Heartland Flyer

[LakeEffect]

Officials from Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas met with Amtrak very recently to move the Heartland Flyer extension to Newton forward. I can’t tell you how much I am looking forward to this. I am planning a SW Chief trip from LAUS to Newton in July but I am not thrilled about having to take Greyhound to OKC.

I would not mind at all even booking a hotel room in downtown Newton for one night while waiting for a train connection. I just wish downtown Newton would get a boutique hotel. Maybe once this connection is built it will be more feasible.

https://jcpost.com/posts/cdf29c89-3c...9-d1c5b0125251

AND, Amtrak is including this extension in its strategic plan for growth (along with 2 more round trips to Fort Worth per day). It has real legs, and I'll be very happy to take it north to connect to Chicago (and Michigan).

https://media.amtrak.com/amtrak-connects-us/

[baralheia]

AND, Amtrak is including this extension in its strategic plan for growth (along with 2 more round trips to Fort Worth per day). It has real legs, and I'll be very happy to take it north to connect to Chicago (and Michigan).

https://media.amtrak.com/amtrak-connects-us/

It's really important, though, to remember that while Amtrak's leadership sees the Heartland Flyer expansion effort as one of their top priorities, and expansion looks more likely than it has in a long time, actually operating the train will still require funding from Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas due to the cost-sharing methodology mandated by PRIIA Section 209. This effort is so important to Amtrak that their current proposal is to use infrastructure funding to pay for all of the costs necessary to start the service - both the necessary capital improvements and the increased operational expenses - but after the third year, we'd be back on the hook for operational costs. With the increase in route-miles from the expanded service - both the extension to Newton and the additional frequencies to Fort Worth - I expect Oklahoma's share of the operational burden will be substantially larger than it is today. Without a strong champion on the state or federal level, that increased cost will be a difficult pill for Oklahoma lawmakers to swallow - and I have my doubts that ODOT would be willing or able to simply absorb that additional burden without some sort of additional funding (increased appropriations or federal assistance as was used to start the Heartland Flyer back in '99). Amtrak is estimating that the capital improvements alone would generate an economic impact of $1.9 billion, along with an annual economic impact of $64.8 million, so I do hold out hope that lawmakers will see the value in keeping the expanded service going once the states are back on the hook for operational costs... but knowing Oklahoma, I personally expect that to be a frustrating, uphill fight.

This is still in the early planning phases so costs - and the state's share of the burden - have yet to be determined; Amtrak seems very confident that the economic impact will offset the increased operational burden, but it remains to be seen how committed Oklahoma will be to supporting this extension. To me, it's notable that the only representative from Oklahoma on a recent Amtrak media event was the mayor of Ponca City... and that is a bit worrysome.

That media event, btw, can be viewed here: https://vimeo.com/560982534

[Plutonic Panda]

It seems likely Kansas and Texas will approve the funding. Oklahoma already pays for the majority of the service. Will Oklahoma approve of increased funding? Hard to tell. Unfortunately, for whatever reason Mayor Holt was very quick to indicate OKC will not be contributing ANY funding for it even though he acknowledges the benefits so that isn’t exactly hopeful. I wonder if our legislators will back it.

You mentioned certain provisions requiring a funding share split, I wonder to make Amtrak more appealing to states if that rule would be eased a bit. Biden and Amtrak seem really keen on getting this initiative going. I’m sure there will be some other states besides Oklahoma who simply don’t have the money or will take a very long time getting it going. The Mayor of Ponca city said costs in his town alone would likely run north of 2 million. I think for this to work in Oklahoma Amtrak or the feds are going to have to have to help big time as this is a crucial link for much more than only this state.

I’m curious to know what your opinions are on that given you have a high degree of knowledge on this issue.

[baralheia]

It seems likely Kansas and Texas will approve the funding. Oklahoma already pays for the majority of the service. Will Oklahoma approve of increased funding? Hard to tell. Unfortunately, for whatever reason Mayor Holt was very quick to indicate OKC will not be contributing ANY funding for it even though he acknowledges the benefits so that isn’t exactly hopeful. I wonder if our legislators will back it.

You mentioned certain provisions requiring a funding share split, I wonder to make Amtrak more appealing to states if that rule would be eased a bit. Biden and Amtrak seem really keen on getting this initiative going. I’m sure there will be some other states besides Oklahoma who simply don’t have the money or will take a very long time getting it going. The Mayor of Ponca city said costs in his town alone would likely run north of 2 million. I think for this to work in Oklahoma Amtrak or the feds are going to have to have to help big time as this is a crucial link for much more than only this state.

I’m curious to know what your opinions are on that given you have a high degree of knowledge on this issue.

I do have to admit that my level of knowledge here is simply because I'm a nerd that loves trains - especially passenger trains. I don't have any privileged inside knowledge on any of this, and can only share the information I've found as well as my own personal opinion. That said - I agree with your assessment that Texas and Kansas both appear to be on board with funding the additional commitments necessary to support the Heartland Flyer expansion. Holt's comments on the expansion are about what I expected... as far as I'm aware, the City doesn't currently contribute to the existing service outside of funding station operations and repairs, so the City is simply maintaining the status quo there. I know there are Heartland Flyer supporters in the Legislature - Forrest Bennett is one that I know of for sure - but it remains to be seen if there would be any appetite among the majority for increasing the state's appropriation to ODOT earmarked for the Flyer. I believe that the more vocal that constituents can be toward their legislators in support of Amtrak and the Flyer, the better those chances become.

On your funding split question - so Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) required Amtrak to develop and implement a standardized formula for calculating how Amtrak would share the operational costs for services under 750 route-miles in length with the states that the routes traverse - the idea being that Amtrak would then treat all states fairly and equally when it comes to recovering the actual cost (offset by passenger revenue) of operating and maintaining services through their states. This standardized formula is complicated, but at it's most basic level requires states to proportionately fund approximately 85% of the cost of operating an Amtrak service within their borders, with Amtrak picking up the remaining 15% tab. The current methodology was adopted in 2012, after all affected states (except for Indiana) agreed to the new terms and the Surface Transportation Board signed off on it as meeting the legal requirements of Section 209 (link). As a result, any changes to the cost sharing methodology would need to go through this process again - though that may not be that big of a lift if it improved terms for the states.

You're absolutely correct that some states may not be able to afford the vision that Amtrak wishes to implement. This is the reason why Amtrak repeatedly emphasized that "federal partnership" in the media event I linked above - the intent is for the Feds to help blunt the financial impact of establishing new service and expanding existing services so that the additional costs are much easier for states to swallow. As mentioned previously, Amtrak is proposing to use some funding from the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Bill in Congress right now to cover the startup and continued operation costs of this expanded service for at least a few years. Amtrak is also leaning hard on the idea of ROI through increased economic activity to help offset the additional costs for states. One thing to note, though, since you mentioned Ponca City: Generally, Amtrak doesn't own the stations they stop at (outside of a small percentage, mostly along the NEC), so local governments are on the hook for their city's station stops. The up-to-$2MM figure that Mayor Nicholson quoted is specifically for renovating the former Santa Fe depot, which was originally built in 1911 and has sat vacant since 1998, into a multi-modal transportation hub, with space for Amtrak. I don't know specifically how Ponca City intends to fund this renovation, but it's notable that the depot is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (link), which will help qualify the City for grants, tax incentives, and loans to cover some or all of that cost. Amtrak's Great American Stations Project also will help cities like Ponca City find and qualify for additional assistance with their depot projects as well.

None of this is zero-impact to the states or communities through which the service expansion will traverse, of course - but this assistance will make it much easier to establish and/or expand services in states and to show the value that Amtrak service can bring to the areas they serve. My main concern is that it will likely be difficult to get Oklahoma lawmakers to fund the expanded service once the federal grant money runs out and the financial burden for the Heartland Flyer shifts back to the states - especially since there have been times in the past where Oklahoma's yearly bill for the service was larger than the Legislature's appropriation to the Oklahoma Tourism and Passenger Rail Revolving Fund. But I dunno, perhaps I'm being overly pessimistic... I mean, they did pass HR 1036 last year, sponsored by Reps. Ken Luttrell, John Pfeiffer, Rep. Ty Burns, and Rep. Garry Mize, which was a non-binding resolution that expressed support for the Flyer extension, and the feds will foot the bill for the track improvements necessary to get this thing off the ground... so I dunno. I am holding on to hope, despite my doubts.

[Plutonic Panda]

Specials currently going on for the OU game in Dallas:

https://kfor.com/news/local/amtrak-u...s-game-travel/

The article also incorrectly states the train will arrive directly in Union Station in Dallas unless Amtrak is somehow doing that.

[baralheia]

Actually, for the OU-Texas game, ODOT works with Amtrak to temporarily extend the route of the Heartland Flyer to terminate at Dallas Union Station (DAL) instead of the Fort Worth Central Station (FTW). This extension usually only lasts for OU-Texas weekend.

[Plutonic Panda]

OK wow I didn’t know that. I sent a correction to KFOR about it now I’ll have to email them again and say that I was wrong. Thanks for the heads up.

[shawnw]

Actually, for the OU-Texas game, ODOT works with Amtrak to temporarily extend the route of the Heartland Flyer to terminate at Dallas Union Station (DAL) instead of the Fort Worth Central Station (FTW). This extension usually only lasts for OU-Texas weekend.

Once it goes to 3x/day, they should just go ahead and make at least one of them also go to Dallas. Save us the TRE daypass cost ($12).

[baralheia]

Looks like this year the extension to Dallas is only on Friday, 08 Oct 2021 and Sunday, 10 Oct 2021. Amtrak's official page for this special offer is here: https://www.amtrak.com/promotions/he...all-game_deals

This route modification is kinda interesting... On Friday, a ticket can be booked on the Heartland Flyer to arrive in Dallas (Ar. 2:00pm), but you cannot book a ticket directly FROM DAL on the Heartland Flyer on the same day. On Saturday, the Flyer follows it's normal schedule. Then on Sunday, you can book a ticket from DAL on the Flyer (Dep. 2:15pm), but you cannot book a ticket directly TO DAL. I imagine this is likely because Amtrak cleans and services the Flyer in FTW between runs... but just thought it was kinda interesting.

I definitely do agree that a permanent extension to Dallas would be really great, to avoid the multi-hour layovers between the Flyer and the Texas Eagle in FTW - especially on Sundays and holidays when the TRE doesn't run. I'm skeptical that ODOT/TxDOT/Amtrak would be that interested though, since there are other overlapping connection options on most days.

[Plutonic Panda]

Once it goes to 3x/day, they should just go ahead and make at least one of them also go to Dallas. Save us the TRE daypass cost ($12).

Or at the very least include a discount on the TRE pass with a Heartland Flyer purchase. But ideally a direct connection to Dallas would be better. It’d be nice if they extended the heartland flyer to Dallas as the final destination all together.

[PhiAlpha]

Actually, for the OU-Texas game, ODOT works with Amtrak to temporarily extend the route of the Heartland Flyer to terminate at Dallas Union Station (DAL) instead of the Fort Worth Central Station (FTW). This extension usually only lasts for OU-Texas weekend.

If you haven’t tried it, the Heartland Flyer game train is a really fun way to get to Dallas for the game. They usually bring in a sightseer car or two (the ones with the overhead windows and dining tables). The fact that it goes to Dallas is extremely convenient. Takes a little longer but you avoid all the game day traffic and get to relax. There are several regulars who have taken it for 20 years that make it fun. My friends and I taught a few of them how to play beer pong one year just after we graduated. Despite the 40-50 year age difference we taught them too well and they beat us a few times!

[catch22]

Amtrak Vs. Auto-Hauler - Thackerville, OK

A dramatic video captured the moment an Amtrak train slammed into a semi-truck hauling several cars in Oklahoma, sending vehicles and debris flying and injuring several people on board.

The incident occurred Friday around 7 p.m. local time in Thackerville, near the Oklahoma-Texas border. Minutes before Amtrak Train 822, which operates daily between Fort Worth, Texas, and Oklahoma City, was scheduled to pass through, the car hauler tractor trailer got stuck on the train tracks, Love County Sheriff Marty Grisham told ABC News.

Fair Use: ABC news

https://abcnews.go.com/US/dramatic-v...ry?id=80619175

That was nearly a derailment, the lead engine raises off the tracks at least a foot or so upon impact. Luckily no one was critically injured.

[Zuplar]

It’s been bad for Amtrak lately. Between the derailment that killed people and the shooting in Arizona, now this.

[Plutonic Panda]

Not like this is groundbreaking news but the Norman City Council adopted a resolution supporting the Heartland Flyer Expansion:

https://www.normantranscript.com/new...825450529.html

[soonerguru]

Not like this is groundbreaking news but the Norman City Council adopted a resolution supporting the Heartland Flyer Expansion:

https://www.normantranscript.com/new...825450529.html

GAME CHANGER! Jk

[Plutonic Panda]

GAME CHANGER! Jk

Lol

[bombermwc]

I mean does anyone still ride this little 3 care tourist trip? I see more people in one train on the Chicago El at any given hour of the day than the Heartland sees in its entire day's load.

If it actually WENT somewhere, then we'd be looking at something cool. But who's holding their breathe that the expansion is going to happen....and have the dollars to do it? Give me a Heartland that i can ride to Chicago, well then we've got a deal.

[Plutonic Panda]

I do and the train is almost always half full. So lots of people use it. I think you should give it a try sometime. I just wish they’d add a full service bar on one of the cars.

[Mississippi Blues]

An extension would connect it to the Southwest Chief which runs multiple trains between Chicago and Los Angeles with stops in Newton.

[Plutonic Panda]

An extension would connect it to the Southwest Chief which runs multiple trains between Chicago and Los Angeles with stops in Newton.

IIRC the Heartland Flyer was going to potentially be extended all the way to Kansas City and end there with obvious stops and Newton being one of them to connect to the Southwest Chief.

[shawnw]

I ride it and plan on doing it more soon with my bicycle to ride the Dallas area trails. Also once frequency is increased to 3 times day it will become much more useful.

[Plutonic Panda]

^^it would be nice if Texas and Oklahoma worked together to build a cycle trail between OKC and DFW.

[baralheia]

I mean does anyone still ride this little 3 care tourist trip? I see more people in one train on the Chicago El at any given hour of the day than the Heartland sees in its entire day's load.

If it actually WENT somewhere, then we'd be looking at something cool. But who's holding their breathe that the expansion is going to happen....and have the dollars to do it? Give me a Heartland that i can ride to Chicago, well then we've got a deal.

I don't think we're going to see a return of the Lone Star, Amtrak's old direct route from Chicago to Houston by way of OKC. But that said, you *can* ride to Chicago *today*. From OKC, take the Heartland Flyer down to Fort Worth, then catch the Texas Eagle toward Chicago. If you don't mind a bus for part of the route, take Amtrak's "thruway service" bus from OKC to Newton, KS - then catch the Southwest Chief toward Chicago. Once the Heartland Flyer expansion to Newton happens, then you can ride the train instead of having to take a bus, but otherwise the trip will be the same.

It's really important to consider, though, that the thruway bus is a deterrent to many travelers who would prefer their entire journey to be by rail. That's why Amtrak itself wants to see the Heartland Flyer service expanded - it enables an important mid-continent link between the SW Chief and the Texas Eagle, enabling new passenger routing that isn't available or desirable today. Studies have shown that expansion to Newton will substantially increase ridership on the Flyer, from an average of around 60k pax/yr to as much as 200k pax/yr. And Amtrak has already stated that they will be using part of the $66 billion they were allocated from the infrastructure bill to fund capital expenditures and the first few years of operational costs of this service expansion, so Kansas and Oklahoma will basically get instant gratification and won't be on the hook until later, so funding shouldn't be the roadblock that it has been in the past.

[baralheia]

IIRC the Heartland Flyer was going to potentially be extended all the way to Kansas City and end there with obvious stops and Newton being one of them to connect to the Southwest Chief.

At this time, the current plan is as Mississippi Blues stated - expansion of the current Heartland Flyer service from OKC up to Newton. Previous expansion studies have also floated the idea of a train operating during daylight hours - that wouldn't interact with the current Heartland Flyer service - from OKC to Kansas City, but that's not currently in the cards.

^^it would be nice if Texas and Oklahoma worked together to build a cycle trail between OKC and DFW.

Those are almost always built in place of rail corridors that are no longer used - but unfortunately there really isn't any old rail corridor that could be used for that purpose between OKC and DFW. The only thing that comes close is the former Kansas, Oklahoma, & Gulf line between Baxter Springs, Kansas and Denton, TX - but that line was legally abandoned so ownership of the property reverted back to landowners along the route. The only other realistic option would be to co-locate such a trail along current or former highway or public utility right-of-way that the State owns or has some influence over... but building an interstate hiking/biking trail along a highway wouldn't capture much of the magic that makes other long-distance trails popular, I fear. It'd still be a neat thing to boast, though.

[gjl]

.....