OKC to McAlester would have to be rebedded, rebuilt, and relayed with all new tracks and ties. If Union Pacific still owns the right of way between these two cities, I doubt they're going to want to invest their money in it, so you're looking at the state buying it from them and then spending our hard earned money on it. Do you want that tax?

My recommendation would be to rent a Jeep Wrangler with the top down and road trip it to SA. You'd have a better experience than riding a slow moving train. Wear lots of sunblock.
Not sure that I would recommend a convertible this time of year, my top stays up most of the summer. The motorcycle stays in the garage as well.


Oh, also I would take I-44 to Wichita Falls and then take 281 South straight into SA. It's a better scenic route than I-35. There are lots of neat small towns along the way including the historic and haunted looking Baker Hotel in Mineral Wells, TX.
I have taken this route when there is bad construction backups on I-35 or when I have ridden the motorcycle up to OKC. A stop at Hard 8 BBQ in Stephenville is always a good stop.

Also, I would love to redo the Baker Hotel but it seems a hotelier here in Austin is taking it on as a project.

Statesman.com - Austin hotelier Trigger to lead restoration of Mineral Wells' famous Baker Hotel (http://www.statesman.com/business/real-estate/austin-hotelier-trigger-to-lead-restoration-of-mineral-862888.html)

I haven't been by there in about a year to see if they have done anything yet.

The reason it takes so long is because the trains can't go more than 55mph in texas, if I remember correctly. My mom is deathly afraid of flying so she always uses amtrak, usually the southwest chief though that goes to AZ.

Spartan, I"m not sure what you were looking at, but normal adult roundtrip fares from OKC to San Antonio are $130.00. It would certainly be iffy if you could drive for that amount. And you're wrong about student discounts. They offer a 15% discount for holders of a Student Advantage Discount Card.

The ISIC/Student Advantage discounts were not valid on OKC-SAS.

And I had no idea about 55 mph in Texas, now I understand. Imagine that, a stupid law in Texas.. I would totally just do the Jeep through the Hill Country, but I'm already set to drive across the Northern Rockies in a month anyway..

The drive is 470 miles, so if you average 20MPG and gas is $3.50 a gallon, that's about $82 just for gas each way. If you use the IRS standard mileage rate at .55 per mile, that is over $250 each way.

And yes, it's about four more hours each way on the train, but train time is YOUR time to read, sleep and relax.


You can't compare European trains due to the density of their population. How many times do you think you'd have to change trains for a 12 hour ride there??

I'm all about relaxing on trains, but 12 hours is a hard train ride, I've done my share of those. The last time I had a 12 hour train ride, we ended up running someone over in Katowice, PL and then more construction delays made it 18 hours--but it was only like $15. How many times would I change on a European 12 hour train ride? It depends, there are always a dozen daily direct trains between all regional major cities (ie., Krakow to Budapest, Warsaw to Berlin, etc). But if you take an odd night route or something, or if you're getting off the intercity grid, then yeah there can be a switch every hour or so on those kinds of trips. It depends.

The reason I even bother with the point of why Amtrak is so sucky in this part is because Amtrak actually offers decent service for the Northeast Corridor and somewhat okay service in the Midwest (in/out of Chicago). I am confident that they can do it, there just has to be a will. Believe it or not, the U.S. is not THAT sparsely populated. If you connect Oklahoma to points east and along I-35, it's doable density-wise, and it would be comparable to some places in Europe, particularly Central Europe which is augmented by mountain ranges. Countries like PL, CZ, HU, SK aren't all that dense, and have huge sweeping plains just like OK and MO, in fact, the train scenery there always reminded me of the drive from OKC to Chicago.

[QUOTE=Spartan;453719]The ISIC/Student Advantage discounts were not valid on OKC-SAS.QUOTE]

If you price it on their website, it offers a discount of $19.50 off of the roundtrip fare from OKC to San Antonio

I've done it. It was miserable. From what I was told by the people running the Flyer, BNSF doesn't mind AMTRAK (Heartland Flyer) operating on it's lines, but UP does and makes the Texas Eagle have to work around it's freight trains. Not only is it a slow ride, but it is not uncommon to sit in a Texas cornfield for two hours waiting for a broken down freight train get out of the way.

Also, the scenery is nothing to write home about. As I discovered, the "wrong side of the tracks" are usually BOTH sides of the tracks. You get to see the backside of every Texas city you pass through.

I wouldn't believe the timetable either. It took me about 16 hours!

Don't do it.

I've done it. It was miserable. From what I was told by the people running the Flyer, BNSF doesn't mind AMTRAK (Heartland Flyer) operating on it's lines, but UP does and makes the Texas Eagle have to work around it's freight trains. Not only is it a slow ride, but it is not uncommon to sit in a Texas cornfield for two hours waiting for a broken down freight train get out of the way.

Also, the scenery is nothing to write home about. As I discovered, the "wrong side of the tracks" are usually BOTH sides of the tracks. You get to see the backside of every Texas city you pass through.

I wouldn't believe the timetable either. It took me about 16 hours!

Don't do it.

I've heard numerous similar horror stories about flying and driving as well. The scenery from your plane window isn't much to get excited about either and, while I'm sure you had a bad experience, many people enjoy it a lot because it's normally much less hastle, more comfortable, and more relaxing.

Your line from OKC to McAlester would have to be rebedded, rebuilt, and relayed with all new tracks and ties. If Union Pacific still owns the right of way between these two cities, I doubt they're going to want to invest their money in it, so you're looking at the state buying it from them and then spending our hard earned money on it. Do you want that tax?

You must be thinking of a different track than I am. All of the track I used is in use today, at least according to the Oklahoma DOT rail map. The yellow line is in Phase 4 so that is ways off anyhow.

I'm a bit confused by the OP. If you are taking a train because you want the quickest trip between point a and point b than you will not like it. If you are taking a train because you want something different and have the time to do it than go for it.

Something to consider. When I was still living in Dallas I took the Texas Eagle to St. Louis with a cousin and friend. We each chipped in $30 extra each, got a sleeper room, and took the night train. IMO it was a very enjoyable experience. We had dinner in the car, met some really interesting people, and when it was late (around Little Rock AR) we simply went to the car and fell asleep. At 8 am we woke up in Downtown St. Louis. No traffic jams, no "whose going to drive" musical chairs, no TSA agent gropefest. Yes it was 15 hours, but we weren't in a hurry to begin with. With that in mind I'm not sure I would have liked it as much w/o the sleeper or having to switch trains. But I still wouldn't discount it.

Personally, I went to that area last February and I was so burnt out on the stupid drivers and outrageous traffic on 35 my next trip to SA will either involve an Amtrak ticket or Southwest Airline FunFare.

I also wish we had better train service throughout the country. Hate to say it but even if our wish was granted tomorrow and work began on a great new train project, at the pace our government and those projects move everyone in this thread will either be old and gray or dead before we see something working. Makes one want to not even bother.

I also wish we had better train service throughout the country. Hate to say it but even if our wish was granted tomorrow and work began on a great new train project, at the pace our government and those projects move everyone in this thread will either be old and gray or dead before we see something working. Makes one want to not even bother.

That is true with a nationwide system. However, regional rail systems could be put in place very quickly, but the federal government would have to stay out of it. Just look at how much time is wasted on our streetcar just to apply for federal funding (with no guarantee of getting any). Interurban service between OKC and Tulsa could start relatively soon but the problem becomes, how do you get around in each city once you get there. The local infrastructure has to be in place first.

I'm a bit confused by the OP. If you are taking a train because you want the quickest trip between point a and point b than you will not like it. If you are taking a train because you want something different and have the time to do it than go for it.

Well, I think there should be some kind of in-between. I am not expecting high-speed rail service from OKC to San Antonio anytime soon, maybe not even in this lifetime. I don't see why it has to take 12-16 hours though. It is a 7 hour drive, so to me, it would be nice if the train could be maybe an 8-9 hour ride. Basically I just mean that I don't expect rail to ever be the "most convenient" mode of transit, however, it would be nice if it weren't sooo inconvenient. Does that make sense?

15 hours from San Antonio to St. Louis, considering that distance, is actually not bad at all.

Just look at how much time is wasted on our streetcar just to apply for federal funding (with no guarantee of getting any).

Yeah, and if that effort comes through, it could be the easiest $50-75M that the city has ever earned. I'm not sure what you're trying to say about federal transit, but that is traditionally how interstate infrastructure gets funded. It's just that we're currently too geared toward highways.

I took Amtrak to San Antonio last fall. I believe we arrived in S.A. about an hour and a half earlier than their schedule would have indicated. I asked the train conductor how come we were so early and he said they build in some wiggle room in the schedule because they don't know what kind of freight traffic will occur. Just know that when u get on in the morning its gonna be an all day trip because its amtrak and all. The stretch to Ft. Worth seems to be fast though.

Yeah, and if that effort comes through, it could be the easiest $50-75M that the city has ever earned. I'm not sure what you're trying to say about federal transit, but that is traditionally how interstate infrastructure gets funded. It's just that we're currently too geared toward highways.

I am saying that instead of the federal government collecting money and sending it back out with all kinds of conditions and studies attached, let the states keep the money and spend it how it is needed locally. The $75 million didn't originate in D.C., they just took it and then gave it back with instructions on how to spend it. Cutting out the middle man (the federal government) would make things less expensive and faster. Even states the receive more in benefits than they pay in would be better off because of the reduciton in red tape.

Also, I would love to redo the Baker Hotel but it seems a hotelier here in Austin is taking it on as a project.

Statesman.com - Austin hotelier Trigger to lead restoration of Mineral Wells' famous Baker Hotel (http://www.statesman.com/business/real-estate/austin-hotelier-trigger-to-lead-restoration-of-mineral-862888.html)

I haven't been by there in about a year to see if they have done anything yet.

We bought a few acres at PK Lake just before the enormous wildfires this spring. To get there we take TX-180 right through MW. As of a month ago, no work had begun.

The company I work for is involved in the restoration of the slightly smaller, but no less opulent, Settler Hotel in Big Spring, TX.

You must be thinking of a different track than I am. All of the track I used is in use today, at least according to the Oklahoma DOT rail map. The yellow line is in Phase 4 so that is ways off anyhow.

No, I'm pretty sure I know what line I'm talking about. Being a rail buff, I know it used to be a Union Pacific line, formally, MKT. There's many parts of the line that are washed out, especially along the South Canadian River. It may go only as far as Shawnee but beyond that, it's not in operation.

I am saying that instead of the federal government collecting money and sending it back out with all kinds of conditions and studies attached, let the states keep the money and spend it how it is needed locally. The $75 million didn't originate in D.C., they just took it and then gave it back with instructions on how to spend it. Cutting out the middle man (the federal government) would make things less expensive and faster. Even states the receive more in benefits than they pay in would be better off because of the reduciton in red tape.

i don't think i am disagreeing with you unless you are saying Oklahoma is a "Donor State". I have heard that all of my life but recent reading has indicated that the tide has turned on it and we get back more now than what we put in. Of course we probably haven't yet made up for the decades of donor status and the tide could go back out again...

And your point is taken that the strings and red tape that can be avoided is a plus.

No, I'm pretty sure I know what line I'm talking about. Being a rail buff, I know it used to be a Union Pacific line, formally, MKT. There's many parts of the line that are washed out, especially along the South Canadian River. It may go only as far as Shawnee but beyond that, it's not in operation.

You're right - that track needs some repairs. I took a look out near Earlsboro and there are even trees growing between the rails and the street crossing have been paved over. However, that is good for me because the major expense is right-of-way acqusition and since this line isn't used there is no freight traffic to deal with. I only considered using single car DMUs anyhow so it isn't like it would need to support HSR.

You're right - that track needs some repairs. However, that is good for me because the major expense is right-of-way acqusition and since this line isn't used there is no freight traffic to deal with.

The only reason I can think of for why it'd still be in operation east of Shawnee is for the Army Munitions plant in McAlester, but UP's Tulsa/Dallas line runs right through McAlester so it's an easy connection there.

The only reason I can think of for why it'd still be in operation east of Shawnee is for the Army Munitions plant in McAlester, but UP's Tulsa/Dallas line runs right through McAlester so it's an easy connection there.

Rail access to the munitions plant if off the Dallas/Tulsa UP line. Out of OKC going east the line is owned by UP but leased by Santa Fe. In Shawnee it connects with a Santa Fe spur line that goes north and crosses I-40. It goes to three industrial users close to I-40 and then from there north it is abandoned. When I was making my route map it was really neat (and sad) to see all the abandonded lines around the state. I also thought it was weird that there is no direct rail traffic from OKC to Amarillo. The UP line west out of OKC stops at Erick, OK (although UP ownership stops at El Reno). To get to Amarillo by rail you have to go to Enid or Altus first.

Heck, just do it (take Amtrak) --- consider it an adventure w/ all the + & - / it's something different to do. Take your camera, use your imagination, some people don't see all there is to see ;).

My girlfriend and I decided to be adventurous and take the Amtrak to Ft. Worth. From the start, it was a nightmare. The OKC station is a dilapidated building. I couldn't believe this is how Oklahoma greets its passengers? Image is everything and this wasn't a good first impression. Just look at Ft. Worths station and compare. Theirs looks very professional, clean, well-lit and beautiful environment. OKC station looks like a dump.

Once we got to the platform, you wait until the train is ready. You will not benefit by getting to the platform early. There is no line, so when the conductor tells everyone to board the train - it's chaos of people trying to run to get on first. Pure madness!

Once on the train and take your seat, you'll have to tolerate the noise of others. We had the misfortune of sitting near a group of very loud talkers and one guy who didn't need a headset to listen to his hip-hop music and shared it with everyone. The conductors did nothing to keep the noise down.

Painfully slow train ride. It makes many stops on the way to Ft. Worth. We decided it is best to drive to Ft. Worth instead.

Oh, we also looked into getting a sleeper (yes, even for a 4 hour trip - for the peace and quiet), but Amtrak doesn't provide sleeper cars for OKC to Ft. Worth.

That's why I fly to DFW whenever I go. Takes the same amount of time when you add in security and getting there early. Costs about the same as Amtrak, and you only have to deal with sitting next to someone for 30 minutes. Not the hassle and energy spent driving for 3 hours.

I am saying that instead of the federal government collecting money and sending it back out with all kinds of conditions and studies attached, let the states keep the money and spend it how it is needed locally. The $75 million didn't originate in D.C., they just took it and then gave it back with instructions on how to spend it. Cutting out the middle man (the federal government) would make things less expensive and faster. Even states the receive more in benefits than they pay in would be better off because of the reduciton in red tape.

Kerry. Read this post carefully. I don't disagree that what you're saying would be easier and more convenient, would make more sense, and would even be preferable. However, this is just the way things are done. It is in our best interest to see how the game is played and follow the rules to maximize what we can get out of it. Taking some philosophical or moral stance on earmarks is tilting at windmills and just screws you over in the long run. We need those earmarks as long as that is the way that infrastructure is funded. There is -NO- other way to be reasonable here. Just realize that.

My girlfriend and I decided to be adventurous and take the Amtrak to Ft. Worth. From the start, it was a nightmare. The OKC station is a dilapidated building. I couldn't believe this is how Oklahoma greets its passengers? Image is everything and this wasn't a good first impression. Just look at Ft. Worths station and compare. Theirs looks very professional, clean, well-lit and beautiful environment. OKC station looks like a dump.

Once we got to the platform, you wait until the train is ready. You will not benefit by getting to the platform early. There is no line, so when the conductor tells everyone to board the train - it's chaos of people trying to run to get on first. Pure madness!

Once on the train and take your seat, you'll have to tolerate the noise of others. We had the misfortune of sitting near a group of very loud talkers and one guy who didn't need a headset to listen to his hip-hop music and shared it with everyone. The conductors did nothing to keep the noise down.

Painfully slow train ride. It makes many stops on the way to Ft. Worth. We decided it is best to drive to Ft. Worth instead.

Oh, we also looked into getting a sleeper (yes, even for a 4 hour trip - for the peace and quiet), but Amtrak doesn't provide sleeper cars for OKC to Ft. Worth.

Keep in mind that the OKC station will be the new intermodal transportation hub and should see some significant upgrades. As for noise, I'm sure that wasn't pleasant, but you can experience noise overload on planes or buses as well.

Surely you knew about the time schedule for the train to Fort Worth before buying a ticket. When it's on schedule, it takes about 4 hours compared to about 3 hours driving. Maybe you consider 5 stops to be many but it is reasonable for that route. Until we have high speed rail, people won't be taking train travel for speed.

It certainly is not reasonable to expect sleeper cars on a train from OKC to Fort Worth that only operates during the day. It makes no sense economically or otherwise. They might get one person per day who would want a sleeper and who would pay for the added expense.

Spartan - I understand how it is done now, and how it is done has produced our current Amtrak system that takes 16 hours to go 400 miles. If you want to make a better system you can't keep doing things the same way. If the pottery is coming out all screwed up you have to break the mold and start again. If there is anything we know to be true in this world, it is that Washington DC is incapable of change so any rail improvements will have to be done without and inspite of them.

Countries that have working rail systems have all used their own federal funds to build their systems. The U.S. is not the only country in the world where states are semi sovereign.

Countries that have working rail systems have all used their own federal funds to build their systems. The U.S. is not the only country in the world where states are semi sovereign.

If you want the US federal government to implement your rail system, they already did it. It is called Amtrak. Where does your trust and faith in government come from because it isn't based on their track record of success?

Given the high level of repeat business, it seems the Heartland Flyer has plenty of happy customers.

In case any of you get the wrong idea from some of these posts, Superliner Coach on this train is roughly the equivalent of 767 international business class in terms of personal space, carry-on space, leg rests and so forth.

There are individual reading lights, curtains on the windows, and some seats have 110 volt AC outlets.

There are sandwiches, snacks, hot beverages, soft drinks, and liquor for sale. Or you can bring your own (except adult beverages!).

WiFI isn't available, but it's coming.

While sacolton has a very bad review of the whole Amtrak experience, I gave a great review of me and my girlfriends trip down there on the same train. No run is any different from another, so obviously the issue is personal preference. One thing I enjoyed coming back is sneering at traffic in a standstill on I-35 as we're bolting by at 80mph! Not too shabby...

Given the high level of repeat business, it seems the Heartland Flyer has plenty of happy customers.

In case any of you get the wrong idea from some of these posts, Superliner Coach on this train is roughly the equivalent of 767 international business class in terms of personal space, carry-on space, leg rests and so forth.

There are individual reading lights, curtains on the windows, and some seats have 110 volt AC outlets.

There are sandwiches, snacks, hot beverages, soft drinks, and liquor for sale. Or you can bring your own (except adult beverages!).

WiFI isn't available, but it's coming.

The Heartland Flier is one of only two profitable routes on the entire Amtrak system. And I use the term 'profitable' loosely because it requires a multi-million subsidy from the States of Oklahoma and Texas. If left to just the federal government the route wouldn't exist at all, which leads me to wonder if a state based regional rail system could run it better. What if Texas and Oklahoma just funded their own rail network between Ft. Worth and OKC instead of paying subsidies to Amtrak. We could probably get 2 or 3 trains a day.

I actually did San Diego to Little Rock about 15 years ago. I personally had a blast. $1 Daquaris in the club car with a bunch from Australia and some board games. Good times. The scenery out west is awesome. I made the trip several times between San Diego and Anaheim (Disneyland) and there is no better way to travel that route. You get dropped off at Angels Stadium and walk to DL from there.

Chris
www.radiookc.com

I'm all about relaxing on trains, but 12 hours is a hard train ride, I've done my share of those. The last time I had a 12 hour train ride, we ended up running someone over in Katowice, PL and then more construction delays made it 18 hours--but it was only like $15. How many times would I change on a European 12 hour train ride? It depends, there are always a dozen daily direct trains between all regional major cities (ie., Krakow to Budapest, Warsaw to Berlin, etc). But if you take an odd night route or something, or if you're getting off the intercity grid, then yeah there can be a switch every hour or so on those kinds of trips. It depends.

The reason I even bother with the point of why Amtrak is so sucky in this part is because Amtrak actually offers decent service for the Northeast Corridor and somewhat okay service in the Midwest (in/out of Chicago). I am confident that they can do it, there just has to be a will. Believe it or not, the U.S. is not THAT sparsely populated. If you connect Oklahoma to points east and along I-35, it's doable density-wise, and it would be comparable to some places in Europe, particularly Central Europe which is augmented by mountain ranges. Countries like PL, CZ, HU, SK aren't all that dense, and have huge sweeping plains just like OK and MO, in fact, the train scenery there always reminded me of the drive from OKC to Chicago.

Man, this one brings back memories!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNVLRPSEVaE

... We could probably get 2 or 3 trains a day.

With the level of freight running on that same line, adding another couple of daily passenger runs from OKC-FW strikes me as somewhat difficult.

Man, this one brings back memories!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNVLRPSEVaE

Other than the fact that the video uses public transportation as a background, does it have anything to do with this thread?

With the level of freight running on that same line, adding another couple of daily passenger runs from OKC-FW strikes me as somewhat difficult.

I am pretty sure they could get another couple of trains a day on those tracks. The traffic isn't that heavy when compared to some other heavy use areas around the country. Folkston, GA gets a train ever 20 minutes and it includes 8 Amtrak trains.

I don’t mind taking the heartland flyer but I sure wish that it was much quicker.

What additional improvements are needed to significantly speed things up?
Does anyone have an update on the plan to extend train service to KC?

Just took the Heartland Flyer to Ft Worth on Saturday for the first time. All in all it was a good experience. It is a very good option cost wise for one or two people depending on the type vehicle you drive. The train departed OKC on time and arrived in Ft Worth a few minutes early. I think the previous comments about BNSF cooperating with Amtrak for prioritization must be accurate because we never waited for a freight train to pass. In fact we passed a few "high priority" freights such as intermodals sitting on sidings waiting for us. The seating and availability of refreshments beats any airline and the cost is significantly lower than anything in an airport. With the TRE connection at the Ft Worth Intermodal Center, it is very easy to get to Dallas and connections on DART and other Amtrak trains.

I agree the Santa Fe depot in OKC needs some TLC. You can see it is a very nice building and will serve us well as the future transit center. I am looking forward to seeing it after a restoration. The ticketing kiosk is located in a rather inconvenient place; and since the station is not staffed it is not the most inviting place. Hopefully this will change once it becomes the OKC transit center. (The Ft Worth Intermodal Transit Center is a very good model we would do well to emulate in concept.)

So while it is true you can drive or fly to DFW faster, the Heartland Flyer is definitely the most laid back way to get there. No driving, lots of space, and no TSA mugging. When you factor in time spent waiting at the airport or driving, I think Amtrak is a pretty good trade off. I will definitely ride the Flyer again if it is only a couple people travelling. I wish the rest of the Amtrak system was as good.

How many of you would rather see the Heartland flyer going directly to Dallas rather than Fort Worth?
I know I would...... and I think it would significantly increase ridership.

I would rather see the Heartland Flyer dropped from the national Amtrak system and ran as its own regional rail line funded by Texas and Oklahoma. The train is one of only two profitable routes in the entire Amtrak system and all the profits go to Amtrak despite most of the funding coming for Oklahoma and Texas. We need to eliminate the middle man. I would also like to see an AM train from Ft Worth to OKC with a PM return.

I would rather see the Heartland Flyer dropped from the national Amtrak system and ran as its own regional rail line funded by Texas and Oklahoma. The train is one of only two profitable routes in the entire Amtrak system and all the profits go to Amtrak despite most of the funding coming for Oklahoma and Texas. We need to eliminate the middle man. I would also like to see an AM train from Ft Worth to OKC with a PM return.

How would you feel about a state operated extension to Kansas City via the northern flyer?

How would you feel about a state operated extension to Kansas City via the northern flyer?

Way ahead of you. I would like to see Ft Worth, Lawton, OKC, Tulsa, Wichita, Topeaka, Kansas City, and Omaha all connected by high speed express service.

https://sites.google.com/site/okcrail/

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/Oklahoma-Kansas-NebraskaRail2.jpg

How many of you would rather see the Heartland flyer going directly to Dallas rather than Fort Worth?
I know I would...... and I think it would significantly increase ridership.

Unfortunately that ship has already sailed. All RR ROW between Denton and Carrollton is now devoted to the recently opened A-Train light rail. It connects Denton to downtown Dallas via a DART connection at Trinity Mills. You could always get off at the Denton Station and head into Dallas that way but the TRE would probably be less of a hassle.

I would LOVE to see the Flyer extended to Tulsa, then Joplin, then KC. Kansas City is the closest stop on the Amtrak Chicago/NYC network to OKC, so from there you can pretty much go anywhere east. Of course we are talking about 2 days on a train but it would be a blast! It would require some serious subsidies from the state though.

Unfortunately that ship has already sailed. All RR ROW between Denton and Carrollton is now devoted to the recently opened A-Train light rail. It connects Denton to downtown Dallas via a DART connection at Trinity Mills. You could always get off at the Denton Station and head into Dallas that way but the TRE would probably be less of a hassle.

I would LOVE to see the Flyer extended to Tulsa, then Joplin, then KC. Kansas City is the closest stop on the Amtrak Chicago/NYC network to OKC, so from there you can pretty much go anywhere east. Of course we are talking about 2 days on a train but it would be a blast! It would require some serious subsidies from the state though.


Holy Cow - DFW is light years ahead of OKC when it comes to rail transit. OKC (and Oklahoma in general) better get on the ball a lot faster than they are. One of OKC competitive advantage over DFW was the lack of traffic congestion but with rail becoming a very viable alternative in DFW that advantage will shift back to Texas.

Denton
http://www.lightrailnow.org/news/n_dtn_2011-07a.htm

Austin
http://www.lightrailnow.org/news/n_aus_2010-04a.htm

Unfortunately that ship has already sailed. All RR ROW between Denton and Carrollton is now devoted to the recently opened A-Train light rail. It connects Denton to downtown Dallas via a DART connection at Trinity Mills. You could always get off at the Denton Station and head into Dallas that way but the TRE would probably be less of a hassle.

I would LOVE to see the Flyer extended to Tulsa, then Joplin, then KC. Kansas City is the closest stop on the Amtrak Chicago/NYC network to OKC, so from there you can pretty much go anywhere east. Of course we are talking about 2 days on a train but it would be a blast! It would require some serious subsidies from the state though.


Is the track between Denton and Dallas no longer standard gage and not compatible with Amtrak equipment?
There isn’t an Amtrak Heartland Flyer Denton Station to get off at.

I would like a new KC route but more than new service I would first rather see much faster service on the lines we already have that don’t lose lots and lots of money.

Is the track between Denton and Dallas no longer standard gage and not compatible with Amtrak equipment?
There isn’t an Amtrak Heartland Flyer Denton Station to get off at.

I would like a new KC route but more than new service I would first rather see much faster service on the lines we already have that don’t lose lots and lots of money.

Not sure if the rails would be compatible for the Amtrak trains, but I'm going to assume no. I made a mistake in my last post. The A-train is in fact not light rail but rather commuter rail. I do know they ripped up all of the existing track and replaced it with newer track. They are currently leasing trains from the TRE but they plan on ordering new lighter trains in the future (I'm posting a link at what they are getting here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadler_GTW)


Holy Cow - DFW is light years ahead of OKC when it comes to rail transit. OKC (and Oklahoma in general) better get on the ball a lot faster than they are. One of OKC competitive advantage over DFW was the lack of traffic congestion but with rail becoming a very viable alternative in DFW that advantage will shift back to Texas.

DFW has a pretty aggressive plan for rail but right funding is becoming the main hangup. Several DART stations have been scrapped such as the Knox Henderson Station that would have served Uptown Dallas (the only true walkable neighborhood in Dallas). The Cotton Belt line that would have connected Plano to DFW Airport is on hold until they can find a private operating willing to share the costs. Can't speak on details for Houston's METRO except that progress has been slooooooowwww. They had an opportunity to really expand in the early 2000's. it but Mr Tom Delay made sure they didn't get a dime. In fact the only reason the A-Train got built is Denton County sold the rights to operate the Sam Rayburn Tollway to a private Spanish company for some huge amount of money.

Not sure if the rails would be compatible for the Amtrak trains, but I'm going to assume no. I made a mistake in my last post. The A-train is in fact not light rail but rather commuter rail. I do know they ripped up all of the existing track and replaced it with newer track. They are currently leasing trains from the TRE but they plan on ordering new lighter trains in the future (I'm posting a link at what they are getting here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadler_GTW)





A TRE train came to OKC several months ago for an OKC demonstration.
To the best of my knowledge commuter rail usually operates on standard gage tracks.

To the best of my knowledge commuter rail usually operates on standard gage tracks.
The commuter rail in Austin runs on former BNSF tracks.

The commuter rail in Austin runs on former BNSF tracks.

http://www.lightrailnow.org/news/n_aus_2010-04a.htm



MetroRail's Red Line operates over a portion of Capital Metro's 160-mile railway, a former Southern Pacific branch line stretching between the Central Texas towns of Giddings and Llano, and shared with contractual short line freight railroad operations – although "heavy" freight railroad service is shut down when MetroRail service is scheduled, and vice versa.

This procedure, known as temporal separation (and implemented by similar light railway operations elsewhere, such as the San Diego Trolley and the RiverLine between Camden and Trenton, New Jersey), fulfills one of the rules exceptions granted by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), which also holds responsibility for federal regulatory oversight of MetroRail. (The Federal Transit Administration, or FTA, does not have oversight, since FTA funding was not involved in the project.)

[It should be noted that the sharing of railway infrastructure – mainly tracks – between the operations of "light" transit-type passenger rolling stock and those of "heavy" intercity-type railroad rolling stock – locomotives, freight and passenger cars, etc. – is currently a warmly contentious issue between US transit agencies and FRA regulators. The FRA's prohibitions particularly stand in contrast to the widespread – and demonstrably safe – practice in Europe of running light rail "tram-trains" – trams (streetcars) – on major intercity railway lines shared with "heavy", highspeed intercity trains.]



Leave it to the federal government to get in the way of itself.

While the federal government did not help, the project was doing plenty of getting in the way of itself


As summarized in the LRN memo, some of the most serious weaknesses and mis-steps include:

• Rail project personnel apparently neglected to coordinate closely early on with the FRA, although it had been clear for more than a decade that, because of CMTA's freight railroad operations, there would be regulatory involvement by the FRA.

• The issue of comprehensive regulatory oversight of the rail project was not resolved at the outset – a situation that was certainly not helped by some confusion introduced by federal and state regulatory officials. However, it should have been clear that some measure of federal regulatory oversight would need to be settled, including some degree of intervention by the FRA. In any case, because of this confusion, some key design elements of the MetroRail project were initially not adequately coordinated in a cooperative relationship with any appropriate regulatory agency, such as the FRA – particularly crucial, as it turned out, especially in regard to rolling stock selection and signal system requirements.

• Lack of experience with the actual challenges and requirements of rail transit projects may have contributed to the serious under-estimation of the projected investment cost of the "urban commuter rail" project presented to the public. This budget under-estimation then became a constraint, since the project team did not want to appear to be exceeding the established budget as the project progressed and other unforeseen requirements emerged.

• Some of the capabilities of DMU technology (as a replacement for electric LRT as the technology for a future urban system) seem to have been misjudged – particularly in regard to the reduced capability of DMUs to operate in an urban street environment (e.g., turning radius constraints), their lower acceleration compared with electric LRT (and the adverse impacts of this drawback on schedules in closely spaced station stops), and their limitations in climbing grades as steep as those of electric LRT (and thus the impact of this limitation on route profiles, such as approaches to hills and bridges). By far, however, the most serious mis-step in terms of rolling stock was the failure to initially coordinate rolling stock selection with the FRA and its regulations affecting the railway alignment to be used.

• One of the most critical features of the CMTA railway is an at-grade, interlocking-protected "diamond" crossing of the heavy-traffic north-south main line of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) at McNeil Junction, north of Austin, and CMTA rail project designers proposed for the MetroRail alignment to retain this level crossing. Despite skepticism voiced by knowledgeable rail supporters (including leading representatives of the Light Rail Now Project), the need for a grade separation with the UPRR was initially rejected, and continued reliance on an interlocking-protected, at-grade crossing was assumed. As it turned out, this may have contributed to the under-estimation of the ultimate investment cost of the project.

• Although it eventually became clear that a grade-separation (viaduct) over the UPRR was truly necessary, the narrow, single-track viaduct design that emerged omitted any provision for a future double track, thus incorporating a serious capacity constraint.

• Ultimately, the segment of the MetroRail viaduct over the surface grade of the UPRR and a parallel siding was constructed approximately 18 inches (457mm) too low for adequate clearance of the interchange tracks – in turn necessitating the lowering of one of the underlying tracks, incurring drainage problems and substantial additional costs.

• MetroRail sidings – to enable passing of trains in opposing directions on a predominantly single-tracked alignment – appear to have been improperly located, thus adversely impacting the system's schedules and capacity.

• At some point into the project, in the effective absence of coordinated, systemwide project management, the project became split into at least three somewhat independent activities – civil, information technology (IT), and operations – subject to very poor coordination.

• In 2006, approximately two years into the project, the decision was made (apparently at the behest of the FRA) to dispense with plans for a simpler system of train movement control, and to implement a safer, more industry-standard centralized traffic control (CTC) system. However, Installation of the CTC signal system, together with level crossing protection controls, seems to have been poorly coordinated, with different contractors reportedly implementing incompatible components in different segments of the line. Furthermore, according to the LRN analysis, signal system components were initially improperly installed – for example, poor insulation reportedly made the system vulnerable to rainwater infiltration.

On the electrification/dmu debate - for a long time I favored DMUs. That was until I rode an electrified system on a regular basis. The electric systems are very quiet and get up to speed very fast. From University City station to Eastwick station is 5.5 miles but we hit 80 mph for a good portion of it. A DMU couldn't even come close to that. Plus there is the added benefit that an electrified train can go into an enclosed building (think underground station) without any issues.

DMU's a primarily useful on routes with lower ridership and long distances. The efficiency / capacity tradeoff would work well on a route such as Lawton - OKC or Stillwater - OKC. I think DMU's cost slightly more than conventional commuter rail (TRE) but the infrastructure costs are much lower than electrification over longer distances. I think electric is the way to go for HSR (obviously) serving larger hubs and metropolitan systems such as DART.