Amtrak News/Updates

[Richard at Remax]

https://www.railwayage.com/regulator...id-selections/

[HOT ROD]

nice to see, and with KS being the sponsor of the Heartland Flyer extension - I think this extension will be fully accomplished (thereby eliminating likely pushback from Tulsa and unserved rural OK communities).

[BG918]

Lots of chatter this past week about the FRA Long-Distance rail study. Finally connects OKC to Tulsa with through connections to KC and St Louis. Also shows the long-discussed connection to Wichita/Newton.

[jccouger]

Lots of chatter this past week about the FRA Long-Distance rail study. Finally connects OKC to Tulsa with through connections to KC and St Louis. Also shows the long-discussed connection to Wichita/Newton.

Feels like every few years a new map like this comes out and then nothing ever comes from it.

[TheTravellers]

Feels like every few years a new map like this comes out and then nothing ever comes from it.

Yeah, I'm 58, and I doubt I see all of these new OKC and Wichita/Newton happening in my lifetime.

[Richard at Remax]

Feels like every few years a new map like this comes out and then nothing ever comes from it.

The only thing that ever comes from these is municipalities and states spending millions of dollars for "studies" that usually don't end moving the needle or moving forward progress. How many studies have been done on the OKC to Newton line? I think I've lost count...

[Snowman]

Lots of chatter this past week about the FRA Long-Distance rail study. Finally connects OKC to Tulsa with through connections to KC and St Louis. Also shows the long-discussed connection to Wichita/Newton.

Given how many green routes west of OKC would potentially serve the lowest densely populated areas of the country, thus are dubious if viable, it hurts the credibility the green routes in more populated areas of eastern half of US seriously happening.

[Rover]

Given how many green routes west of OKC would potentially serve the lowest densely populated areas of the country, thus are dubious if viable, it hurts the credibility the green routes in more populated areas of eastern half of US seriously happening.

All you need to know about this map: "CONCEPTUAL" "FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION".

[rte66man]

Lots of chatter this past week about the FRA Long-Distance rail study. Finally connects OKC to Tulsa with through connections to KC and St Louis. Also shows the long-discussed connection to Wichita/Newton.

Lot of redundancies in those green lines. No need for Fort Worth to Tulsa if OKC to Tulsa is built. Same goes for Tulsa to KC if Tulsa to STL is built. MSP to KC via Omaha and Sioux Falls looks like nothing more than a sop to South Dakota since anyone going from MSP to KC would go via Des Moines.

[baralheia]

Lot of redundancies in those green lines. No need for Fort Worth to Tulsa if OKC to Tulsa is built. Same goes for Tulsa to KC if Tulsa to STL is built. MSP to KC via Omaha and Sioux Falls looks like nothing more than a sop to South Dakota since anyone going from MSP to KC would go via Des Moines.

So it's important to remember that there are two separate but related efforts underway to expand the National Passenger Rail Network - the Corridor ID program (for shorter, state-supported routes under 750 miles in length) and the FRA Long-Distance Service Study (aka LDSS - for longer, federally-supported routes over 750 miles in length). This map is from the LDSS, and shows all of the potential segments that could be included in new or revived long distance routes, including segments already identified for potential state-supported service under the Corridor ID program - which is why it looks like there's a lot of redundancy. Not all of the green lines will actually progress past the conceptual planning phase. A more informative map to look at in the context of new long distance services would be the Proposed Network of Preferred Routes from the same presentation:



This map makes it more clear as to why there appears to be a lot of redundancies for places like Tulsa - it's because the FRA is considering recommending two new long-distance routes to Congress that would have stops there: Dallas/Fort Worth to NYC (via OKC, Tulsa, St Louis, Indiannapolis, Columbus, Pittsburg, and Philadelphia) and San Antonio to Minneapolis/St. Paul (via DFW, Tulsa, Kansas City, and Des Moines). This is early in the planning process, and as noted by the red callout box, further analysis would be needed to move any of these proposed routes into the project planning or development phases before any of them could become reality - and there's no guarantee that any of them will.

It's a LONG read, but I'd recommend checking out the Overview Presentation from Meeting Series 3 for more detailed information: https://fralongdistancerailstudy.org/meeting-materials/

Here's some more info from that presentation on the two proposed routes that would serve stops in Oklahoma:

[Snowman]

It is interesting that the N/S route did not even show a secondary option to evaluate going through both OKC and Tulsa, similar to the NYC to Dallas line options for Tulsa and OKC. Since that probably does not change the distance/time much, may reduce operating costs, cuts out probably the largest potential stop not already on route whichever skip, and having more frequent train times along the Tulsa - OKC - Dallas segment can make it more viable for passengers to take in general.

[baralheia]

I didn't screenshot it, but it's addressed in the full meeting presentation that these route preferences were chosen based on a number of criteria, not just the connection of major city pairs; enabling more rural communities to have access to the national rail network, especially in tribal or disadvantaged areas, is one of the priorities of this plan. They don't say it exactly, but based on how the preferred San Antonio - Minneapolis/St Paul route above is depicted, I think they are routing from Fort Worth to Tulsa via UP's Choctaw, Cherokee, and Tulsa Subdivisions, then Tulsa to KCMO via the BNSF Cherokee Sub, the UP Wagoner and Coffeyville Subdivisions, then the BNSF Fort Scott Sub. If my guess is correct, then that means that the SAS-MSP line could serve Eastern Oklahoma communities that don't currently enjoy passenger rail service, such as Durant, McAlester, Muskogee, Tulsa, Claremore, and maybe Nowata. If instead they routed over the South Kansas and Oklahoma Railroad (SKOL) from Tulsa and met up with the UP Coffeyville Sub in Independence, KS, then that would enable a stop in Bartlesville instead of Claremore and Nowata. Amtrak usually tends to avoid shortlines due to typically lower standards of maintenance, but since SKOL is owned by the same parent company that also owns the Stillwater Central Railroad between OKC and Tulsa (needed for the proposed DFW-NYC route), I could maybe see the potential of them trying to work together here.

All that said, my interpretation of their routing is only a guess.

[The]

You seem very clued into rail happenings and I appreciate your insights.

[bombermwc]

The sad things to me in all of this is that it IS mostly using existing lines. So none of this is going to be anything close to high speed. Rather, it will be quite the opposite. Especially with all of those rural stops. It's extremely inefficient to make those stops as compared to a point-to-point high speed line.

So i guess we've decided to go the cheap route. Honestly folks, i dont see how this is going to work financially without a LOT of subsidizing. And with the level its going to take, is it even worth it? It's one thing to call them "potential" travelers. It's a whole other thing to see them actually make the trips. I'd say the Heartland Flyer is a good example of how sad things still are with rail. It's slow and only has what 2 cars, and can't fill that. Not to mention how much has gone in to keeping it floating over the years. It's not exactly the poster child for a successful re-introduction of a line.

[Zuplar]

It's cool to see this stuff, but like others have said, until they decide to build their own dedicated rail, I have 0% faith that this will work. It's going to be plagued with the same issues they have now sharing with the freight RR's. I'm a train guy so I'd love for this to be real, and maybe some of it is, which would still be a net positive.

[baralheia]

The sad things to me in all of this is that it IS mostly using existing lines. So none of this is going to be anything close to high speed. Rather, it will be quite the opposite. Especially with all of those rural stops. It's extremely inefficient to make those stops as compared to a point-to-point high speed line.

So i guess we've decided to go the cheap route. Honestly folks, i dont see how this is going to work financially without a LOT of subsidizing. And with the level its going to take, is it even worth it? It's one thing to call them "potential" travelers. It's a whole other thing to see them actually make the trips. I'd say the Heartland Flyer is a good example of how sad things still are with rail. It's slow and only has what 2 cars, and can't fill that. Not to mention how much has gone in to keeping it floating over the years. It's not exactly the poster child for a successful re-introduction of a line.

Correct; this study was a requirement included in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) of 2021- Biden's bipartisan infrastructure bill - and is intended to evaluate the restoration of daily intercity passenger rail service along any Amtrak long-distance routes that were either reduced to a less-than-daily frequency, or discontinued altogether. It also allows the FRA to consider potential new routes, specifically including routes that Amtrak inherited in 1971 but chose not to continue at that time. Slide 10 in the overview presentation for Meeting #3 (the same presentation I pulled information from earlier in this thread) notes this. I know the slide deck is pretty huge at 163 pages but I'd really recommend at least reading up to Slide 21 to get a good idea of what this study is intended to do and why. If you don't have time for that, here's some of the primary bullet points:



It's worth reminding everyone that $66 Billion of additional funding has been dedicated to rail projects thanks to the IIJA - and the overwhelming majority of that has been earmarked for passenger rail ($22B to Amtrak, $36B to the Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail). Like many things that serve a public interest and need, yes passenger rail often requires subsidy - and that's fine, actually. But the point of all of this planning for expansion is to reinvigorate passenger rail and make it a valid travel option for as many as possible - not just adding additional destinations, but enabling additional routing options through the network that can significantly reduce travel times and even make trips possible that were not feasible before. And since you bring it up - the Heartland Flyer is not slow. It's time competitive with driving, topping out at 79mph, and honestly is not *that* much slower than flying when you take into account how early you need to be at the airport to check in and make it through security, plus parking and traffic and all that. I've taken that trip aboard the Heartland Flyer many times now and it's usually pretty full... in fact, the train was completely sold out on my last two trips. They have been running a 2-car consist fairly often lately, that's true - but equipment shortages across Amtrak's network is a big part of the reason why; Amtrak's fleet is aging, and it doesn't help that a combination of mechanical defects and derailments have caused cars to be taken off the active roster. They've announced that they are focused on returning 63 cars back to service by September of this year, which is when Amtrak's fiscal year ends. This is in addition to their efforts toward renewing and augmenting their current fleet. Even *with* the equipment shortages, demand for Amtrak continues to increase, with ridership up 24% in FY23.

With how absolutely eye-watering costs are for high speed rail projects in this country, personally I'm completely fine with sticking with conventional passenger rail while working toward meaningful expansion of the national passenger rail network. I'm sure you'll be pleased to know, however, that HSR is not being ignored either - funding from the Corridor ID program to kickstart the service development plans for state-supported routes has already been awarded to seven high-speed rail projects: two variations of the Texas Central corridor (Dallas to Houston), the Brightline West corridor (east LA to Vegas), the California HSR corridor (SF to LA), the Cascadia corridor (Vancouver to Seattle and Portland), the North Carolina-Georgia corridor (Charlotte to Atlanta), and the California High Desert corridor (Palmdale to Victor Valley).

Passenger rail expansion across the United States is being approached from multiple angles, and the long distance routes I initially posted about are only one piece of the puzzle.

[baralheia]

You seem very clued into rail happenings and I appreciate your insights.

I'm just a nerd with adhd that really likes trains haha But I'm happy to share what I've learned!

[TheTravellers]

I'm just a nerd with adhd that really likes trains haha But I'm happy to share what I've learned!

I'll second the appreciation, you seem not just a railfan, but a railFAN, thanks for all your info. It was nice when I lived in Downers Grove, IL and worked in both the Loop and the suburbs. Walking through (and under in the tunnels for Union and Northwestern (or whatever it's called now)) the Loop was pretty cool for casual train fans like myself.

[baralheia]

I'll second the appreciation, you seem not just a railfan, but a railFAN, thanks for all your info.

Haha, I'd say that's a pretty fair assessment. I wouldn't consider myself a "foamer" - I don't go and stand by the railroad tracks and record random trains as they pass through, and I couldn't identify most locomotives on sight alone - but I'm definitely a BIG fan of rail-based transportation to the point where I legit enjoy playing games like Train Sim World, and when traveling, I prefer to take Amtrak whenever possible. Even though I know that not all of the possible routes being discussed and studied (both long distance and short corridor routes) will come to fruition, I've never been more excited about the future of Amtrak and the national passenger rail network! Some of the long distance routes identified in the Long-Distance Service Study would enable me to to take the train from OKC to destinations that simply weren't previously feasible - places like Tulsa, Denver, Atlanta, or Omaha. More routes means more routing options to get from point A to point B across the network, which improves access and equity for all! And I'm glad that my ADHD hyperfocus can actually be useful for once... LOL

It was nice when I lived in Downers Grove, IL and worked in both the Loop and the suburbs. Walking through (and under in the tunnels for Union and Northwestern (or whatever it's called now)) the Loop was pretty cool for casual train fans like myself.

Ah that's cool! My husband is from Wheeling and he's told me how commuter systems like Metra and the CTA made getting around the Chicagoland area so much easier than it would have otherwise. I never got to live in a place like that for any significant amount of time, but when I was a kid, I did live in the DFW metro when DART opened the Red Line from downtown Dallas to Park Lane. My parents and I rode it into downtown and back the day it opened for service! We ended up moving to Houston later that same year, unfortunately.

[josefromtulsa]

The sad things to me in all of this is that it IS mostly using existing lines. So none of this is going to be anything close to high speed. Rather, it will be quite the opposite. Especially with all of those rural stops. It's extremely inefficient to make those stops as compared to a point-to-point high speed line.

So i guess we've decided to go the cheap route. Honestly folks, i dont see how this is going to work financially without a LOT of subsidizing. And with the level its going to take, is it even worth it? It's one thing to call them "potential" travelers. It's a whole other thing to see them actually make the trips. I'd say the Heartland Flyer is a good example of how sad things still are with rail. It's slow and only has what 2 cars, and can't fill that. Not to mention how much has gone in to keeping it floating over the years. It's not exactly the poster child for a successful re-introduction of a line.

Imagine if we required roads to be profitable be we even considered building them. I also wonder what percentage of current roads are at maximum use and making money?

The ridership levels are what they are despite the low level of service not because there is low demand for non-automobile transportation.

[TheTravellers]

...
Ah that's cool! My husband is from Wheeling and he's told me how commuter systems like Metra and the CTA made getting around the Chicagoland area so much easier than it would have otherwise. I never got to live in a place like that for any significant amount of time, but when I was a kid, I did live in the DFW metro when DART opened the Red Line from downtown Dallas to Park Lane. My parents and I rode it into downtown and back the day it opened for service! We ended up moving to Houston later that same year, unfortunately.

Oh yeah, the L was great - took it from work up to the north side to hit Reckless Records and others during lunch breaks, or around the Loop to hit Tower, and we'd come in to Chicago at Union and then get on the L to go to clubs or restaurants around the city. And Downers Grove was on the BNSF Metra line, which had 3 lines, so there were expresses and locals and freight and Amtrak all flying through there at once, it was crazy at times. When I lived here before we moved up there, I used to beat the train at Western/Britton many times, could see the headlight waaaaaay down the tracks and knew it was slow enough that I could do that (young and stupid). After being up there for a few weeks, never ever ever ever again did I try *anything* when the gates were down and the lights flashing, not with 3 tracks and 60 MPH trains (or more tracks than that in Hammond, IN), or at any crossing anywhere up there, whole different ballgame.

[Laramie]

Amtrak is looking at a nationwide expansion of its long-distance routes that would, if implemented, reconnect Oklahoma City and Tulsa with cities nationwide.

The study underway by the Federal Railroad Administration coincides with ongoing efforts led by Kansas transportation officials to extend the Heartland Flyer north from Oklahoma City, where it currently ends, to Newton, Kansas.

[Mountaingoat]

Imagine if we required roads to be profitable be we even considered building them. I also wonder what percentage of current roads are at maximum use and making money?

The ridership levels are what they are despite the low level of service not because there is low demand for non-automobile transportation.

So, the idea is to persuade people to NOT use highways. If it takes 2 hours to drive to Tulsa by car but 4 1/2 hours by rail, few will use thec rail. The l-44 route should be used to build new straight rail with maybe 1 stop at Stroud.

[PhiAlpha]

So, the idea is to persuade people to NOT use highways. If it takes 2 hours to drive to Tulsa by car but 4 1/2 hours by rail, few will use thec rail. The l-44 route should be used to build new straight rail with maybe 1 stop at Stroud.

I probably would if it was 3 hours. I’m so tired of driving back and forth on I-44 that it would be worth the extra time to relax instead of drive

[UrbanistPoke]

So, the idea is to persuade people to NOT use highways. If it takes 2 hours to drive to Tulsa by car but 4 1/2 hours by rail, few will use thec rail. The l-44 route should be used to build new straight rail with maybe 1 stop at Stroud.

A better route that for the life of me has never been looked into is connecting Tulsa and Oklahoma City through Stillwater. There seems to be an obsession with the DOT and transportation officials and Tulsa/OKC officials for the I-44 route with never studying any alternatives. Just because that the 'straight-line' or as the bird fly's route.

The current freight lines are so curvy, go through so many towns, it's highly forested, the terrain is way more difficult, etc. that it is cost prohibitive to get to a legitimate speed to make it worth not driving. The Turner now has very limited right of way which makes it even less desirable of a corridor for high speed rail or even moderate speed rail given there's little option to save on right of way costs that'd be needed to builder a straighter route to allow for high speed trains.

Connecting through Stillwater would add only 30 miles from downtown to downtown of OKC & Tulsa (if you can get much faster speed this route is would be a matter of maybe 10 minutes or less in additional time). You would also connect the university on game days to both markets plus would then connect Tulsa to Wichita via rail too. The only issue would be extending the rail line that now terminates in Stillwater over to I-35 to the Newtown corridor track that the north Heartland Flyer will use. That would be cheaper than upgrading the I-44 corridor that the biggest city it'd connect is Stroud to OKC & Tulsa. Economically, that would be so much better for the state connecting another major research institution within 30-45 minutes of both urban cores.

Tulsa - Stroud - OKC is about a 110 mile route via current freight lines
Tulsa - Mannford/Pawnee - Stillwater - Guthrie/Edmond - OKC is about 140 miles * which could be lessened by 10 miles if they utilized the Cimarron right of way from Hallet to the Y to reconnect back into the freight line. Would require 20 miles of brand new track to get from Stillwater to the I-35 connection to the Heartland Flyer north corridor.

Upgrade these corridors to allow 125 mph trains and you could get from Wichita to Tulsa in about 90 minutes, OKC to Tulsa via in about 60 minutes, OKC to Wichita in about 75 minutes, OKC to Stillwater in about 35 minutes, Tulsa to Stillwater in about 40-45 minutes. Then keep extending east on the new I-42 corridor and another 40 miles from downtown Tulsa you're at MidAmerica (less than 30 additional minutes) and 100 miles you'd be in Springdale. OKC to NWA in about 2 hours via Stillwater/Tulsa.