February 5, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, KJP said: Rail nerd point of contention... The Acela is not a commuter train. I recall a dozen years ago when Obama was elected and said he wanted America to have high speed trains. A rail advocate friend of mine was working in China and told me the Chinese were all excited about Obama's comments cuz they wanted to supply High-Speed Rail equipment to the USA. My friend had to caution them that, unlike China, just because the president wants something doesn't mean he gets something. He had to explain that there was Congress and constituencies and self-interest groups, and all those things that tend to slow us down in the USA but tend to also keep a lot of political prisoners out of jail or the ground unlike China. I used to commute on the actual commuter train in Delaware. It shares the same ROW as the Northeast Corridor. Sometimes, on my way home from work, I would doze off with my head against the window. Then, BAM, the Acela would fly by waking me up violently. I legit miss that haha.
February 5, 20214 yr Author "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
February 17, 20214 yr Author "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
February 23, 20214 yr thats encouraging, but lets see them build the new gateway tunnels and fix the old ones before there is a tragedy and then i’ll get excited for other plans.
February 23, 20214 yr Author 1 hour ago, mrnyc said: thats encouraging, but lets see them build the new gateway tunnels and fix the old ones before there is a tragedy and then i’ll get excited for other plans. Gotta do that AND move the main route between New York and Boston away from the water's edge east of New Haven. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
February 24, 20214 yr ^ yeah for sure, but that is an improvement in services, whereas gateway is dire straits for the current tunnels. i hope it all comes to pass though -- and more, we shall see.
February 24, 20214 yr Author Not being underwater along the coasts of Connecticut and Rhode Island is certainly an improvement. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
February 28, 20214 yr nothings under water, nor will it be for the foreseeable future. meanwhile, the gateway tunnels could literally collapse tomorrow, kill people and hurt the economy. thats much, much more of a priority than all new lines and speeding up acela services on the last leg of it. so lets see if they can pull that off first before marshall plans. it will cost plenty.
March 7, 20214 yr Author Amtrak Wants to Expand Across the Nation. Local Politics Might Intervene. Extending nationwide service has been an elusive goal for Amtrak. Since 1971 — when the publicly funded, privately operated rail agency was created — routes have largely remained unchanged. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/06/us/amtrak-route-expansion.html "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
March 7, 20214 yr Relief Bill Will Reinstate Daily Long-Distance Amtrak Service http://railfan.com/new-aid-plan-will-reinstate-long-distance-amtrak-service-by-summer/ By Railfan & Railroad Staff WASHINGTON — Daily long-distance Amtrak service will resume sometime in June following the passage of a $1.9 trillion stimulus bill. On Saturday, the U.S. Senate passed President Joe Biden’s pandemic relief plan along party lines. The bill now goes back to the House, which will likely vote on it sometime this week, before the president signs it into law. The legislation, dubbed the American Rescue Plan, includes funding for Amtrak and a prevision authored by U.S. Sen. Jon Tester of Montana that would require the railroad to resume daily long-distance passenger service within 90 days. Last fall, Amtrak reduced most long-distance services across the country to three days a week, including the Empire Builder in Montana. The service is particularly important for Montana’s remote Hi-Line region. The prevision also requires Amtrak to recall furloughed employees. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
March 9, 20214 yr Author BOOM AND "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
March 12, 20214 yr Author Ohio was well represented in these pre-Amtrak plans by the Nixon Administration. Ohio lost routes including intrastate connections like 3C because its Congressional delegation didn't fight for them. Meanwhile, other states' Congressfolk did fight for theirs, including having routes added. Amtrak at 50: Defining the “Basic System” of Service Routes https://www.enotrans.org/article/amtrak-at-50-defining-the-basic-system-of-service-routes/ "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
March 14, 20214 yr Is Amtrak Misleading America? Route accounting practices misrepresent train performance, could complicate Biden rail renaissance https://eddiedee.medium.com/is-amtrak-misleading-america-9e09fcd57860 Edited March 15, 20214 yr by gildone
March 20, 20214 yr Not sure if this is the right place to post this but here goes anyway: Lately, we have been seeing reports that Amtrak has been quietly studying a radical increase in the amount of service it will offer in the future. KJP posted about this and it portends a huge increase of service to Ohio. I attended a Zoom conference last Saturday and an Amtrak Rep had some interesting things to say: 1) Amtrak wants to ask for an increase in its funding from the current $2 billion/yr to $5 billion/yr over the next five years. It's unclear whether this will be a part of the upcoming Biden infrastructure bill or not. 2) Amtrak wants to upgrade 20 existing corridors and add 30 new ones. I believe Amtrak said it would provide 100% of capital costs and 5 years of operating costs, with states picking the latter up after that. This appears to be a recognition that most states do not have the wherewithal for a major rail program. 3) Amtrak wants the flexibility to be able to add these corridors unilaterally in case a state does not want to buy in. Thus, a recalcitrant state in the middle of a corridor would not gum things up. 4) Amtrak values its long distance service (unlike the attitude of the past) and want to improve it. It may in **some** cases ADD service, a major shift in direction. My fave would be a second or third thru New York-Buffalo-Cleveland-Toledo-Chicago train in addition to any corridor service. After all this time, it's refreshing to see such a pro-active stance from Amtrak. It's a vast improvement! I might add that Amtrak is proposing to replace its entire long distance fleet. Amtrak is now looking for support. Coincidentally, an ad-hoc group sprang up late last year composed of rail advocacy organizations in New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio. This group started as a means to generate support for more thru New York-Chicago service on Amtrak's Lake Shore route, but is now also in support of Amtrak's plans as well. I'll post more about them shortly.
March 20, 20214 yr 39 minutes ago, neony said: Not sure if this is the right place to post this but here goes anyway: Lately, we have been seeing reports that Amtrak has been quietly studying a radical increase in the amount of service it will offer in the future. KJP posted about this and it portends a huge increase of service to Ohio. I attended a Zoom conference last Saturday and an Amtrak Rep had some interesting things to say: 1) Amtrak wants to ask for an increase in its funding from the current $2 billion/yr to $5 billion/yr over the next five years. It's unclear whether this will be a part of the upcoming Biden infrastructure bill or not. 2) Amtrak wants to upgrade 20 existing corridors and add 30 new ones. I believe Amtrak said it would provide 100% of capital costs and 5 years of operating costs, with states picking the latter up after that. This appears to be a recognition that most states do not have the wherewithal for a major rail program. 3) Amtrak wants the flexibility to be able to add these corridors unilaterally in case a state does not want to buy in. Thus, a recalcitrant state in the middle of a corridor would not gum things up. 4) Amtrak values its long distance service (unlike the attitude of the past) and want to improve it. It may in **some** cases ADD service, a major shift in direction. My fave would be a second or third thru New York-Buffalo-Cleveland-Toledo-Chicago train in addition to any corridor service. After all this time, it's refreshing to see such a pro-active stance from Amtrak. It's a vast improvement! I might add that Amtrak is proposing to replace its entire long distance fleet. Amtrak is now looking for support. Coincidentally, an ad-hoc group sprang up late last year composed of rail advocacy organizations in New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio. This group started as a means to generate support for more thru New York-Chicago service on Amtrak's Lake Shore route, but is now also in support of Amtrak's plans as well. I'll post more about them shortly. Multiple Lake Shore Limiteds per day would be AMAZING. I know they’ve been discussing extending the Pennsylvanian (NYC -Philly - Harrisburg-Pitt) to Cleveland. I hope they send it all the way through to Chicago. Add a second Capital Limited (DC - Pitt -CLE - Chicago), put them all together, and you’d have 6-7 daily CLE - Sandusky - Toledo - Chicago trains per day. With that many options per day, the train becomes the obvious choice over driving and ridership will soar. Also, thanks so much for sharing the recognition of the importance of long distance routes by the new Amtrak management. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
March 20, 20214 yr Just a bit of a cautionary note... The picture seems to be changing quickly with regard to Amtrak's initiatives, which are still primarily corridor oriented. It remains to be seen whether they would actually be willing to add another thru train running the full length of the Lake Shore Route. Still, the comments I heard were far more favorable than in the past. I think the best we can hope for is extension of trains from New York, Pennsylvania and Michigan to Cleveland first and **maybe** one thru New York-Chicago train if we are lucky. Even that would be a huge advance. We also do not know what the freight railroads will say about this, but don't be surprised if they demand billions to discourage this stuff.
March 21, 20214 yr Does Amtrak ever do deep-dive analysis on their customer needs and customize routes based on daily and/or seasonal needs? For instance I could see increased weekend high speed service being in demand to cater to people who want to get away for a quick weekend in Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland or Buffalo? But keeping the same weekday schedules may not work for someone who wants to leave Friday and come back Sunday....
April 1, 20214 yr How much would the federal government pay for 337 miles of railroad track? The CSR lease is up in 2026. If we could get them to pay $5m a mile that's $1.68 billion. Closes a huge gap in the system as well.
April 3, 20214 yr its good to see the 3Cs line revived on the biden amtrak map plans. it probably should have been or should be extended to louisville though, instead of the indy to l’vuhl cornfields route. it could pick up the cinci airport along the way.
April 3, 20214 yr Hoping the Amtrak money isn't just a bargaining chip to get the rest of the bill passed ... Has Amtrak given any hint of prioritization for their expansion segments? Remember: It's the Year of the Snake
April 3, 20214 yr Author 34 minutes ago, Dougal said: Hoping the Amtrak money isn't just a bargaining chip to get the rest of the bill passed ... Has Amtrak given any hint of prioritization for their expansion segments? The Amtrak money in this bill isn't that much more than what was in the five-year surface transportation reauthorization passed by the House last July 1 but the Senate never gave the transportation bill a hearing. As for prioritization of expansion... I'm only aware of what Amtrak has in mind for Ohio. They specifically said they want to expand the existing routes (especially Cleveland to the east) which they can do without state support. The heavier lift will be 3C. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 5, 20214 yr On 4/3/2021 at 2:31 AM, mrnyc said: it probably should have been or should be extended to louisville though, instead of the indy to l’vuhl cornfields route. it could pick up the cinci airport along the way. While it's clear that this network is mostly a hub/spoke system, the lack of a Cinci-Louisville-Nashville line is really frustrating. Nashville really should be a major hub.
April 5, 20214 yr 35 minutes ago, Dev said: While it's clear that this network is mostly a hub/spoke system, the lack of a Cinci-Louisville-Nashville line is really frustrating. Nashville really should be a major hub. There is a huge hole in the map that is Kentucky. Seems strange to not have more connectivity to Lousiville and Lexington given that McConnell could be more willing to back funding if it benefits his state more.
April 5, 20214 yr 2 minutes ago, Luke_S said: There is a huge hole in the map that is Kentucky. Seems strange to not have more connectivity to Lousiville and Lexington given that McConnell could be more willing to back funding if it benefits his state more. Yeah I've seen a lot of complaints online about it as well with finger pointing to policy decisions under Steve Beshear.
April 5, 20214 yr Author "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 5, 20214 yr ^ yes, while anything that could be built along the cle-akr-can commuter route is fine, it really needs to go to further the airport and terminate in canton. that would make for rail service to all three airports, which would be an abdolutely amazing amenity for business, much less residents and visitors. thats a heck of a lot of bang for the buck with this commuter line! add a second west-east lorain to mentor/painesville + aurora route and that is living the dream.
April 7, 20214 yr Author "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 8, 20214 yr Dunno what this is about. Amtrak doesn't have middle seats. https://www.travelpulse.com/news/car-rental-and-rail/amtrak-to-open-middle-seats-and-sell-tickets-to-capacity.html Remember: It's the Year of the Snake
April 8, 20214 yr It's just a poorly-written article. They're ending ticket restrictions on adjacent seats, not middle seats. “To an Ohio resident - wherever he lives - some other part of his state seems unreal.”
April 9, 20214 yr aaaaand the post chimes in on amtrak joe’s plans — as only the post would: https://nypost.com/2021/04/08/amtrak-joes-rail-line-will-blow-your-cash-on-pricey-repairs/
April 14, 20214 yr Author Amtrak's Acela II, the Liberty Avelia, is testing on the north end of the Northeast Corridor this week. Here it is at Wickford Junction, Rhode Island at 165 mph..... "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 14, 20214 yr ^ Not liking the new Acela's Euro-style horn much; and I bet the folks living alongside the tracks won't either. I'm thinking of that stretch between Baltimore and Wilmington when it seems like they're blowing the horn every 100 yards. Remember: It's the Year of the Snake
April 15, 20214 yr Our very own @KJP mentioned in this article... Rail advocacy group wants Cleveland Amtrak station back at Tower City Updated 2:05 PM; Today 2:05 PM CLEVELAND, Ohio — All Aboard Ohio, a passenger-rail advocacy group, voted this week to recommend moving Cleveland’s Amtrak station back to Tower City Center, in anticipation of a dramatic increase in train service in the coming years. Ken Prendergast, public affairs director for All Aboard Ohio, said the Tower City location is more centrally located, offers more connectivity to RTA trains and buses, and is closer to downtown hotels, businesses and tourism sites. More at: https://www.cleveland.com/travel/2021/04/rail-advocacy-group-wants-cleveland-amtrak-station-back-at-tower-city.html Edited April 15, 20214 yr by Oldmanladyluck
April 15, 20214 yr Two things that I don't think were made clear by the article; (1) Tower City has the link to public transit through the RTA station, but would there be a plan to build out a nearby bus station to make a multimodal hub? I think I saw plans that Jackson wanted to move the Greyhound station to the redesigned lakefront Amtrak station/multimodal transit hub. And if not, is that seen as a draw back of moving the station to Tower City. (2) Is the Jackson administration still committed to the lakefront station, or are they reconsidering the relocation to Tower City?
April 15, 20214 yr Author AND "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 16, 20214 yr 14 hours ago, KJP said: Better detail in this article, thanks! Any idea how and where a Greyhound station would be incorporated with the Amtrak station at Tower City? And do you have any idea which way the Jackson administration is leaning? Is it still toward expanding the lakefront station?
April 16, 20214 yr @KJPAt this point do we have any idea what speed the new Amtrak routes would be at? To me, some of the largest benefits of inter-city train travel don't surface until the lines are high speed. For instance, a Cleveland to Chicago Amtrak trip is a 6-hour train ride and a roughly $50 ticket for economy. So the trip takes longer than by car and is also more expensive than gas for the trip. If you don't have a car, the Amtrak route isn't a bad deal, but about 90% of metro Clevelanders and a slightly lower share of Chicagolandians do have access to a car. It seems like the future of rail has to be high speed if we want rail to beat out auto travel. I'm interested in your thoughts about how this would affect the construction of a new "mini-hub" at terminal tower too.
April 16, 20214 yr ^You also need to factor in turnpike tolls in your comparison. And gas is on an upward trajectory. And you can do things on a train that you can't do while behind the wheel of a car (read, sleep, etc.). Edited April 16, 20214 yr by skiwest
April 16, 20214 yr Are you driving and staying in a urban hotel while in Chicago? Add in very expensive overnight hotel parking as well as parking expenses most every time you move around the downtown area with the car (and don't forget to tip the valet). Of course if you take the train there will probably be some Uber and taxi expenses even if you take public transit for most of the visit. It is all relative.
April 16, 20214 yr 19 hours ago, Luke_S said: Two things that I don't think were made clear by the article; (1) Tower City has the link to public transit through the RTA station, but would there be a plan to build out a nearby bus station to make a multimodal hub? I think I saw plans that Jackson wanted to move the Greyhound station to the redesigned lakefront Amtrak station/multimodal transit hub. And if not, is that seen as a draw back of moving the station to Tower City. (2) Is the Jackson administration still committed to the lakefront station, or are they reconsidering the relocation to Tower City? 1 hour ago, Luke_S said: Better detail in this article, thanks! Any idea how and where a Greyhound station would be incorporated with the Amtrak station at Tower City? And do you have any idea which way the Jackson administration is leaning? Is it still toward expanding the lakefront station? Hi @Luke_S You seem very concerned about buses at the Amtrak Station. The Amtrak Station should be located at the best possible location for a rail station---which is in any central part of Downtown. Public Square (Tower City) is a great location. The location should not be driven by where there is space for a (giant) greyhound station. How many people actually take connect between a bus and amtrak, not counting buses that are operating in the service of Amtrak? Very few. So it should not be a driver. Regarding the idea of having a bus station and Amtrak's station at Amtrak's current location (or the new "North coast whatever station" people talked about) is a bad idea as its too remote for the benefits that train travel (and bus travel) brings--service into a city center. Even Greyhound would be hurt by this plan as E 13 and Chester is a much better location than South Marginal.
April 16, 20214 yr Tower City clearly seems to be the best place for an Amtrak station. I really hope it's feasible/realistic. It funnels the entire Cleveland transit network toward the Amtrak station. I'd accept the proposal for expanded capacity at North Coast, but the disconnect between transit and that location would reduce the potential impact for both Amtrak and RTA.
April 16, 20214 yr The above All Above Ohio tweet suggests a design that would incorporate a GreyHound station with Amtrak at Tower City with Greyhound being above the Amtrak station. I think it has been the desire of the city to combine Amtrak and Greyhound in a transit center no matter where it located (original proposals on the lakefront).
April 16, 20214 yr Author Too early to know for either. The city just found out about our suggestion of Tower City this week. No City Hall can pivot that quickly. And here's a possible way to design the Greyhound station at Tower City.... "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 16, 20214 yr Author 1 hour ago, LlamaLawyer said: @KJPAt this point do we have any idea what speed the new Amtrak routes would be at? To me, some of the largest benefits of inter-city train travel don't surface until the lines are high speed. For instance, a Cleveland to Chicago Amtrak trip is a 6-hour train ride and a roughly $50 ticket for economy. So the trip takes longer than by car and is also more expensive than gas for the trip. If you don't have a car, the Amtrak route isn't a bad deal, but about 90% of metro Clevelanders and a slightly lower share of Chicagolandians do have access to a car. It seems like the future of rail has to be high speed if we want rail to beat out auto travel. I'm interested in your thoughts about how this would affect the construction of a new "mini-hub" at terminal tower too. Actually, the biggest factor for most travelers is the frequency, affordability and reliability of the transportation mode. Safety is assumed (hopefully!). Speed is not a factor unless it is horribly slow. If the train is faster than the drive time yet offers only one train a day and is always late, then it's not going to succeed. But if the train is competitive timewise, has multiple trains per day, reliable and has affordable fares, then it will do well, as we've seen in other states that have purchased service from Amtrak. One thing that people don't take into account is the productivity that travelers can enjoy on the train. Business travelers can get work done on the train, so that train ride becomes billable hours rather wasted hours in the car. And on the way home from the meeting or conference, travelers can enjoy beer, wine, a hot meal or get sleep -- regardless of the weather. This could be Ohio. Instead, it's Michigan and NW Indiana (the second, much slower train is on a different/slower line --- one of the trains that goes through Cleveland to/from the East Coast)...... "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 16, 20214 yr 26 minutes ago, KJP said: Actually, the biggest factor for most travelers is the frequency, affordability and reliability of the transportation mode. Safety is assumed (hopefully!). Speed is not a factor unless it is horribly slow. If the train is faster than the drive time yet offers only one train a day and is always late, then it's not going to succeed. But if the train is competitive timewise, has multiple trains per day, reliable and has affordable fares, then it will do well, as we've seen in other states that have purchased service from Amtrak. One thing that people don't take into account is the productivity that travelers can enjoy on the train. Business travelers can get work done on the train, so that train ride becomes billable hours rather wasted hours in the car. And on the way home from the meeting or conference, travelers can enjoy beer, wine, a hot meal or get sleep -- regardless of the weather. (Edit: I see others above made the similar comments) $50 might be more than gas, but that ignores the tolls from CLE to CHI, and if you're driving into the city, paying to park. A train from CLE would be preferable at $50/person even if it took the same six hours to drive. Edited April 16, 20214 yr by westerninterloper
April 16, 20214 yr 36 minutes ago, KJP said: Too early to know for either. The city just found out about our suggestion of Tower City this week. No City Hall can pivot that quickly. And here's a possible way to design the Greyhound station at Tower City.... I like it except for the terminal closest to the river. A highway isn't a good use for waterfront property, and rail is only marginally better, if at all. Is there an alternative layout that would allow for better uses of the riverfront? Could we get by with three? I want to see future Cleveland leverage as much of its waterfront for leisure and entertainment as possible, and to keep it as walkable as possible.
Create an account or sign in to comment