May 28, 20214 yr 2 hours ago, KJP said: I know for a fact that Amtrak was pushed into being more aggressive by Brightline, Texas Central and some of the commuter rail contractors like Herzog and First Group. In fact, they start all of their presentations to new audiences by saying "we should lead this because we are America's railroad." Agree. I mentioned to Gildone that while Amtrak execs probably scoffed privately when Brightline was announced, they aren't scoffing now. They seem to realize that the old "just give us the money to run the trains" mantra isn't good enough anymore, which it never was anyway. For years Amtrak was too insular and set in its ways. Its execs thought they were bulletproof and were content to stand pat, when they should have been aggressively promoting the organization as an agent of change. Well now that change is coming and they belatedly realize that they have to change with it, which is good, but decades too late. Incidentally, there are scads of Brightline construction vids on You Tube. Check them out! Edited May 28, 20214 yr by neony
June 21, 20222 yr Finger Lakes Railway wants to expand rail service in Maine. Looks like there were unrealistic hopes to get it started by May 1 this year: https://www.bangordailynews.com/2022/01/30/news/midcoast/the-latest-push-to-revive-passenger-rail-to-rockland-faces-uncertain-future-joam40zk0w/
April 18, 20232 yr California startup Dreamstar wants to run a private night train between SF and LA "A privately funded project to operate a nightly first-class passenger train between San Francisco and Los Angeles is underway." Read More: https://www.sfgate.com/travel/article/la-sf-night-train-proposal-dreamstar-17891587.php?IPID=SFGate-HP-CP-Spotlight
May 1, 20232 yr Brightline is earning a profit on operations, and the Orlando segment isn't evenn open yet: https://www.thenextmiami.com/demand-for-brightline-so-high-that-it-just-earned-a-south-segment-profit-never-really-intended/
May 1, 20232 yr Interesting... I was going to share a video from the YouTube account "Infra" where he made a map of all the routes Brightline is considering by compiling references from interviews etc. That video no longer exists... Perhaps that means he finally got in contact with Brightline. In an glass-half-full world maybe this video get re-released with official comments from Brightline, or maybe they just politely asked him to remove it. The routes considered (beyond the two already moving forward) were Portland - Vancouver, the Texas Triangle, and competing on the Northeast Corridor. There may have been other routes I've forgot. Did anyone else see this video?
May 1, 20232 yr The High Speed Rail Alliance hosted a webinar featuring Brightline where they talked about both the Florida and SoCal-Vegas projects. It was very interesting. One slide of the presentation has their (disappointing to Ohioans) future corridors map that @Ethan was asking about. I think Chicago-Detroit/Cleveland and Ohio 3C&D (and on to Louisville) would be better options for Brightline than several of the routes shown - better than NEC (already saturated, therefore much larger capital required), Chicago-STL (Amtrak upgrading to 110, in a good position for more frequency already), and Pacific NW (same). If I’m Brightline, it’s hard to argue with the Texas triangle as number 1 next opportunity after their existing projects, and then ATL-Charlotte is pretty good in a high growth area, but I would think Chicago-Detroit/Cleveland would be the next best ridership to investment ratio. Maybe even better than ATL-Charlotte, since downtown Chicago is much bigger and more important than either sunbelt downtown. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
May 1, 20232 yr 14 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: The High Speed Rail Alliance hosted a webinar featuring Brightline where they talked about both the Florida and SoCal-Vegas projects. It was very interesting. One slide of the presentation has their (disappointing to Ohioans) future corridors map that @Ethan was asking about. I think Chicago-Detroit/Cleveland and Ohio 3C&D (and on to Louisville) would be better options for Brightline than several of the routes shown - better than NEC (already saturated, therefore much larger capital required), Chicago-STL (Amtrak upgrading to 110, in a good position for more frequency already), and Pacific NW (same). If I’m Brightline, it’s hard to argue with the Texas triangle as number 1 next opportunity after their existing projects, and then ATL-Charlotte is pretty good in a high growth area, but I would think Chicago-Detroit/Cleveland would be the next best ridership to investment ratio. Maybe even better than ATL-Charlotte, since downtown Chicago is much bigger and more important than either sunbelt downtown. It looks like it could have been a situation where the video became outdated due to an official statement from Brightline only a day or two after release, which would explain it. For what it's worth, Infra expressed similar criticism about NEC and Pacific NW routes.
May 1, 20232 yr Yeah, Brightline had Chicago-Detroit/Cleveland on its map not too long ago. Wonder why they dropped it? "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
May 2, 20232 yr 23 hours ago, KJP said: Yeah, Brightline had Chicago-Detroit/Cleveland on its map not too long ago. Wonder why they dropped it? I would suspect because of the expense of making the corridor suitable for passenger trains at the service level they would intend to provide. Unlike Amtrak, they understand that frequency matters. They operate, what, 17 rt's per day Miami-West Palm? And, they intend to keep that level up when the Orlando segment opens in a few months (Amtrak proposes anemic service levels for ConnectsUS and they don't have CLE-CHI in its plans, likely for the same reason). You know as well as anyone that we can't have anything close to that between CLE and CHI without some very expensive infrastructure improvements: South-of-the-Lake Bypass from CHI to Porter, IN, new Maumee River bridge, flyover at Vickers Crossing, a new Sandusky Bay bridge and causeway, new Cuyahoga River crossing (or going into Tower City) and adding two passenger tracks from CLE to Porter.
May 2, 20232 yr I would have Brightline use the South Shore instead, then the Turnpikes or alongside NS, to near Vermilion and take it over to enter Cleveland. I'd also take over the CN/GTW between Toledo and Detroit, utilizing 200 miles of existing track. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
May 2, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, KJP said: I would have Brightline use the South Shore instead, then the Turnpikes or alongside NS, to near Vermilion and take it over to enter Cleveland. I'd also take over the CN/GTW between Toledo and Detroit, utilizing 200 of existing track. Take it over what to enter CLE? The Lakewood line? If so, I doubt Lakewood would stand for that. They made a deal with NS to keep that line to 8 trains/day. They are unlikely to be willing to tolerate 15+ more. My guess is that Lakewood would prefer to turn that line into a bike trail. Running through Detroit to Chicago adds population but lengthens the trip too much, I think. Also, 200 what of existing track? Miles? Between what locations? Edited May 2, 20232 yr by gildone
May 2, 20232 yr 55 minutes ago, gildone said: Take it over what to enter CLE? The Lakewood line? If so, I doubt Lakewood would stand for that. They made a deal with NS to keep that line to 8 trains/day. They are unlikely to be willing to tolerate 15+ more. My guess is that Lakewood would prefer to turn that line into a bike trail. Running through Detroit to Chicago adds population but lengthens the trip too much, I think. Also, 200 what of existing track? Miles? Between what locations? The train from CLE wouldn’t go through Detroit to Chicago - that would be a branch. CLE-Detroit direct OR CLE-Chicago direct OR Detroit-Chicago direct. 3 different routes on track shaped like an upside-down T. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
May 2, 20232 yr Yes, NS's Cleveland District through Lakewood. I try not to anticipate what someone else will believe, let 50,000 people, without asking them first. Even so, the deal with NS to cap the number of through freight trains at 13 daily expired four years ago. Even if it wasn't, if Brightline acquired the line, it wasn't a party to that agreement. Cleveland-Chicago trains wouldn't run to Detroit. I would run them as per the map below which would offer a 3.5-hour running time for Detroit-Chicago trains, two hours for Detroit-Cleveland trains, and four hours for Cleveland-Chicago trains. There would be direct Cleveland-Chicago trains, but all Cleveland-Detroit trains would have cross-platform connections to trains traveling Detroit-Chicago, just as Detroit-Cleveland trains would have connections to Cleveland-Chicago trains. Key to the map...... Orange line -- Brightline acquiring or leasing existing, upgraded tracks Black line -- new Brightline tracks along existing, active railroad tracks Yellow line -- new Brightline tracks along existing highway Red line- new Brightline tracks along new right of way or abandoned railroad/other right of way The reason why Brightline would succeed in expanding in Ohio whereas Amtrak may not is because Brightline supports political campaigns, and Ohio is a corrupt, pay-to-play state like Florida. Brightline will also subsidize the trains with real estate revenues whereas Amtrak will require the state to financially backstop the trains, even if Amtrak is paying the subsidy in the first few years. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
May 2, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, TH3BUDDHA said: Why wouldn't the 3C route be a good candidate for them? 3C&D would be a good route, but everything is relative. From Brightline’s perspective, Detroit-Chicago is better than Chicago-any Ohio city because Detroit is much larger. Detroit-Chicago would generate enough trips to get Brightline’s attention. Adding a branch to Cleveland to the Chicago-Detroit route (if via Toledo) is straightforward and adds passengers. Adding Toledo-Columbus to the route would make sense for similar reasons. 3C&D, in absence of an existing network, doesn’t project enough ridership to get Brightline’s attention (compared to other routes they are evaluating.) (I want to emphasize that it’s still a great route and Amtrak should absolutely do it, it just isn’t quite to the same levels of ridership as larger metros like Detroit.) It would be a good second phase if Brightline established service to Cleveland or Columbus. For Brightline, extending a Chicago-Detroit main route from Toledo to CLE is probably better than Columbus, because extending beyond CLE to Buffalo or Pittsburgh is much easier from CLE (the latter because of existing rail and RoW). When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
May 2, 20232 yr 12 minutes ago, TH3BUDDHA said: Why wouldn't the 3C route be a good candidate for them? They seek routes with at least 500,000 riders per year at the outset. That's possible with 3C, but they would have to operate at 110+ mph and that means having tracks separate from freight. That's doable in the short term between Galion-Columbus-London but would take a lot more effort to do over the entire route. The freight trains on the CSX and NS lines between Dayton and Cincinnati could consolidate onto one line, leaving the other for passenger traffic. There is an abandoned rail ROW between Dayton and Springfield, and passenger-only tracks could be laid next to NS between Springfield and London, and next to CSX between Galion and Cleveland. So it's certainly possible but will not be cheap. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
May 3, 20232 yr @kjp Thanks for clarifying as a few things in your post weren't clear. My point about the cap on NS trains wasn't about whether Brightline would be a party to it as I know they wouldn't. My point was that Lakewood (and Bay Village) threw a fit when NS was proposing more traffic. Granted, it was 25 years ago, but NIMBYism is alive and well virtually everywhere in the US. I see nothing wrong with identifying potential road blocks. It keeps things realistic.
May 3, 20232 yr 14 minutes ago, gildone said: @kjp Thanks for clarifying as a few things in your post weren't clear. My point about the cap on NS trains wasn't about whether Brightline would be a party to it as I know they wouldn't. My point was that Lakewood (and Bay Village) threw a fit when NS was proposing more traffic. Granted, it was 25 years ago, but NIMBYism is alive and well virtually everywhere in the US. I see nothing wrong with identifying potential road blocks. It keeps things realistic. Seems like it may matter the reason Lakewood and Bay residents opposed increased rail traffic, do you happen to know the reasoning? If residents were concerned about the noise from trains that's probably not going to change between freight and passenger trains, right? But if the concern was about frequent and extended road closures at crossings that's going to be more of an issue for longer and slower freight trains, so maybe there wouldn't be so much opposition to passenger trains.
May 3, 20232 yr In early November 1997, a very successful commuter rail run was held over several days by GCRTA, NOACA and rail supply industries using a visiting Bay Area CalTrain commuter train. The train traveled from West 110th Street in Cleveland to Lorain and back and was full of city officials from all affected communities, chambers of commerce and others. The next day it was downtown for a static display at the Amtrak station. The third day, it roared through a lake effect snowstorm at 79 mph to Painesville and back (it was snowing so hard at Painesville, the engineer couldn't see the station until he blew past it, requiring a long back-up move). Every one loved the idea of commuter rail in NE Ohio. A few weeks later, I broke the story on the tripling of West Shore freight train traffic (from 13 to 38 daily trains on average) for Sun News which resulted in a big press conference by Kucinich, West Shore mayors and others. Since Sun News came out every Thursday and we weren't on the Internet in 1997, I interviewed Kucinich and the mayors a week early with the promise they wouldn't say anything publicly until Sun News came out on Thursday. They were willing to do that because I'm the one who told them about it. They were grateful I told them. They held their press conference that morning. At the press conference, other media asked me how I knew about it. I mentioned in the article that the reference to the tripling of West Shore freight traffic was buried in a 1,000-plus page filing with the federal Surface Transportation Board. The filing included proposed traffic changes resulting from NS and CSX jointly buying and splitting Conrail roughly equally between them. Local media asked me, did I really sift through more than 1,000 pages of the filing? Of course not. My friend Howard Harding (RIP), a transportation planner at the Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study, found it while preparing a summary of proposed Northeast Ohio rail traffic changes as a result of the Conrail split. He contacted me because we were both active in the Ohio Association of Railroad Passengers (today's All Aboard Ohio) and I was covering the planned addition of commuter rail on NS's West Shore route for Sun News. The commuter rail plan was very popular among the West Shore mayors and Kucinich. At first, Howard and I were certain that this was being done by NS to kill the proposed commuter trains or, at best, get the communities to support infrastructure improvements via Berea so NS could reroute freight trains out of the West Shore. It wasn't even operationally realistic to triple the freight traffic as NS had single-tracked the West Shore line just four years earlier in 1993. Some of us thought NS was floating this to trigger a public reaction. What reaction? Perhaps, adding capacity to the alternate routing through Berea would either allow the commuter trains to replace the freight trains or the West Shore tracks could be removed, especially east of the Avon Lake Ford Plant to Cleveland. But NS's proposed tripling of freight train traffic soured any notion of adding trains to the line -- even though the commuter trains wouldn't have counted against the negotiated cap of 13 daily trains because the cap only limited the number of through trains that began or ended their journeys outside of Vermilion-Cleveland. Local freight trains that served local industries did not count against the cap. At a public hearing at Lakewood Council Chambers, citizens were horrified that so many freight trains would be coming through the West Shore. Lakewood children who walk or bike to school would run in front of trains or risk being late. Safety forces would be delayed in making runs to save lives. Noise and dust and dirt from trains would reduce property values. All heII would break loose. Suddenly adding trains to the West Shore line was bad. Before, adding commuter trains was good. Now, any additional trains was bad. So realism is an opinion. It is everchanging and it depends on who you ask. On Nov. 10, all of the mayors and chambers and Congressfolk loved commuter rail in the West Shore. By Christmas, any notion of adding trains in the West Shore became radioactive. "Reality" can and will change again. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
May 3, 20232 yr @kjp And neither of us know the future, and yours is an opinion too. That doesn't mean identifying potential road blocks is problematic somehow. I concede that passenger rail may be different as there may be potential for a suburban stop in Westlake or something or local rail service could be part of the mix, so there could be benefit to the local population. To change the subject to something more productive... perhaps you should suggest your routing idea to Brightline. And perhaps if future efforts to use that line are more proactive with communications with the local population, the potential for NIMBYism can be reduced.
May 3, 20232 yr Indeed. I used to think I could affect the future. Perhaps I still can in one way... by guiding and being remembered by my son. And that's a wonderful thing. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
May 8, 20232 yr 6 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said: Great article on BrightLine West. I didn't realize Brightline West started off with purchasing another railroad company that had already done some of the initial work. This gives me some hope for Dallas-Houston rail, given Texas Central Railway's apparently collapse, and Brightline's expressed interest in the Texas Triangle. I'd love to see Brightline buy Texas Central, and get a jump on the planning/approval for connecting the 5th and 6th largest cities via high speed rail!
January 27, 20241 yr On 5/8/2023 at 7:01 PM, Ethan said: I didn't realize Brightline West started off with purchasing another railroad company that had already done some of the initial work. This gives me some hope for Dallas-Houston rail, given Texas Central Railway's apparently collapse, and Brightline's expressed interest in the Texas Triangle. I'd love to see Brightline buy Texas Central, and get a jump on the planning/approval for connecting the 5th and 6th largest cities via high speed rail! Texas Central has partnered with Amtrak. We'll see how that goes from here. https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/texas-news/texas-central-partners-with-amtrak-applies-for-federal-grants-to-study-high-speed-rail-viability/3313530/ No further news since this was announced.
January 28, 20241 yr Dreamstar Lines is a private company looking to launch night train services (currently in the western US). They've announced LA-San Francisco, but have pushed back the start to 2025 rather than 2024 as they originally proposed. They are also looking at Salt Lake City-Las Vegas-Los Angeles and possibly service to/from Denver. They are looking to use low-traffic freight lines. https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2023/9/11/23864396/train-utah-to-las-vegas-cost Here's Dreamstar Lines' website: https://dreamstarlines.com/ Edited January 30, 20241 yr by gildone
March 28, 20241 yr Looks like Dreamstar Lines will have its LA-SF night train up and running next year, and STL-LAS-LAX in time for the 2028 Olympics: https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2024/03/28/passenger-railroads-are-coming-to-utah/
January 1Jan 1 @KJP@Boomerang_Brian@neony@Foraker Here's a very recent interview with one of the two co-founders of Dreamstar Lines. I highly recommend giving it a listen (there is a podcast option and a YouTube option). They are aiming to begin operating a SoCal-SF night train in early 2026. I've spoken to the other co-founder, Thomas Eastmond. My impression is these guys are very realistic and careful. They are aiming to offer a better product than Amtrak at a competitive price. In addition, they will also be offering the option of shipping your car, but unlike Amtrak's Auto Train, shipping your car will be optional. (Sidenote: Shipping your car on night trains is not uncommon in Europe. It's not an option on every night train, but there are several where it's possible). You can tell from the interview that they want to offer a high-quality product. They are looking at other possible routes on lightly-used freight lines. Denver-Salt Lake City is one. Apparently they found an option for LA-Phoenix that stays off the busy UP route that the Sunset Limited uses. Anyway, I'm rooting for Dreamstar Lines. Here's the podcast link: https://podcast.criticalmassforbusiness.com/e/critical-mass-business-talk-show-ric-franzi-interviews-joshua-dominic-co-founder-ceo-of-dreamstar-lines-episode-1557 Edited January 1Jan 1 by gildone
January 2Jan 2 5 hours ago, gildone said: . . . they will also be offering the option of shipping your car, but unlike Amtrak's Auto Train, shipping your car will be optional. That's awesome. But for the record -- you can take Amtrak's Auto Train without shipping your car. It's just that both Amtrak Auto Train endpoints, Lorton, VA, and Sanford, FL, are outside the nearest major cities and not easy to get to without a car.
January 2Jan 2 18 hours ago, gildone said: They are looking at other possible routes on lightly-used freight lines. Denver-Salt Lake City is one. Apparently they found an option for LA-Phoenix that stays off the busy UP route that the Sunset Limited uses. The only other routing west from the Phoenix metro area, and the only line directly into Phoenix proper, is the former Santa Fe now Genesee & Wyoming's Arizona & California RR https://www.gwrr.com/arzc/ which links up with the BNSF mainline at Cadiz east of Barstow and goes into LA via the busy Cajon Pass. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
January 26Jan 26 On 1/1/2025 at 9:13 PM, Foraker said: That's awesome. But for the record -- you can take Amtrak's Auto Train without shipping your car. It's just that both Amtrak Auto Train endpoints, Lorton, VA, and Sanford, FL, are outside the nearest major cities and not easy to get to without a car. no you can't. I've ridden it multiple times.
February 2Feb 2 On 1/26/2025 at 2:37 PM, gildone said: no you can't. I've ridden it multiple times. Odd, so have I -- without my car. But it's been a few years, maybe they've changed the rules.
Create an account or sign in to comment