# Texas Eagle to Begin Using TRE Route FTW-DAL!!



## Bob Dylan (Dec 13, 2014)

Good news! Goodbye to the infamous Tower 55 backing move for the Texas Eagles into FTW!

According to a Post on trainorders today (12/13) Amtrak and DART have reached agreement on a 10 year Contract to re-route the Texas Eagles #21/#22 on the TRE Route between FTW and DAL. Amtrak will pay an undisclosed annual fee to DART and DART/TRE will pick up certain undisclosed expenses.

The details are hidden behind a paywall, you must be a paid member to read links, so no startup date is mentioned??


----------



## daveyb99 (Dec 13, 2014)

amazing this has been going on 5+ years.
Now to get the FW Station upgraded -- adding new track and platform

story

http://www.texasrailadvocates.org/viewIt.asp?ati=3&a=1886

DART Agenda item (#13)
http://www.dart.org/about/board/boardagendas/120914dartboard.pdf


----------



## printman2000 (Dec 13, 2014)

What upgrades are needed/expected at Fort Worth? Seems to me to be a great station with plenty of space.


----------



## SanAntonioClyde (Dec 13, 2014)

This means at least 15 minutes saved in schedule, but will Amtrak be able to roll savings up and down the line and adjust future schedules? Will Irving now want service at existing TRE platforms? Time will tell.


----------



## neroden (Dec 13, 2014)

This is a very interesting agreement. It lends credence to those who said that DART was holding up the negotiations. Why? Because *the T* will pay TRE for any incremental costs of the Amtrak service, and for any performance penalties assessed by Amtrak, and for Amtrak's additional insurance costs (required because of the state liability cap which covers DART & TRE). DART won't pay anything. (TRE is a joint project of DART and "the T".)

This will unlock DART's federal ARRA grant to double track from Centrepoint through West Irving stations (the "Valley View Road" area).

Apparently, according to the rumor mill, UP was annoyed by the delay, and told the T that they wouldn't authorize the TEXRail project until Amtrak moved to TRE. So this should gain UP's approval of TEXRail. (TEXRail needs to parallel UP within UP right-of-way for a short distance to get from the Fort Worth station onto the Cotton Belt route; it's not long, but it's a critical section.) TEXRail is going to run high-floor equipment, which will require some new high-level platforms at both of the existing Fort Worth stations.

Apparently the agreement still requires the concurrence of Dallas Garland & Northeastern Railroad, but since they're a short line they'll probably agree (they are pretty much totally dependent on the good graces of everyone else involved in the deal).

Other interesting points: TRE can shut down the line for maintenance for up 20 days per year, whiich must be Sundays and holidays, and Amtrak has to find alternative routes on its own. More days than that, and TRE has to compensate Amtrak.

As for faster Amtrak service: Amtrak is timetabled at 1 hour eastbound Ft. Worth - Dallas, and 1:35 westbound (!!!), presumably due to the Tower 55 moves. TRE is timetabled to take 53 or 54 minutes from Dallas to the ITC, all day long, with lots of stops. Recall that TRE is also locomotive-hauled, so it's just as slow as Amtrak. Amtrak should therefore be able to get a 55-minute schedule in both directions, even if it has to follow a TRE train the whole way; this is probably too generous an allowance, as Amtrak should be able to pass some TRE trains.

There are also 20 minutes scheduled for the Dallas stop in either direction. At Fort Worth, there is a 22 minute stop scheduled eastbound, and 45 minutes (!!!) scheduled westbound. While some time might be desired for recovery time, I would really expect it to be possible to reduce the westbound time to the eastbound time. So eastbounds should have at least a few minutes taken off the schedule, but westbounds should have over an *hour* taken off the schedule (40 minutes between Dallas and Ft. Worth and 23 minutes at Ft. Worth). This is before considering any reductions in time between Ft. Worth and Cleburne thanks to the Tower 55 work.

Amtrak will probably want to reschedule the westbound substantially. The Texas Eagle / Sunset Limited PIP advised a significantly later departure from Chicago as well as a somewhat later arrival in San Antonio. Amtrak wants to minimize the layover time between the Texas Eagle and Sunset Limited. If the Eagle arrives in San Antonio at, say, 11 PM, and over an hour is chopped out of the schedule, it could depart Chicago at 3:45 PM or later. This would put the overnight segment between St. Louis and Little Rock, which is about as good as you can do.

I would expect the train to be moved over on the current schedule first, and a big schedule change to come a bit later, probably accounting for all the Illinois trackwork as well as the changes in Texas.


----------



## VentureForth (Dec 14, 2014)

Why does there need to be concurrence with the Dingo? DART parallels their ROW IN the East, but I can't think of where it would be affected between Dallas and Fort Worth.

When Amtrak is on time, it is at about the slowest time of day for the TRE. There may be one train to follow, but I doubt there will be any leap frogging. I could be wrong.

5 years in the making? Folks have been looking at this for 15 years.

Finally, as cool as it would be cool to stop in Irving, I don't think there will be a ton of support as one can easily catch the TRE as they have been doing for 15 years to Dallas or Fort Worth. Of course, if my grandma was still alive and lived in South Irving, I may sing a different tune.

I don't know why locomotive-hauled is considered slow. 79 is a good speed - faster than most EMUs in the USA outside the NEC. Isn't Acela and TGV locomotive-hauled? And I see good things coming. With the upgrades and double tracking work finished, maybe we'll see some 90 mph sections, but that's just wishful thinking.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Dec 14, 2014)

I was able to take the _*Texas Eagle*_ over the TRE last summer when it was being rerouted because of the Tower 55 construction and it was so much faster and smoother. We actually arrived FTW early, but that only meant I had to kill off that much more of a layover before the _*Heartland Flyer.*_


----------



## afigg (Dec 14, 2014)

This is a clue as to why it took 5-6 years from the 2009 ARRA grant to reach an agreement: "Players involved in the five years of negotiations included DART, Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the T), Amtrak, Union Pacific, FRA, Rail Division of the Texas Department of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments and others." (quote from the TRA post). Almost as many players in this as in the Game of Thrones.

Still, five years to reach a fairly straightforward agreement is a sign of just how slow the US has gotten on infrastructure related projects and getting agreements and decisions pushed through all the bureaucracies. The years of delays on advancing to construction for many of the 2009-2010 ARRA and HSIPR grants have been frustrating.



neroden said:


> I would expect the train to be moved over on the current schedule first, and a big schedule change to come a bit later, probably accounting for all the Illinois trackwork as well as the changes in Texas.


The CHI-STL improvements are going to be ongoing through 2017, so it is likely that Amtrak is going to mostly leave the TE schedule alone with some small trimming of padding and adjustments through the next several years. They may leave much of the padding in from FW to Dallas to keep the OTP numbers up.


----------



## neroden (Dec 14, 2014)

VentureForth said:


> I don't know why locomotive-hauled is considered slow. 79 is a good speed -


acceleration, not top speed



afigg said:


> The CHI-STL improvements are going to be ongoing through 2017, so it is likely that Amtrak is going to mostly leave the TE schedule alone with some small trimming of padding and adjustments through the next several years. They may leave much of the padding in from FW to Dallas to keep the OTP numbers up.


That would be.... unreasonable. There's well over an hour of unnecessary padding on the westbound. It needs to be taken out. Doing so will still leave substantial padding, because the eastbound is padded for Tower 55 delays too.
If I were Amtrak, I'd make major changes in the westbound schedule fairly soon: take padding out in Texas, arrive later in San Antonio,... and probably add padding further back at St. Louis to account for Illinois trackwork.


----------



## Anderson (Dec 14, 2014)

I like what Nathanael suggested: Keep the schedule the same on the ends and move padding up to the STL area. Once all of the work is done there might be 60-90 minutes that can be dropped between padding and schedule improvements, but it would be better to have that in the schedule to keep flexibility on the north end as work proceeds.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Dec 14, 2014)

I'd say the Eagle is already plenty late into San Antonio as it is. If anything it should arrive earlier. Who exactly would benefit from a later arrival into SAS? Certainly not the folks disembarking in San Antonio. I don't see how the folks sleeping through the connection in either of the 421 cars would benefit. Even the folks who cluelessly booked a manual offline connection through SAS would probably prefer an earlier arrival into SAS. At least they'd have something more to do than just sit around admiring the generic waiting room and avoiding random acts of violence. I think the Texas Eagle should arrive as early as possible into SAS. San Antonio still doesn't have a single daytime arrival and yet with this supposed improvement we're already banking on even worse arrivals than before. SAS already has plenty of impractical scheduling and calling times with the Sunset Limited. There's no need to add the Eagle to that list. What's left of the Sunset Limited is likely to be the next LD route to be lost forever. Considering the growth and solidification of the anti-rail political movement making changes that potentially hurt the Eagle in order to help what's left of the Limited seems rather irrational to me.


----------



## Anderson (Dec 14, 2014)

Also, this is a total aside, but with Texrail in place (and with the longer-term expansions planned) Dallas-Fort Worth is getting a _really_ comprehensive commuter network. It isn't on par with, say, Chicago yet...but it's sure getting there step by step.


----------



## neroden (Dec 14, 2014)

Devil's Advocate, I know you're being a devil's advocate, but anyway...

* The primary benefit from later San Antonio arrivals is, in the long run, later Chicago departures. I wouldn't arrive later than 11 PM, but that's perfectly reasonable if the trains run on time.

* My last spreadsheet estimate says that a daily Sunset Limited would perform better financially than either the Southwest Chief or the California Zephyr. If one train is going to get axed, the Southwest Chief *still* seems most likely, due to the deterioration of Raton Pass, the unwillingness of any of the states to spend any money, and Amtrak or BNSF's resistance to the reroute. If something is going to be lost due to money shortages, saving a daily Texas-Sunset through route as advised in the PIP would actually be a better choice for Amtrak than trying to retain the SWC over Raton. It's not the greatest LA-Chicago route, but it is an LA-Chicago route.


----------



## battalion51 (Dec 15, 2014)

Very glad to hear they're finally going to make this move permanent. Fortunately, with the re-routes this past summer the crews should already be qualified over TRE, so that's one barrier to entry that won't have to be tackled.

As far as the scheduling is concerned, it wouldn't surprise me if the schedule isn't tweaked for some time while they work bugs out of the slotting. If 21 is more than 30-35 minutes late it is entirely possible they will end up following 2923 if not all the way at least part of the way to Ft. Worth. They may be able to slide around them on double track, but as they approach the West End of Double Track near West Irving the meet with 2924 occurs. Similarly if 22 is 20-25 minutes late they're going to follow 2728 for awhile. They could theoretically pass them on Double Track between West Irving and I-35E, but if they don't get around before then, they're not going to since 2728 and 2931 meet at Medical/Market Center. Notwithstanding is the Sunday Maintenance Window where it may still be necessary to "Detour" via UP, so you don't want to lose 30-45 minutes off of advertised time due to detours. Early arrivals are much easier to combat than late arrivals.

It will be interesting to see if there is any move made by Amtrak to attempt to establish Centreport or one of the Irving stations as an unmanned station. Downtown Irving makes sense from the standpoint of bus connections to DART, but Centreport makes sense with the access to free DFW shuttle buses.


----------



## VentureForth (Dec 15, 2014)

Ahhh - Now I can understand a Centreport stop for DFW. Allow folks from Longview, Marshall, heck even Austin take the train to arguably the most important international hub in the US (Certainly in the Top 5).

Sorry everyone. Schedule improvement will be nullified by a stop at Centreport and hundreds of people dis/embarking with suitcases, carry ons, purses, etc.


----------



## afigg (Dec 15, 2014)

battalion51 said:


> It will be interesting to see if there is any move made by Amtrak to attempt to establish Centreport or one of the Irving stations as an unmanned station. Downtown Irving makes sense from the standpoint of bus connections to DART, but Centreport makes sense with the access to free DFW shuttle buses.


The DART agenda link posted above contains the text of the operating agreement and summary. Excerpt from the summary:



> Key points of this Agreement include:
> 
> 
> Amtrak service on the TRE Corridor consists of one eastbound train and one westbound train daily (with no intermediate station stops) and two non-regularly scheduled round trips per year for service to the State Fair of Texas on the weekend of the University of Texas-Oklahoma University football game.


That precludes adding a stop on the TRE Corridor as it stands. There is a clause in the agreement allowing Amtrak to request modifications to the service with TRE agreeing to it, so there is a path for Amtrak to add a station stop in the future. But they just spent 5 years negotiating the agreement. Doubt that there will be a rush to modify it.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 15, 2014)

Afiggs post pretty much nails it! And with DART now able to get passengers directly to DFW and TRE running from FTW to Centerpoint Station/connections on the bus to DFW ( except Sundays), the chances of any stops being added for the Eagles are about as good as the Congress passing a resolution naming President Obama the Best President Ever born in the USA!! LOL


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Dec 15, 2014)

neroden said:


> * The primary benefit from later San Antonio arrivals is, in the long run, later Chicago departures. I wouldn't arrive later than 11 PM, but that's perfectly reasonable if the trains run on time.


I'm no expert on scheduling but I would think I am about as close as you can get to being the TE's target customer (full route travel between both termini, routine sleeper passenger, last minute tickets, etc.) and I find the current schedule already leaves something to be desired. I understand that in most cases Amtrak has no ability to make positive scheduling changes without first paying a ransom to one or more of our freight rail monopolies, so I don't expect perfect scheduling on any LD route. That being said when there is a low cost opportunity to allow for improved scheduling I would hope Amtrak would work toward giving me a schedule that doesn't make multi-modal connections even more difficult or make negotiating private rides even less practical. If Amtrak wants to split the benefit between San Antonio and Chicago that would be fine with me, but punishing San Antonio with even worse arrivals for the exclusive benefit of Chicago area residents would be a great way to send me back to the airlines. I've already abandoned the Sunset Limited route thanks to increasingly poor calling times and now Amtrak has a chance to either improve or degrade the Eagle's schedule as well.



neroden said:


> * My last spreadsheet estimate says that a daily Sunset Limited would perform better financially than either the Southwest Chief or the California Zephyr. If one train is going to get axed, the Southwest Chief *still* seems most likely, due to the deterioration of Raton Pass, the unwillingness of any of the states to spend any money, and Amtrak or BNSF's resistance to the reroute. If something is going to be lost due to money shortages, saving a daily Texas-Sunset through route as advised in the PIP would actually be a better choice for Amtrak than trying to retain the SWC over Raton. It's not the greatest LA-Chicago route, but it is an LA-Chicago route.


Which bureaucrats and politicians does your last spreadsheet say will push to fund daily service of the Sunset Limited? How long does your last spreadsheet say it will take the Sunset Limited to pay off millions in ransom money to UP? What reasons does your spreadsheet give for the claim that Amtrak and/or BNSF is/are hesitant to shift the Southwest Chief to the mainline reroute? Reading what you've written so far I'm left with more questions than answers.


----------



## battalion51 (Dec 15, 2014)

afigg said:


> battalion51 said:
> 
> 
> > It will be interesting to see if there is any move made by Amtrak to attempt to establish Centreport or one of the Irving stations as an unmanned station. Downtown Irving makes sense from the standpoint of bus connections to DART, but Centreport makes sense with the access to free DFW shuttle buses.
> ...


Thanks for that info afigg. I guess we're just taking it one step at a time.


----------



## fairviewroad (Dec 15, 2014)

VentureForth said:


> Ahhh - Now I can understand a Centreport stop for DFW. Allow folks from Longview, Marshall, heck even Austin take the train to arguably the most important international hub in the US (Certainly in the Top 5).


I don't think a once-daily, unreliable train will be of much use to people arriving/departing a major airport. Most of Amtrak's other "airport" stations are not served by LD trains. I mean, if you can make a case for stopping in Irving/Centreport for _other_ reasons, fine. But to pretend it would be of use to people catching a flight...well...


----------



## LDKarr (Dec 15, 2014)

Absolutely. I am looking at a two hour drive once I finally do arrive in San Antonio. The scheduled arrival time into San Antonio is already later than I prefer. The sooner I can get there, the better.



Devil's Advocate said:


> If Amtrak wants to split the benefit between San Antonio and Chicago that's fine with me, but punishing San Antonio with even worse arrivals for the exclusive benefit of Chicago area residents would be a great way to send me back to the airlines.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 15, 2014)

Suggestion; Consider booking your car and getting off in Austin where the Eagle generally arrives between 6:30pm and 7:30pm if nothing has happened on the UP Parking Lot that day!

The rush hour will be over except for the 18 Wheelers on IH35 but with #21/#421 stopping in San Marcos and then taking longer to get from the SA Airport to Sunset Station than from AUS- SAS due to the great circle route around SA, it might be worthwhile!

You didn't indicate where you are driving to but there are short cuts from Austin that don't involve using IH35/ if interested PM me!


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Dec 15, 2014)

In my experience at 6:30PM-7:30PM the I-35 rush hour is hardly over. If you're heading North/South from Austin you might as well have an extended dinner and consider heading out around 9:00PM. It has gotten so bad lately that I'm forced to avoid I-35 except for Saturday and Sunday when the commuters stay home. On the weekends I-35 remains packed with traffic but at least it's moving smoothly between New Braunfels and Buda.


----------



## neroden (Dec 15, 2014)

FWIW, with DART from Dallas to the airport already operating and TEXRail from Fort Worth to the airport planned to start operating ASAP, there will probably not be great pressure to stop at Centrepoint.

I appreciate the argument that the Texas Eagle should have earlier calling times in San Antonio. Looking at it, you're right, it definitely should. San Antonio is gonna remain a poor market, though, with their persistent refusal to fund local public transportation. I guess that means a lot of people are driving a long way to get to the station, though.


----------



## afigg (Dec 17, 2014)

Additional info on the agreement to move Amtrak to the TRE. Star Telegram editorial: Amtraks move is an expensive one for the T. Excerpts:



> Ouch! Moving Amtrak trains to the Trinity Railway Express tracks between Dallas and Fort Worth will cost the Fort Worth Transportation Authority $1.07 million per year!
> 
> ....
> 
> ...


 So Amtrak got the T to pay for the insurance over the TRE segment. Points to Amtrak management. But $1.07 million is a dang expensive insurance rate for a short segment. Has to be more to the story or the T does not have a good insurance broker.


----------



## neroden (Dec 17, 2014)

The T says that the insurance company will probably lower the rates after a few years. I think this is general paranoia-by-underwriter. The problem is probably that such insurance policies (insuring a passenger train over a passenger line) are very rare. I bet they're custom-written. There's probably no underwriters who really know what they're doing when it comes to this, and as a result they're overestimating the costs (better for the insurer to make extra money than lose money).


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Dec 17, 2014)

neroden said:


> The T says that the insurance company will probably lower the rates after a few years. I think this is general paranoia-by-underwriter. The problem is probably that such insurance policies (insuring a passenger train over a passenger line) are very rare. I bet they're custom-written. There's probably no underwriters who really know what they're doing when it comes to this, and as a result they're overestimating the costs (better for the insurer to make extra money than lose money).


I would disagree that it's a lack of data. There are over four decades of liability history to work with. How many more decades do they really need?


----------



## battalion51 (Jan 11, 2015)

Has there been any more word on when this shift will take place?


----------



## cirdan (Jan 12, 2015)

Just wondering. Do The T's own trains have insurance?

Are they assuming an Amtrak train is more likely to be involved in an incident than their own, or that the consequences will be more dire?

Or why can they not just charge what they pay for one of their own trains on to Amtrak?


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 12, 2015)

afigg said:


> Additional info on the agreement to move Amtrak to the TRE. Star Telegram editorial: Amtraks move is an expensive one for the T.


LOL! I just opened this link, and the huge photo of a TRE Bi-Level COACH is captioned as an Amtrak engine!

On another note, I did notice in some article somewhere that I can't find, the switch is hoped to be made by the end of 1Q 2015. However, this probably won't make the new time table that I'm expecting comes out today or next week. So don't know if they are just going to dwell until departure at FTW and perhaps modify the schedule in the Summer, or if they will just add it all to padding.


----------



## cirdan (Jan 12, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> > Additional info on the agreement to move Amtrak to the TRE. Star Telegram editorial: Amtraks move is an expensive one for the T.
> ...


Isn't the dwell at FTW pretty long anyway?


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 12, 2015)

Yeah - that's why I would love to see the schedule tightend up. However, what would that mean in SAS? Even a LONGER dwell time, unless they can tighten up that schedule, too. And if they do that, you could be looking at a 3 AM arrival into LAX on days it runs with the Sunset.


----------



## cirdan (Jan 12, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> Yeah - that's why I would love to see the schedule tightend up. However, what would that mean in SAS? Even a LONGER dwell time, unless they can tighten up that schedule, too. And if they do that, you could be looking at a 3 AM arrival into LAX on days it runs with the Sunset.


Maybe it might make more sense to use some of the time gained to add additional stops.

I'm thinking of CentrePort / DFW airport first of all.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 12, 2015)

Yes - It certainly wouldn't HURT the schedule by any means. I think they would succeed well in adding a stop there.


----------



## afigg (Jan 12, 2015)

cirdan said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah - that's why I would love to see the schedule tightend up. However, what would that mean in SAS? Even a LONGER dwell time, unless they can tighten up that schedule, too. And if they do that, you could be looking at a 3 AM arrival into LAX on days it runs with the Sunset.
> ...


Read back to my post #16 from December. The agreement as written precludes adding a stop.


> Key points of this Agreement include:
> 
> 
> Amtrak service on the TRE Corridor consists of one eastbound train and one westbound train daily (with no intermediate station stops) and two non-regularly scheduled round trips per year for service to the State Fair of Texas on the weekend of the University of Texas-Oklahoma University football game.


As to when the move will be made, the announcement was for a wide window of the 1st quarter. Which probably means in March.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 12, 2015)

Yes, I know that the current agreement precludes any new stops being added. I should have reiterated that in my previous post. However, with the time savings, an additional stop or two perhaps should be negotiated to help reduce excessive dwell times - in FTW and San Antonio. That all being said, the agreement is on the TRE. There's nothing that says Amtrak can't add stops somewhere else along the existing route (though I can't think of any real demand at the moment).

Back to Centreport for a moment - that platform is way too short for Amtrak. Not that a double spot isn't do able. But just another point that someone is/was bound to nitpick about.


----------



## Bierboy (Jan 12, 2015)

I agree on a significant earlier arrival in SAS in daylight....it was a mess when we arrived there in April, 2013. People not knowing where to go; no taxis in sight, etc....


----------



## afigg (Jan 12, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> Yes, I know that the current agreement precludes any new stops being added. I should have reiterated that in my previous post. However, with the time savings, an additional stop or two perhaps should be negotiated to help reduce excessive dwell times - in FTW and San Antonio. That all being said, the agreement is on the TRE. There's nothing that says Amtrak can't add stops somewhere else along the existing route (though I can't think of any real demand at the moment).


Acadia Valley, MO is in the works to be added as a stop to the Texas Eagle, sometime in late 2015. It is shown on the schedule as a future stop. As for adding a stop on the TRE, the signed agreement and lack of Sunday service to keep the station open, likely puts off adding a station stop for some years.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 12, 2015)

afigg said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I know that the current agreement precludes any new stops being added. I should have reiterated that in my previous post. However, with the time savings, an additional stop or two perhaps should be negotiated to help reduce excessive dwell times - in FTW and San Antonio. That all being said, the agreement is on the TRE. There's nothing that says Amtrak can't add stops somewhere else along the existing route (though I can't think of any real demand at the moment).
> ...


I almost agreed with you until the point about the lack of Sunday service. Centreport is an unmanned platform. Whether Amtrak stops there is completely irrelevant as the station doesn't physically "close". Now, they may have to add shuttle service, but I'm sure DFW would be happy to do so. Centreport wouldn't be able to accomodate passengers with checked bags, for sure, but many Amtrak stations don't already.

Frankly, I don't understand why the agreement would disallow Amtrak to add a stop there. It can't be competition - perhaps up to $125 per day in lost revenue? I guess that can add up. And that's if 50 people use it per day between the two trains.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jan 12, 2015)

The lack of Sunday Service on TRE is important for FTW, but with DART running from Union Station in Dallas to DFW 7 days a week, there is no need for Amtrak to stop @ Center Point Station ! The fare on #22 is the same to FTW or DAL from SAS and Stations North,so Northbound Eagle pax could just book to DAL and ride DART to DFW to catch flights!


----------



## neroden (Jan 12, 2015)

cirdan said:


> Just wondering. Do The T's own trains have insurance?


Nope. They have a state law which allows them to not pay out -- to leave injured people in the lurch with no compensation. Well, they have to pay something out, but they have a very low limit on how much they have to pay out (I looked it up some time ago but I have forgotten it). Amtrak's liability limit under federal law is much higher ($200 million).


----------



## neroden (Jan 12, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> > The T says that the insurance company will probably lower the rates after a few years. I think this is general paranoia-by-underwriter. The problem is probably that such insurance policies (insuring a passenger train over a passenger line) are very rare. I bet they're custom-written. There's probably no underwriters who really know what they're doing when it comes to this, and as a result they're overestimating the costs (better for the insurer to make extra money than lose money).
> ...


I said, if you read it carefully, that *there are no underwriters who know what they're doing*. Not that there wasn't data. That there were no underwriters who were used to dealing with the data.


----------



## neroden (Jan 12, 2015)

jimhudson said:


> The lack of Sunday Service on TRE is important for FTW, but with DART running from Union Station in Dallas to DFW 7 days a week, there is no need for Amtrak to stop @ Center Point Station ! The fare on #22 is the same to FTW or DAL from SAS and Stations North,so Northbound Eagle pax could just book to DAL and ride DART to DFW to catch flights!


What Jim said. Plus, in a few years, the same will be true from the south end: http://www.texrail.com/ 

It looks like the stars are aligned for TexRail. The federal government has issued the Record of Decision; there is enough funding to complete design and purchase land; agreement has been obtained from the track owners; complete funding is expected from the FTA in early 2016. They're targeting 2018, though 2019 is probably more likely.

At that point, there will be no good reason for Amtrak to stop at Centreport.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 13, 2015)

neroden said:


> jimhudson said:
> 
> 
> > The lack of Sunday Service on TRE is important for FTW, but with DART running from Union Station in Dallas to DFW 7 days a week, there is no need for Amtrak to stop @ Center Point Station ! The fare on #22 is the same to FTW or DAL from SAS and Stations North,so Northbound Eagle pax could just book to DAL and ride DART to DFW to catch flights!
> ...


One stop rides have always been an important aspect of ridership. If you are travelling from Marshall, Longview, or Mineola, then would YOU want to get out at Dallas with your bags, switch to the Red/Blue line for one stop, transfer to the orange line, with all your bags, ride 50 minutes on a crowded train to the Northern terminal of DFW where you need to transfer to a shuttle to take you to the Remote South parking area, where you hop on a shuttle that takes you to your terminal.

Or, you could just stay on your nice comfortable long distance train for an additional 30 minutes, then switch to a shuttle that will drop you off at your airline.

Situation (until TexRail) is worse from McGregor and Cleburne from the West. You get to Fort Worth. Ride 30 minutes past Centreport. Then add the transfers mentioned above.

The more I think about it, Amtrak should be paying TRE to expand Centreport with full Amtrak ticketing and baggage service. THIS is what a National long distance railroad should be all about. Connecting communities to other transporation modes. In fact, the only downside that I can think of is that it could be so popular that they would either have to add a coach or risk medium-distance travellers blocking space from full run passengers.


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 13, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> > jimhudson said:
> ...


Skylink or terminal link vans work well.


----------



## neroden (Jan 13, 2015)

Centreport's long, 30-minute bus transfer to the airport means it isn't a one-seat ride. If it were that would be very different.

In fact, if you aren't checking luggage, a no-bus trip is now possible with DART -- Amtrak to Dallas, DART to north terminal, in through security, Skylink to correct gate.

https://www.dfwairport.com/skylink/index.php

The majority of travellers will prefer this to the Centreport bus connection.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jan 13, 2015)

Second what tony and neroden said!


----------



## afigg (Jan 13, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> The more I think about it, Amtrak should be paying TRE to expand Centreport with full Amtrak ticketing and baggage service. THIS is what a National long distance railroad should be all about. Connecting communities to other transporation modes. In fact, the only downside that I can think of is that it could be so popular that they would either have to add a coach or risk medium-distance travellers blocking space from full run passengers.


Amtrak is connecting to other transportation systems at Dallas Union Station and in Fort Worth. The question is how many passengers are taking the TE to connect to flights at DFW airport? Probably a few, but enough to justify adding a stop between cities that are not that far apart? The TE is a LD train, so it serves a different market mix than a shorter range multiple daily frequency corridor service.
What are the TRE passenger numbers for Centreport? The Amtrak LD trains don't stop at the Newark and BWI airport stops on the NEC. Both of those offer local transit connection options from the nearest city stop at NWK, BAL, WAS that people can take if their destination is actually the airport.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 13, 2015)

Again, if it were a single train transfer in Dallas, it'd be a slightly better scenario, but with two transfers before you even reach skylink, it's a burden.

I agree with you afigg about the purpose of LD trains. But connectivity to airports is paramount for an efficient total transportation solution. Case in point - I think it's sorta silly to run a train from downtown Miami to Orlando International Airport. First of all, the rates and destinations are probably more agreeable to most passengers out of MIA as opposed to MCO. The majority of passengers from MIA would probably prefer to arrive in a part of Orlando served by public transportation - like a connection to Sunrail at the least, rather than end up at the airport with expensive connections (will most "day visitors" rent a car?).

I'm not saying that folks are going to take the Texas Eagle from Chicago or LA or even El Paso or San Antonio to Centreport to get to DFW. But it's not out of line to make as efficient as possible transfer for folks coming in from Longview/Marshall or McGregor and Cleburne. As I said before, the extra hours from DAL to the terminals may not be that much different, but it would sure be a time savings from the West.


----------



## battalion51 (Jan 13, 2015)

The other consideration for adding Centreport in my mind is that it helps you serve the cities in between Ft. Worth and Dallas. It's always been kind of odd to me that the Eagle didn't stop in Arlington. Stopping at Centreport gives you the ability to have a short drive to the train from places like Irving, Grapevine, Arlington, and others. To me it's akin to the Lake Shore stopping at South Station, Back Bay, and Framingham. You could easily make the case that you should run from South Station to Worcester non-stop, but it is more convenient for folks to have options at Framingham and Back Bay, in spite of those stations not having services.


----------



## Ryan (Jan 13, 2015)

Just as a data point, none of the LD trains stop at BWI or EWR, either. If you want to head to the airport, you're going to have to change to a regional (or MARC/NJT) to make that happen.


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 13, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> Again, if it were a single train transfer in Dallas, it'd be a slightly better scenario, but with two transfers before you even reach skylink, it's a burden.
> 
> I agree with you afigg about the purpose of LD trains. But connectivity to airports is paramount for an efficient total transportation solution. Case in point - I think it's sorta silly to run a train from downtown Miami to Orlando International Airport. First of all, the rates and destinations are probably more agreeable to most passengers out of MIA as opposed to MCO. The majority of passengers from MIA would probably prefer to arrive in a part of Orlando served by public transportation - like a connection to Sunrail at the least, rather than end up at the airport with expensive connections (will most "day visitors" rent a car?).
> 
> I'm not saying that folks are going to take the Texas Eagle from Chicago or LA or even El Paso or San Antonio to Centreport to get to DFW. But it's not out of line to make as efficient as possible transfer for folks coming in from Longview/Marshall or McGregor and Cleburne. As I said before, the extra hours from DAL to the terminals may not be that much different, but it would sure be a time savings from the West.


I agree that connectivity is a great goal! In theory, there is now connectivity from DAL, using the Orange line. Agreed could be a PITA for those with many bags, but if you have many bags, Centerport would be a huge PITA also, as there is no checked bag service ao the rail line (TRE), or the shuttle buses either! Six of one, half dozen of the other.............

Now, I absolutely agree that a traveler with only carry on bags would be quicker/easier with a Centerport stop on Amtrak.


----------



## cirdan (Jan 14, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> Acadia Valley, MO is in the works to be added as a stop to the Texas Eagle, sometime in late 2015. It is shown on the schedule as a future stop. As for adding a stop on the TRE, the signed agreement and lack of Sunday service to keep the station open, likely puts off adding a station stop for some years.
> Frankly, I don't understand why the agreement would disallow Amtrak to add a stop there. It can't be competition - perhaps up to $125 per day in lost revenue? I guess that can add up. And that's if 50 people use it per day between the two trains.


If it was about competition, I guess the DART Orange Line is doing more damage than Amtrak ever could.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 14, 2015)

RyanS said:


> Just as a data point, none of the LD trains stop at BWI or EWR, either. If you want to head to the airport, you're going to have to change to a regional (or MARC/NJT) to make that happen.


I appreciate those data points, but they can be accessed with a same station, single transfer to a regional. I think lack of decent rail access to JFK is the real travesty. That's a whole new thread, though. 



tonys96 said:


> I agree that connectivity is a great goal! In theory, there is now connectivity from DAL, using the Orange line. Agreed could be a PITA for those with many bags, but if you have many bags, Centerport would be a huge PITA also, as there is no checked bag service ao the rail line (TRE), or the shuttle buses either! Six of one, half dozen of the other.............
> 
> Now, I absolutely agree that a traveler with only carry on bags would be quicker/easier with a Centerport stop on Amtrak.


Remember, the Orange Line doesn't stop at Dallas Union Station - only at the West End, which is a mere 1/2 mile or so away. So it's arrive DAL receive bags from checked luggage or you haul them off the train yourself because you started somewhere with no checked luggage, wait for Blue or Red line. Load bags and family. Ride one stop. Unload bags and family. Wait for train. First one is yellow line. Next one is yellow line. Third one is yellow line. Then you realize that all the DART trains are yellow and you have to look at the signs (OK - just being a bit silly, here, but I lived near Dallas, and I saw this happen when there was just the Red and Blue lines. IE: Where does this YELLOW train go?). Finally you see the Orange Header that says DFW and you load your bags and family and enjoy the next 50 minutes of Urban Dallas, Las Colinas (IRVING - sorry, sore subject), then you get off at the airport, unload your bags and family and proceed to a shuttle that will take you to that obscure gate that Aeroflot uses over in Terminal D. Or, you go through security and ride Skylink, but you can't check your bags until you get to the right terminal.

Now, if you're a sole traveller with no checked bags, that'd be totally cool. I'm in for that.

But alas, I'm in Georgia now and so I'm going to go back to complaining about not having the Nancy Hanks III and the horrible connection to the city from the Charlotte, NC station.

Phew.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 14, 2015)

neroden said:


> ...in a few years, the same will be true from the south end: http://www.texrail.com/


Right now, TEX Rail doesn't even have a plan to get onto the airport property. Current plan is to stop about two train lengths off the mainline and again, run a shuttle to Terminal A/B where you have to change to go to any other terminal.


----------



## neroden (Jan 14, 2015)

Actually, TexRail is going to stop pretty much exactly as close to terminal B as DART is to terminal A. The plans are quite clear; it's perfectly symmetrical to DART. Where DART is between the east service road and the east lanes of the expressway, TexRail will be between the west service road and the west lanes of the expressway.

Looking at it, it doesn't seem that there's any decent mass transportation option for those heading to the airport with checked luggage. The Centreport bus also sucks if you have checked luggage.


----------



## Anderson (Jan 14, 2015)

While it is true that none of the LD trains stop at BWI, they all stop at Alexandria (a whopping 15 minutes from WAS) and Newark. At a bare minimum an experimental stop for a year or two would seem to be worth Amtrak's consideration. It might also be worth doing this and blocking out Dallas/Fort Worth-Centerport tickets (unless connecting from the Heartland Flyer).


----------



## neroden (Jan 14, 2015)

I am sympathetic with the argument for stopping to serve the suburban populations in Arlington etc., but I would point out that typically stations on Amtrak's long-distance routes are an hour apart from each other, and rarely closer together than half an hour. The timing between Dallas and Fort Worth does not really allow for another stop.


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 14, 2015)

neroden said:


> The Centreport bus also sucks if you have checked luggage.


THIS, because you cannot get checked bags off Amtrak, unless they put in a station, which is not going to happen.


----------



## afigg (Jan 14, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> I'm not saying that folks are going to take the Texas Eagle from Chicago or LA or even El Paso or San Antonio to Centreport to get to DFW. But it's not out of line to make as efficient as possible transfer for folks coming in from Longview/Marshall or McGregor and Cleburne. As I said before, the extra hours from DAL to the terminals may not be that much different, but it would sure be a time savings from the West.


A fundamental problem with taking an LD train to get a flight at the airport is the lack of on-time reliability. Just a fact of life when the TE is covering 981 miles from CHI to DAL before it even gets to the TRE.

Ok, so you are in Longview TX and you want to take the TE #21 to DFW airport. But #21 may be 3 hours late. If you have a non-refundable reservation or one a with a hefty change, do you book a flight 6 hours after the TE gets to the Dallas or Centrepoint stop to give a big enough buffer? If the TE is on-time, is the plan to sit around the airport an extra 4 hours? How many people are going to do this? Not many or at least very few more than once. LD trains are not for someone trying to make anything close to a tight connection. To take an Amtrak train from Longview to flights at DFW airport, really need a multiple daily frequency corridor service such as FW-Dallas to Shreveport.

Here are the departure times of #21 for the last 10 days in the Status map archives database. Yes, there were some bad delays for the TE recently, but still, take this train to take a scheduled flight departure time?


```
History for Amtrak 21 at DAL
Origin Date Sch DP Act DP Comments Service Disruption Cancellations
01/11/2015 01/12/2015 11:50 AM 12:43PM Departed: 53 minutes late.
01/10/2015 01/11/2015 11:50 AM 2:13PM Departed: 2 hours, 23 minutes late.
01/09/2015 01/10/2015 11:50 AM 6:24PM Departed: 6 hours, 34 minutes late. SD
01/08/2015 01/09/2015 11:50 AM 2:28PM Departed: 2 hours, 38 minutes late.
01/07/2015 01/08/2015 11:50 AM 10:25PM Departed: 10 hours, 35 minutes late. SD
01/06/2015 01/07/2015 11:50 AM 11:50AM Departed: On time.
01/05/2015 01/06/2015 11:50 AM 2:00PM Departed: 2 hours, 10 minutes late.
01/04/2015 01/05/2015 11:50 AM 2:48PM Departed: 2 hours, 58 minutes late.
01/03/2015 01/04/2015 11:50 AM 11:50AM Departed: On time.
01/02/2015 01/03/2015 11:50 AM 1:30PM Departed: 1 hour, 40 minutes late.
Average DP delay for 10 records found: 2 hours and 59 minutes late
```


----------



## cirdan (Jan 14, 2015)

tonys96 said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> > The Centreport bus also sucks if you have checked luggage.
> ...


I think Neroden meant checked luggage on the airline. Seeing airlne carry on restrictions are much stricter than train ones, more people are likely to need to check air luggage than train luggage.


----------



## cirdan (Jan 14, 2015)

neroden said:


> Actually, TexRail is going to stop pretty much exactly as close to terminal B as DART is to terminal A. The plans are quite clear; it's perfectly symmetrical to DART. Where DART is between the east service road and the east lanes of the expressway, TexRail will be between the west service road and the west lanes of the expressway.
> 
> Looking at it, it doesn't seem that there's any decent mass transportation option for those heading to the airport with checked luggage. The Centreport bus also sucks if you have checked luggage.


Looking at Google maps, it looks as if there is space alongside the service road to extend the Orange Line to the other terminals. The trains could then also serve as a landside transfer between terminals if the airport could pick up part of the costs to be able to offer that segment of the service for free.

Many other airport rail services have separate stations for different terminals if they are not walking distance.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 14, 2015)

neroden said:


> Actually, TexRail is going to stop pretty much exactly as close to terminal B as DART is to terminal A. The plans are quite clear; it's perfectly symmetrical to DART. Where DART is between the east service road and the east lanes of the expressway, TexRail will be between the west service road and the west lanes of the expressway.


You are right. I stand corrected. I was looking at the DFW-North station - a stupid stop designed ONLY to carry employees from their parking lot. That makes for an expensive shuttle.



neroden said:


> I am sympathetic with the argument for stopping to serve the suburban populations in Arlington etc., but I would point out that typically stations on Amtrak's long-distance routes are an hour apart from each other, and rarely closer together than half an hour. The timing between Dallas and Fort Worth does not really allow for another stop.


 Though that is the general practice, there are enough exceptions to make that point BS.



tonys96 said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> > The Centreport bus also sucks if you have checked luggage.
> ...


 We're going around in circles here. I addressed the checked luggage issue and that Amtrak should consider full services here. Plenty of important stops don't offer checked baggage service.



afigg said:


> A fundamental problem with taking an LD train to get a flight at the airport is the lack of on-time reliability. Just a fact of life when the TE is covering 981 miles from CHI to DAL before it even gets to the TRE.


That's something that has to be worked out with the Freights and Amtrak. This may not be anything more than anecdotal, but it seems to be that whenever Amtrak and a commuter line co-exist, the ontime performance seems to improve. IE: When NM Railrunner entered service in ABQ and Sunrail in Florida, I would expect performance improvements along the TRE. This is because when Amtrak co-exists with a commuter line that owns their ROW, THEY get priority over Amtrak. I know it's not perfect on the SWC or the Silvers, and I wouldn't expect it to be perfect on the TE. But with some rational expectations, time wasting can be reasonably mitigated.



cirdan said:


> I think Neroden meant checked luggage on the airline. Seeing airlne carry on restrictions are much stricter than train ones, more people are likely to need to check air luggage than train luggage.


 Neroden and Tony meant checked Amtrak luggage, but you're right. Not everyone boards or disembarks at a station that checks bags.


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 14, 2015)

cirdan said:


> tonys96 said:
> 
> 
> > neroden said:
> ...


I think you are wrong.


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 14, 2015)

cirdan said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, TexRail is going to stop pretty much exactly as close to terminal B as DART is to terminal A. The plans are quite clear; it's perfectly symmetrical to DART. Where DART is between the east service road and the east lanes of the expressway, TexRail will be between the west service road and the west lanes of the expressway.
> ...


There is Skylink in the airport now, after TSA, and Terminal Link buses there already. Dart will not extend rail to each terminal. There is no political will here for that at all.


----------



## battalion51 (Jan 15, 2015)

neroden said:


> I am sympathetic with the argument for stopping to serve the suburban populations in Arlington etc., but I would point out that typically stations on Amtrak's long-distance routes are an hour apart from each other, and rarely closer together than half an hour. The timing between Dallas and Fort Worth does not really allow for another stop.


I agree with Venture, there are multiple cases in major metropolitan areas where Long a Distance trains stop at suburban stops. A few examples that come to mind: Southwest Chief with Fullerton, Riverside, and San Bernadino. Cal Zephyr with Richmond and Martinez. Silver Service with Hollywood, Deerfield Beach, and Delray Beach. Eagle at Joliet. Sunset at Pomona and Ontario. Lake Shore at Croton. Empire Builder at Edmonds and Everett. The list goes on and on. 
Making stops at the suburbs of these major cities not only attracts additional ridership because you don't have to go as far out of your way to get to the station, but you help ease some of the burden at the larger stops. Adding a stop like Irving or Centreport would add maybe 3-4 minutes to the schedule, but if that adds ridership that's significant like it is at the suburban stops of other services, it'd be foolish to not do it. When you're in an urban area you should be stopping more often because there's more people to serve. When you're in rural America you stop in significant towns to serve those communities and those nearby.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jan 15, 2015)

I ride the Texas Eagle. I also fly to/from/through SAT, AUS, DFW, MDW, and ORD. I would seem to be a prime candidate for Texas Eagle service to any number of major airports. But there is no way I'd waste my time and effort with such a trip. Mainly because here in the US the logistical expectations and relative schedule keeping between railroads and airlines are so drastically different. Amtrak LD trains can generally get you to your destination within a few hours of the schedule. Even Amtrak trains which are recorded as being "on time" are often one or more hours late when arriving at intermediate destinations.

Meanwhile commercial aircraft generally depart within a few minutes of their schedule. There is simply no way to make these two services work together without some sort of formally guaranteed connection and I see no reason why any airline would put themselves in a position where they are forced to clean up after Amtrak. Taking an Amtrak LD train to catch a flight is basically a non-starter for me and I would imagine this would be true for most folks who are aware of the potential pitfalls.

That being said, I would absolutely support more stops in major cities for easier use of Amtrak LD services. San Antonio suffers from the same mindless sprawl that most American cities have experienced and is an extended stop for both the Texas Eagle and the Sunset Limited. It would seem that some of our extended dwell time could be used for serving the North East and South West areas of town in addition to the downtown station. Even a stop in New Branfels would work better for me than downtown San Antonio. All you would need is a platform and a parking lot. Unfortunately the ADA has apparently mandated that even flag stops require a million dollar up-front expense, and I don't see how that would ever be funded, but nonetheless I would welcome it.


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 15, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> I ride the Texas Eagle. I also fly to/from/through SAT, AUS, DFW, MDW, and ORD. I would seem to be a prime candidate for Texas Eagle service to any number of major airports. But there is no way I'd waste my time and effort with such a trip. Mainly because here in the US the logistical expectations and relative schedule keeping between railroads and airlines are so drastically different. Amtrak LD trains can generally get you to your destination within a few hours of the schedule. Even Amtrak trains which are recorded as being "on time" are often one or more hours late when arriving at intermediate destinations.
> 
> Meanwhile commercial aircraft generally depart within a few minutes of their schedule. There is simply no way to make these two services work together without some sort of formally guaranteed connection and I see no reason why any airline would put themselves in a position where they are forced to clean up after Amtrak. Taking an Amtrak LD train to catch a flight is basically a non-starter for me and I would imagine this would be true for most folks who are aware of the potential pitfalls.
> 
> That being said, I would absolutely support more stops in major cities for easier use of Amtrak LD services. San Antonio suffers from the same mindless sprawl that most American cities have experienced and is an extended stop for both the Texas Eagle and the Sunset Limited. It would seem that some of our extended dwell time could be used for serving the North East and South West areas of town in addition to the downtown station. Even a stop in New Branfels would work better for me than downtown San Antonio. All you would need is a platform and a parking lot. Unfortunately the ADA has apparently mandated that even flag stops require a million dollar up-front expense, and I don't see how that would ever be funded, but nonetheless I would welcome it.


I agree!

The problems with trying to do this on the TRE though is that unlike freight rail, the TRE will not give priority to Amtrak, (as if freights do  ) and the TRE will take priority if the Eagle is late going either direction. It takes the TRE 53 minutes to go from FTW to DAL.

Also, since the TRE is jointly owned by DART and the T, with 9 cities and the North Texas Council of Governments as partners, it will be difficult, at this time, to clear the liability hurdle to allow Amtrak to use any of the stations along the route. There is just not the political will there right now, might materialize in the future, though.

Then there is the parking dilemma. By contract, the TRE lots are "No Overnight Parking Allowed" and cars are towed after the latest departure/arrival each night. So Amtrak riders would need a lift to and from these stations. To change this would require a vote of all of the partner cities, the DART board and the board of the T, which would be difficult, if not impossible.

And there is still the baggage issue. I agree that having baggage handling at Centerport would alleviate this issue, but that would require Amtrak building and operating a station there, which is quite expensive. Dallas and some of the cities in DART might agree to help with some of the upfront costs for this, but in the current political climate, I *assure* you that Hurst, Richland Hills and Ft. Worth would not. Not sure about Irving, could go either way, as a former DART board member is now on their city council.

There is talk of connecting the TRE to Arlington/Grand Prairie by rail, it is currently connected with the MAX bus service (funded by City of Arlington, Arlington Chamber and UTA), but that rail service is waaaayyyy out in the future.

(Interesting tidbit: Overnight parking IS allowed at the UTA location on the MAX, so you can go from Arlington to DFW, by way of Centerport, to fly out and reverse the process coming home, all on a bus).


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jan 15, 2015)

Good post Chris! New Braunfels has 2 old Rail Stations ( one a Rail Museum), the old M-K-T ( Katy) and the old MOPAC

station that the Eagle passes on the way to SAS!

San Antonio also has the Grand old IG& N Station ( now a Credit Union) that the Eagle passes by on the long circular route around downtown to the Sunset Station.

As you know the Eagle also passes right beside the SA International Airport on the way into town from the NE!

But with the current Mayor being opposed to street cars and light rail, ( will y'all really elect her after she was appointed when Castro left for Washington, while promising not to run for the office?) I doubt if she'd be in favor of spending money on an airport stop!

San Marcos and Taylor are both stops for the Texas Eagle, both basically suburban Austin Stations, so as you say, this idea should work for lots of Metropolitan areas!

While we all support ADA, the requirements to spend so much money on platforms for flagstop or rural stations is idiotic!!!!


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jan 15, 2015)

Interesting topic, like lots of things guess we'll just have to agree to disagree without being disagreeable!

( the way it used to be in Washington before the take no prisoners era began!)


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 15, 2015)

jimhudson said:


> Good post Chris! New Braunfels has 2 old Rail Stations ( one a Rail Museum), the old M-K-T ( Katy) and the old MOPAC
> 
> station that the Eagle passes on the way to SAS!
> 
> ...


I believe Letitia Van de Putte will be San Antonio's next mayor.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 15, 2015)

I understand and appreciate all of your comments. Perhaps we will close this just agreeing to disagree.

I'm confused, however, at the following statement:



tonys96 said:


> Then there is the parking dilemma. By contract, the TRE lots are "No Overnight Parking Allowed" and cars are towed after the latest departure/arrival each night. So Amtrak riders would need a lift to and from these stations. To change this would require a vote of all of the partner cities, the DART board and the board of the T, which would be difficult, if not impossible.


 This sounds like a problem for TRE riders today that go to Centreport to transfer to DFW, not Amtrak riders who would get on and off at stations way outside of the TRE Zone like the five cities I've already mentioned. So far as I know, each of those offer free parking.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jan 15, 2015)

Tony: Excellent post from someone who is " in the loop" in the Metrolex political world and also understands transportation!


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 15, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> I understand and appreciate all of your comments. Perhaps we will close this just agreeing to disagree.
> 
> I'm confused, however, at the following statement:
> 
> ...


Correct! For those coming from Cleburne, Minneola, etc. But how would you keep people from wanting to board at Centerport?

I agree that it would be *great* to have Amtrak stop there, just disagree that the logistics would be as easy as you claim. It is a major hassle as is with luggage going from TRE to DFW on the bus. And if the Eagle were to be on time, pax would have to wait for the next TRE scheduled arrival to catch that bus. They could not schedule one to meet Amtrak with the Eagle's hit and miss arrival times.

However, with what I mentioned earlier, it is simply not going to happen anytime soon. And by soon, I mean 10 to 20 years, if ever. No political will for it to happen.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 16, 2015)

tonys96 said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> > I understand and appreciate all of your comments. Perhaps we will close this just agreeing to disagree.
> ...


To your first point, almost nobody lives near Centreport. They are a few apartments, but most within walking distance. I don't see that as an issue, but one that could be mitigated with a full up Amtrak station installed if the demand existed. But there is no free parking at Fort Worth or Dallas, either.
I agree with just about everything you are saying about political will, but it's ok to have the discussion. This forum ain't going to change nuthin'. But if there are a couple of boots on the ground that feel the same way I do, maybe it won't take 20 years. After all, it did take nearly 20 years just to get Amtrak moved from the UP to the old Rock Island.


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 16, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> tonys96 said:
> 
> 
> > VentureForth said:
> ...


You are correct about free parking in Dallas. However there IS parking. Just paid. There is no overnight parking at Centerport at all, free or paid. So a driver would still have to go to Dallas or Ft. Worth (where there is paid and free parking).

So a Centerport stop on Amtrak will help the few pax who are going to DFW, who do not have checked bags, and/or care to schlep them from the train to the bus. I agree with you on that! Still not gonna happen in my lifetime.

The free parking in Ft. Worth is in Sundance Square. Pick up your vehicle after hours on weekdays or anytime at all on weekends and all of your parking, no matter when it started, is free.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jan 16, 2015)

Can't you also park free across the tracks from the old T&P Station ( a beautiful place, now condos,worth a ride on TRE or a walk to see it!)which is the starting/ending Station for the TRE in FTW?

One of our members used to do this on Amtrak trips from FTW or to DFW to catch planes!


----------



## neroden (Jan 16, 2015)

To answer the raging question of the day:

I meant checked luggage on the airline. 

If you're going to DFW with luggage to check on the airline, neither the TRE/Centreport bus nor DART nor TexRail is going to be attractive.


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 16, 2015)

neroden said:


> To answer the raging question of the day:
> 
> I meant checked luggage on the airline.
> 
> If you're going to DFW with luggage to check on the airline, neither the TRE/Centreport bus nor DART nor TexRail is going to be attractive.


ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!

And if you have checked baggage on Amtrak, you would not be able to get it off the train at Centerport unless they built and manned a station there.


----------



## neroden (Jan 16, 2015)

tonys96 said:


> It takes the TRE 53 minutes to go from FTW to DAL.


FWIW, this is substantially less than the timetabled time which Amtrak currently takes over the Union Pacific.
It's interesting to realize that the ex-Rock Island routes are usually better passenger routes than the alternatives. A bit like the NY Central & Pennsy in the East. Perhaps it was the first mover advantage. Unfortunately, the Rock was allowed to be almost completely dismantled, unlike Penn Central, so there's a lot of work to be done to restore passenger service on the correct routes.


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 16, 2015)

neroden said:


> tonys96 said:
> 
> 
> > It takes the TRE 53 minutes to go from FTW to DAL.
> ...


And it is interesting that southbound Eagle has 1 hour 35 minutes scheduled time to make this trip, while northbound has only 1 hour. Must be those headwinds from the west slowing it down......


----------



## battalion51 (Jan 17, 2015)

There's definitely some pad in the schedule for the southbound. I wonder though if it has something to do with the timing of trains in the morning versus the afternoon and having to get across Tower 55. I expect though that even if the Eagle is right on the heels it will still be faster over TRE than over UP. Based on the schedule of TRE it shouldn't really be an issue, especially since nearly everything east of Centreport is double tracked.


----------



## tonys96 (Jan 17, 2015)

battalion51 said:


> There's definitely some pad in the schedule for the southbound. I wonder though if it has something to do with the timing of trains in the morning versus the afternoon and having to get across Tower 55. I expect though that even if the Eagle is right on the heels it will still be faster over TRE than over UP. Based on the schedule of TRE it shouldn't really be an issue, especially since nearly everything east of Centreport is double tracked.


Correct. If TE is on schedule, no conflict with TRE schedule! And we know the Eagle is always on schedule. ; )

Whatever, I agree it will generally be quicker over the TRE line.


----------



## TheTuck (Jan 17, 2015)

The current running time between FTW and DAL over the UP is about 50 mins. This includes a 10 minute wye move at Tower 55 in each direction. There's about 45 mins of padding on #21 and about 10 mins on #22.

As for TRE, I'm not familiar with the track layout or speeds but looking at the public timetables, the fastest runs between the two stations is 50 minutes. Of course this is with all 7 intermediate stations. In perfect conditions the Eagle could probably make the trip in 35-40 minutes. Looking even further, I see that the current departure times would leave a nice window for the Eagle with only one opposing TRE train to meet. This of course could change if Amtrak decides to tighten the schedule on other portions of the route. My opinion is the southern section between FTW and SAS should stay as is due to the Sunset Limited and Heartland Flyer connections. This would allow for a slightly earlier eastbound run from DAL to CHI and a slightly later run westbound.

Don't be surprised if Amtrak doesn't adjust anything other than station dwell times in FTW and DAL initially. The negotiation process with the host railroads is a long and tedious one.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Jan 17, 2015)

I made the run between DAL and FTW on the_* Eagle *_a couple times last Summer when the Tower 55 detour was in place and it took about 30 minutes with no in between stops or major slowdowns. And of course the southbound _*Eagle*_ pulls into FTW nose first ready to continue south without any wyeing; of course during the detour this was end of line and the engines were simply turned, putting the Trans on the tail for the trip north.


----------



## neroden (Jan 17, 2015)

Let's assume, for now, that Amtrak leaves Texas Eagle timings pretty much constant from Chicago to St. Louis, due to the ongoing (endless) construction work, and the involvement of CN and TRRA as well as UP, as well as Chicago Union Station operations and the BNSF wye.

Amtrak is already planning to add another station between Dallas and St. Louis. It would seem appropriate to negotiate a new schedule with UP from St. Louis to Dallas, tighten up the padding at Dallas, and move most of the remaining schedule padding to Ft. Worth. Then go back to BNSF and UP to renegotiate the Ft. Worth - San Antonio portion of the trip.

I think nearly all the time should be taken off the San Antonio end due to the extreme complications involved in rescheduling things up in Illinois.


----------



## printman2000 (Feb 15, 2015)

Anyone heard anything lately about this reroute? Been reading other places of a report that the plan has been scrapped due to a third party objecting.


----------



## The Chief (Feb 15, 2015)

Here's an article

http://www.star-telegram.com/news/traffic/your-commute/article4480770.html

that notes

*"Amtrak* will begin using the *Trinity Railway Express* line between downtown Fort Worth and Dallas in February (2015)."

I read the funny quote by *Peter LeCody*, Texas Rail Advocates prez:
“They had a lot of padding in the schedule, so hopefully they can take that out,” he said.

Yeah, they'll get right on that, Pete.


----------



## VentureForth (Feb 15, 2015)

Me thinks that article is what started the conversation. I think post #87 was looking for updates.


----------



## printman2000 (Feb 16, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> Me thinks that article is what started the conversation. I think post #87 was looking for updates.


That would be correct. Looking for updates on the reroute not the scheduling.


----------



## neroden (Feb 16, 2015)

There are unverified rumors that BNSF is making trouble. (Geez...) Don't any of the class Is know how to play nice with others?


----------



## tonys96 (Feb 17, 2015)

The Regional Transportation Council (RTC), which is a group of cities, counties and other interested parties, along with the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) have been discussion this move, as have the Cities who pay taxes to the T. There has been some political blowback. As you can guess, with many different entities, with many differing agendas, this has been a tricky tap dance to get done.

As we speak, UP is doing several grade crossing improvements, and tie replacements, on one of the lines in Grand Prairie and Arlington. Often that closes one of the lines, making only one usable. They recently replaced the other line with new welded rail and concrete ties. Just repairing the other. The Garrett Rail Yard on Arlington's east border is really busy these days, often putting together over mile long trains, with far less available track. They often have to use the through track simply to put together the trainsets. With this going on, it would have been a great time to move Amtrak to the TRE line.


----------



## VentureForth (Feb 17, 2015)

neroden said:


> There are unverified rumors that BNSF is making trouble. (Geez...) Don't any of the class Is know how to play nice with others?


I know that BNSF's dispatchers are in Fort Worth, and they have a decent presence in that area. But what part of the TRE do they have anything to do with?

Well, I just pulled up BNSF's system map and they amazingly call the TRE route "theirs" as opposed to hauling agreement or trackage rights. I suppose they control Tower 55, too, which should make them more amenable to the move.


----------



## neroden (Feb 17, 2015)

So the situation as it stands is this:

-- Amtrak, TRE, The T, and DART have signed an agreement to relocate Amtrak to the TRE route, at The T's expense

-- Relocating Amtrak to the TRE route is a prerequisite for spending money allocated back in 2008 by the federal government to double track a section of the TRE route -- otherwise it MUST be returned to the Feds. This money has a 2017 deadline for being spent, so it's fast approaching.

-- UP has made relocation of Amtrak to the TRE route a precondition for agreeing to sell/grant rights on the property needed for TEXRail, which is the top priority project of The T.

-- TEXRail has received environmental clearance (ROD) from the federal FTA, and has been told that it will receive a full funding grant agreement from the FTA. This will all evaporate if UP agreement is not reached, which will happen if Amtrak does not move to the TRE.

So there is a LOT RIDING ON THIS. Anyone obstructing this is interfering with hundreds of millions of federal funding and the top-priority project in Fort Worth.

Apparently the combined projects are requiring a redesign of the tracks & platforms immediately around Fort Worth ITC, so that may be the actual cause of delays.


----------



## VentureForth (Feb 23, 2015)

neroden said:


> Apparently the combined projects are requiring a redesign of the tracks & platforms immediately around Fort Worth ITC, so that may be the actual cause of delays.


The track situation at the Fort Worth ITC is not trivial. There are three boarding tracks at FTW. All three of the current tracks can be switched to the TRE line. This is how it's been for over a decade, now. The major problem is not going to be changed by this switch-a-roo. That problem is the fact that you can have three Amtrak trains and as many as two TRE trains in the station at the same time. (NB TE, SB TE, HF, EB TRE, WB TRE, if everyone's schedule is wonked out). OH yeah, and don't forget BNSF who still maintains trackage rights.


----------



## daveyb99 (Feb 23, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently the combined projects are requiring a redesign of the tracks & platforms immediately around Fort Worth ITC, so that may be the actual cause of delays.
> ...


Don't know who would pay, but More Platforms ... the only answer.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 23, 2015)

daveyb99 said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> > neroden said:
> ...


How about more efficient use and better schedule keeping? Right now trains sit at FTW for hours at a time taking up space. Compared to the really busy stations in the world FTW has more than enough platforms to work with. They're just needlessly inefficient with how they use what they already have.


----------



## neroden (Feb 24, 2015)

TRE and future TexRail trains will move very quickly out of the ITC, on their way to the T&P station and the tail tracks beyond it.

BNSF is not going to want trackage rights through the station onto the... dead-end tracks to the T&P station. Apparently BNSF is planning to shrink its large neighboring yard, which should keep BNSF away from the station tracks. This should not be a problem

Only the Amtrak trains are likely to be sitting in the station for significant periods. The trick is getting passengers to the Amtrak platform across the TRE/TexRail platforms...


----------



## saxman (Feb 26, 2015)

Currently on 21 right now from DAL, and on the UP line, still. Lots of construction going on, that I see.


----------



## Rover (Mar 12, 2017)




----------



## Rover (Mar 12, 2017)




----------

