JTF, you are thinking that it best monetary bid. ODOT conveniently made this "the best overall offer" which could mean anything. BNSF will own the line.

AGy0R_ftUSc

I need to learn how to do my own movie clips because people cut out the best parts.

I just shared this suggestion on Bob Kemper's Facebook page, but hey, why doesn't the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority go ahead and purchase this line? To tie up all means over transportation between OKC and Tulsa--other than Route 66--would surely be great for them. They could have a third party operate the line while they take care of the maintenance of the line.

That would be worse than BNSF getting the line. That turnpike probably generates the most revenue for the OTA, they would buy the route and shut it down, forcing as many trips as possible thru the turnpike turnstiles.

That would be worse than BNSF getting the line. That turnpike probably generates the most revenue for the OTA, they would buy the route and shut it down, forcing as many trips as possible thru the turnpike turnstiles.

On the other hand - they could roll a rail system into their perpetual mandate to keep toll roads until all are paid-off. It could open a whole new market for them to continue their existence.

Two words in all of this. Especially the turnpike idea- "Gary Ridley".

Two words in all of this. Especially the turnpike idea- "Gary Ridley".

How dare you! It's Braden Palm...lol....and it was just a suggestion that popped into my head with no outside influence.

I just shared this suggestion on Bob Kemper's Facebook page, but hey, why doesn't the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority go ahead and purchase this line? To tie up all means over transportation between OKC and Tulsa--other than Route 66--would surely be great for them. They could have a third party operate the line while they take care of the maintenance of the line.

The Ohio Turnpike (I-80/90 through Northern Ohio) funds routinely get diverted to projects within 40 miles of the turnpike (ie., Cleveland). The turnpike has been a nice pot of money for a few at-grade boulevard projects. Pretty sure the Chicago Tollway funds get diverted to other projects too, like supporting suburban transit there. There are a LOT of different models for using tolls to support an array of other uses. Oklahoma I think actually leads the nation in diverting "transportation" dollars to other uses.

The Ohio Turnpike (I-80/90 through Northern Ohio) funds routinely get diverted to projects within 40 miles of the turnpike (ie., Cleveland). The turnpike has been a nice pot of money for a few at-grade boulevard projects. Pretty sure the Chicago Tollway funds get diverted to other projects too, like supporting suburban transit there. There are a LOT of different models for using tolls to support an array of other uses. Oklahoma I think actually leads the nation in diverting "transportation" dollars to other uses.

Considering we lead the nation for most turnpikes and turnpike mileage, I wouldn't doubt that.

The Ohio Turnpike (I-80/90 through Northern Ohio) funds routinely get diverted to projects within 40 miles of the turnpike (ie., Cleveland). The turnpike has been a nice pot of money for a few at-grade boulevard projects. Pretty sure the Chicago Tollway funds get diverted to other projects too, like supporting suburban transit there. There are a LOT of different models for using tolls to support an array of other uses. Oklahoma I think actually leads the nation in diverting "transportation" dollars to other uses.

Well that is until Kasich decided to sell bonds against the turnpike to fund projects for the rest of the state instead of just the northern counties served by the turnpike. Turnpike funds never use to get diverted until the last year or two when Johnny boy starting moving things around. The turnpike itself was entirely self sufficient when it came to construction, upkeep, and snow removal. Imagine if we held true to that for all toll roads and toll interstates. Anywho...way off track now.

The best solution for anything rail related is to start an independent rail authority and let them handle things. ODOT is incompetent of handing anything but highway projects. The turnpike commission will probably find a way to make $500 to take a train to Tulsa just so people keep driving instead.

JTF, you are thinking that it best monetary bid. ODOT conveniently made this "the best overall offer" which could mean anything. BNSF will own the line.

Why do you say that? BNSF is the company that sold the line. They kept the Sapulpa to Tulsa part because of the line south to Okmulgee. No Class 1 Road in the right minds would want the Sooner Sub.

Why do you say that? BNSF is the company that sold the line. They kept the Sapulpa to Tulsa part because of the line south to Okmulgee. No Class 1 Road in the right minds would want the Sooner Sub.

BNSF hauls more Bakken shale and tar sand oil than any Class I. The Sooner sub is as close as you can get to Cushing by rail. WATCO took a nearly unusable line and has continually upgraded it and rebuilt the customer base ever since they leased it from the state. The state is collecting on that lease every year. WATCO has built a nice transload facility that transfer oil from rail to the storage facility in Cushing. BNSF wants it back now and has been throwing cash around to politicans to make the path to their takeover easier. ODOT and Fallin are willing accomplices.

BNSF hauls more Bakken shale and tar sand oil than any Class I. The Sooner sub is as close as you can get to Cushing by rail.

Who needs rail from Cushing - the pipeline just opened.

Pipeline begins moving oil out of Cushing | News OK (http://newsok.com/pipeline-begins-moving-oil-out-of-cushing/article/3926293)

Who needs rail from Cushing - the pipeline just opened.

Pipeline begins moving oil out of Cushing | News OK (http://newsok.com/pipeline-begins-moving-oil-out-of-cushing/article/3926293)

To Cushing....brought in from the north and sent to storage tanks. Sent south via pipeline. But still a lot of oil traffic on BNSF main through OKC.

To Cushing....brought in from the north and sent to storage tanks. Sent south via pipeline. But still a lot of oil traffic on BNSF main through OKC.

Is BNSF wanting to purchase the Sooner Sub so that they can build new rails on the old AT&SF ROW that went up to Cushing? That would be awfully impressive.

I haven't heard anything like that. They are the 800 lb gorilla driving this though and there is only one reason for them to do so. Their history of abandoning lines once they are no longer needed by unit trains is very troubling and foretells the future of this line though. WATCO rebuilt the local customer base and is actually interested in having passenger service on this line. BNSF will insist on Amtrak being the only passenger service on "their" line and Amtrak does not have a very good track record with these types of operations unfortunately. The potential passenger operators on a state owned line number at least 3, with WATCO still leasing it for their freight operations. There is no logical financial reason for ODOT and the Gov to insist on this sale.

I still think, if this sales goes through to BNSF, then there has to be a clause to permit Amtrak service on the line but also to secure BNSF as a commuter rail operator on the lines they do control in the Metro.

I heard part of a KTOK interview last night where somebody was talking about OKC Tulsa passenger train service. This is going to be private effort which I'm all for. I thought they said coach fare would cost $15 which IMO is reasonable.

The man being intervened talked talked about the work individuals could do while on the train and that people could drink on the train and while that's completely true I can't help but think that a faster service who make the train far more viable. He said the train would travel at only 40 mph. This is IMHO much to slow... This train won't last long with speeds that slow.... They plan on 8 trips a day.

Why can't the state sale the rail line between OKC and Tulsa to BNSF with the stipulation that BNSF will improve the tracks and maintain them to a point where viable passenger train speeds are possible. I maybe wrong but this seems like a win win solution?

It would also be nice if they provided train service to Norman / OU during major events.
There are a ton of people who would take trains to avoid the congestion and or the long late drive back to the Tulsa are after a night game. They may even be able to operate trains from Edmond, Bricktown and other places?

As a condition of sale for the rail line from OKC to Tulsa the state should require BNSF to accommodate this passenger rail service.

Why can't the state sale the rail line between OKC and Tulsa to BNSF with the stipulation that BNSF will improve the tracks and maintain them to a point where viable passenger train speeds are possible. I maybe wrong but this seems like a win win solution?

It would also be nice if they provided train service to Norman / OU during major events.
There are a ton of people who would take trains to avoid the congestion and or the long late drive back to the Tulsa are after a night game. They may even be able to operate trains from Edmond, Bricktown and other places?

As a condition of sale for the rail line from OKC to Tulsa the state should require BNSF to accommodate this passenger rail service.

BNSF does a great job of working with Amtrak on the Dallas-OKC line. I have heard that train quite often has to stand on a siding to allow freight to go by. The best interest of the citizens of the state is to sell it to a company who truly has an interest in doing passenger service the right way. BNSF is not that choice.

Additionally, once the shale oil boom subsides; or if the Keystone XL northern segment is on line, BNSF is very likely to abandon the line again. They only want it is for access to the Cushing terminal - nothing more. It is not likely BNSF will put a penny toward upgrading the line to permit 79mph passenger operations either. I think WATCO/Iowa Pacific is much more likely to undertake that endeavor.

BNSF does a great job of working with Amtrak on the Dallas-OKC line. I have heard that train quite often has to stand on a siding to allow freight to go by. The best interest of the citizens of the state is to sell it to a company who truly has an interest in doing passenger service the right way. BNSF is not that choice.

This. We probably are no where near to be in the position to force their hand like the Chicago area is with BNSF operating the Metra on their line to Aurora. Though maybe if we require BNSF to operate the commuter line, with a set schedule and performance expectation, that might provide enough motivation. Especially if a clause is put in that if they don't meet it, they don't get rights to the line and have to pay penalties.

I heard part of a KTOK interview last night where somebody was talking about OKC Tulsa passenger train service. This is going to be private effort which I'm all for. I thought they said coach fare would cost $15 which IMO is reasonable.

The man being intervened talked talked about the work individuals could do while on the train and that people could drink on the train and while that's completely true I can't help but think that a faster service who make the train far more viable. He said the train would travel at only 40 mph. This is IMHO much to slow... This train won't last long with speeds that slow.... They plan on 8 trips a day.

lol

Seriously?

$15 is fantastic but 40MPH?? That'd take 2 1/2-3 hours! They need to get real...

Why can't the state sale the rail line between OKC and Tulsa to BNSF with the stipulation that BNSF will improve the tracks and maintain them to a point where viable passenger train speeds are possible. I maybe wrong but this seems like a win win solution?


The alignment of this route from OKC to Tulsa simply will not support higher speeds. The horizontal geometry is god-awful. It would be something like having 18-wheelers trying to drive 70 on Talimena Drive.

More info from ODOT:

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/newsmedia/press/2014/14-006_next_steps_outlined_in_Sooner_Sub_sale_process _and%20facts_about_rail_line.pdf

The alignment of this route from OKC to Tulsa simply will not support higher speeds. The horizontal geometry is god-awful. It would be something like having 18-wheelers trying to drive 70 on Talimena Drive.

Not to mention there are something like 100 at-grade crossing, many of them with nothing more than an RXR sign.

The alignment of this route from OKC to Tulsa simply will not support higher speeds. The horizontal geometry is god-awful. It would be something like having 18-wheelers trying to drive 70 on Talimena Drive.

How hard would it be to straighten out the horizontal geometry?

Sounds like a good job for some of our states prisoners.
Prisoners could learn how to operate heavy equipment....
Those are high demand jobs right now that can sometimes pay pretty good wages.

The alignment of this route from OKC to Tulsa simply will not support higher speeds. The horizontal geometry is god-awful. It would be something like having 18-wheelers trying to drive 70 on Talimena Drive.

While I do agree with you, you'll have someone respond to your post here telling you that steam passenger trains used to run 90MPH on this line...

Wait for it....

While I do agree with you, you'll have someone respond to your post here telling you that steam passenger trains used to run 90MPH on this line...

Wait for it....

I don't know about 90 mph...but 88...

http://images.travelpod.com/tripwow/photos/ta-009a-5602-935d/back-to-the-future-train-orlando-united-states%2B1152_12795642906-tpfil02aw-6569.jpg

So, which thread would be best to discuss the proposed line sale and the 4 offers received?

So, which thread would be best to discuss the proposed line sale and the 4 offers received?

This seems like an appropriate place since it will have a direct effect on the prospects of establishing passenger service between Tulsa and OKC.

This seems like an appropriate place since it will have a direct effect on the prospects of establishing passenger service between Tulsa and OKC.

It would, but it might not be as limiting as some think. I think it might be good to have its own thread.

The Tulsa World has a good article recapping the first Eastern Flyer run. Oklahoma's Eastern Flyer takes first voyage - Tulsa World: Sapulpa Business (http://www.tulsaworld.com/communities/sapulpa/oklahoma-s-eastern-flyer-takes-first-voyage/article_723b5fb8-58ab-5696-81bd-a93af393d04b.html)

"Ed Ellis, president of Iowa Pacific, which is operating demonstration rides, said he hopes the Oklahoma Department of Transportation chooses his company to run the line. If so, Ellis said the plan would be to quickly have eight trains running between Tulsa and Oklahoma City during the week, as well as five running each weekend.

Antonio Perez, president and CEO of Talgo, Inc., a Seattle, Wash., a high-speed train manufacturer also made the trip and said he saw a great opportunity in northeast Oklahoma."

And by good, I mean it has information that is reasonably accurate. :) Talgo is not based in Seattle - it is a Spanish company that has won projects in the US and even built a plant before WI pulled the rug out from under them.

I will say, I'm intrigued by Iowa Pacific and Talgo's interest in the line.

And by good, I mean it has information that is reasonably accurate. :) Talgo is not based in Seattle - it is a Spanish company that has won projects in the US and even built a plant before WI pulled the rug out from under them.

I will say, I'm intrigued by Iowa Pacific and Talgo's interest in the line.

I think the link between Talgo and the PNW is the trainsets built for WI who subsequently breached the contract are running there now along with the older Talgo trainsets up there.

Bombardier also has the LRC design in operation in Canada on VIARail that might be suitable to raise the average speed on the Tulsa-OKC line.

Didn't know which rail thread to drop this in but interesting regardless on future of Amtrak's Southwest Chief. I do think it is weak they want so much money when it is already federally funded and the cargo trains most likely do most of the damage.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/us/small-towns-in-southwest-fear-loss-of-cherished-train-line.html?_r=1

Didn't know which rail thread to drop this in but interesting regardless on future of Amtrak's Southwest Chief. I do think it is weak they want so much money when it is already federally funded and the cargo trains most likely do most of the damage.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/us/small-towns-in-southwest-fear-loss-of-cherished-train-line.html?_r=1
I would like to see the SW Chief moved to the mostly double tracked BNSF line that would have the passenger train running from near Wichita to Wellington, Alva, Woodward, Pampa TX, Amarillo, Hobbs... then to the Albuquerque area where the state of NM operates a train.

This path would cut several hours off the trip and be on a fright line that is as well maintained as any in the USA.. With the NM state train extension it would have more people closer to its path.

We would be able to drive to a train station like Woodward or Wellington and take the train to LA or Chicago.

Hobbs would be too far south. Out of Amarillo I can see it going to Clovis, NM, then meeting up with the line just south of Albuquerque

The BNSF Transcon is 100% double tracked, it's just that it's divided track between Wellington & Emporia, Kansas.

Didn't know which rail thread to drop this in but interesting regardless on future of Amtrak's Southwest Chief. I do think it is weak they want so much money when it is already federally funded and the cargo trains most likely do most of the damage.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/us/small-towns-in-southwest-fear-loss-of-cherished-train-line.html?_r=1

This money would be so much better spent developing state-wide rail systems in these states instead of a single daily train to cities a thousand miles away. In what world does it make sense to connect Lamar, CO to Chicago and not to their own state capitol? Then they wonder why the rural portions of Colorado feel disconnected from metro Denver - well duh.

Hobbs would be too far south. Out of Amarillo I can see it going to Clovis, NM, then meeting up with the line just south of AlbuquerqueYou are right..... I got my towns mixed up.....I should have looked at a map. it would go to Clovis

The BNSF Transcon is 100% double tracked, it's just that it's divided track between Wellington & Emporia, Kansas.

I thought there was still a few miles that wasn't yet double tracked in parts of south Kansas?
Have they finally closed the gap? or is this wrong?

I thought there was still a few miles that wasn't yet double tracked in parts of south Kansas?
Have they finally closed the gap? or is this wrong?

From what I remember reading in Trains Magazine it was parts of the Texas Panhandle and Oklahoma that were left.

...
We would be able to drive to a train station like Woodward or Wellington and take the train to LA or Chicago.

FWIW, you can hop on up to Newton, KS and do that now. Sure it is further than Woodward, but not horridly so.
For that matter, One could take the Heartland Flyer to Fort Worth (or drive to Dallas) and catch the Texas Eagle north to Chicago or south to San Antonio and then the Sunset Limited on to LA.
Not sure the Sunset still goes through to Florida. I know a few years back it no longer did and I have not looked since then.

Currently suspended east of New Orleans, yes.

Iowa Pacific is going hard on the passenger rail idea. http://passengerrailok.org/EASTERNFLYER/2014-02-18-IowaPacificProposaltoGovernorFallin.pdf

From Facebook:
owa Pacific Holdings :: Governor Fallin Request

Yesterday, Iowa Pacific Holdings requested a meeting with Governor Fallin and ODOT Director Mike Patterson to become the passenger rail operator for the rail line between Tulsa and Oklahoma City. The letter is provided here:

http://passengerrailok.org/EASTERNFLYER/2014-02-18-IowaPacificProposaltoGovernorFallin.pdf

We need everyone who enjoyed their trip over the past two weekends to read this letter and contact Governor Fallin's office. Please let her know you support Iowa Pacific as the carrier for the Eastern Flyer route.

(405) 521-2342 or (918) 581-2801

Highlights of the letter include:

-Iowa Pacific will not charge the state
-Iowa Pacific will operate into Downtown Tulsa within six months
-Iowa Pacific has requested a meeting between Governor Fallin, the Governor's Chief of Staff, General Council, House Transportation Chairman, Senate Transportation Chairman, and key House members
-Iowa Pacific has requested a 5 year contract, renewable in 3 year increments
-Phase I - Service will begin May 1, 2014
-Phase I - (2) daily round trips between Sapulpa and Midwest City 2 hours and 50 minutes

-Phase II - September 1, 2014 - 6 round trips between Sapulpa and Midwest City - running time of 2 hours 25 minutes (5 round trips on weekends)

-Phase III - beginning October 1, 2014 (upon BNSF notification prior to March 31, 2014, - 6 round trips between Sapulpa and Midwest City AND two round trips between Tulsa and Midwest City - running time (5 round trips on weekends)

-Iowa Pacific will reduce running time to 2 hours 15 minutes within 9 months.

-Dedicated shuttles will be provided from Sapulpa and Midwest City to downtows, universities, airports and Bartlesville

-Intermediate stops will include Bristow and Stroud

-Special Event Trains will be provided

If only ODOT and the Gov can be prevented from selling it to BNSF. If that happens, game over.

WATCO is interested in having passenger service on the line and BNSF considers it a nuisance. BNSF also only permits Amtrak to operate passenger trains on their rights of way. Amtrak is going to more expensive than nearly any other service provider since they are desperately trying to dump all their obligations outside the NEC.

WATCO and Iowa Pacific would make a great partnership for passenger service on the Sooner Sub in my opinion. The main issue that would need resolution is gaining access to downtown OKC. BNSF could potentially be a PITA on that issue.

I am so excited about the potential for this, but nothing I have ever seen from Fallin leads me to believe she will let this happen.

Maybe if they offer to let her son's frat have a party car she'll let it go through. It would at least get them out of the Governor's Mansion. LOL

I wonder if it could be delayed until the election and then maybe another candidate could use it as part of their campaign to bring rail transit to Oklahoma.

1.Why can't they go directly to downtown OKC and are their any plans to eventually do so?

2.Do they have any plans to decrease travel times?

3.What do they have in mined for special events?

It seem like the novelty will eventually wear off and unless the 1 & 2 issues are addressed I have a hard time thinking that this will last any longer than the first contract.

The rail line is going to need a lot of segments replaced and straightened to get trip times done from what I see.

1. Operating into downtown will require the construction of a curved track leading up to the platform level of Santa Fe station. This was why the Karachmer Garage in bricktown was opposed, because it would eliminate the area the connection would run in.

2. Travel time will be reduced to 2hrs and 15 mins after 9 months of service.

3. I am sure they could run extra frequencies or add extra cars

BNSF could potentially be a PITA on that issue.

If is slows down or delays the high paying freight they have every right to be vocal and involved. Legacy RR companies dumped passenger rail service decades ago for undeniably valid economic reasons.

If is slows down or delays the high paying freight they have every right to be vocal and involved. Legacy RR companies dumped passenger rail service decades ago for undeniably valid economic reasons.

Airlines will bump paying passengers off before we will bump cargo off when weight restrictions present themselves:) I'm sure you wouldn't be mad if that happened to you, of course :)

1. Operating into downtown will require the construction of a curved track leading up to the platform level of Santa Fe station. This was why the Karachmer Garage in bricktown was opposed, because it would eliminate the area the connection would run in.

2. Travel time will be reduced to 2hrs and 15 mins after 9 months of service.

3. I am sure they could run extra frequencies or add extra cars

Even if it could not reach the station downtown easily now, a temporary platform near the Oklahoma Ave could put the CBD, Bricktown and Deep Deuce in comfortable walking distance and provide plenty of parking


1.Why can't they go directly to downtown OKC and are their any plans to eventually do so?
I think the temporary run they just did on the state owned section of the line between the two cities. It will take at least some agreement between between the railroad owners to do the run all the way between both downtowns, which may not be practical or economical to get all the permissions for the trial run (in any case it probably would have pushed the trial back at least six months to a year). The segment near Tulsa had a requirement that at least a few trips per day would be allowed in the conditions to buy it, I think UP owns the most direct route and BNSF owns the south route, there was statements in council as the end of the lease to buy ODOT did finished that UP said they were open to having passenger trips on their segment, but they will no doubt want some sort of compensation for it's use.

1. Real reason it doesn't run into downtown is because they would need to set up an agreement for trackage rights on BNSF's N/S main through OKC. Same goes for even if the curved ramp were to be built to gain access to the platform--an agreement would have to be reached with Union Pacific to traverse their line.

Oddly enough BNSF's desire for access to the Sooner Sub may help with this - IF WATCO is selected to buy the line or the present status is maintained. If a WATCO/Iowa Pacific partnership is providing passenger service between Tulsa and OKC, they might be able to make a trackage right agreement with BNSF contingent on increased access from Sapulpa to Tulsa and to the Santa Fe hub in OKC. I have heard (through the grapevine so take it for what it is worth) that UP may be less resistant to permitting conventional rail operations through their line from MWC to Bricktown. They were less enthusiastic about the Adventure Line proposal so I am not quite sure what to make of UP though. Maybe that was due to the nature of the operation and possibility of running lighter equipment on the Adventure Line.

From Friends of the Eastern Flyer on facebook - map showing access routes to Santa Fe Station. The spur that needs to be rebuilt would be located just above the SF Station and between the 'M' and 'A'.

https://scontent-b-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/t1/1001515_684187901620345_211205469_n.jpg