# Proposals for Restored Gulf Coast Service



## jis

Here is a bit of progress report:

http://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/2016/04/20/passenger-rail-group-finding-priorities/83241732/

BTW, since it is highly unlikely that _Gulf Coast Service_ will have any relationship with the_ Sunset Limited_, this may be the time to split off the _Gulf Coast Service_ discussion into its own thread. It will either be a continuation of the _CONO _or a standalone trains. It will have nothing to do with the _Sunset Limited_, other than some sort of connection at NOL.


----------



## Palmetto

+1.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

jis said:


> Here is a bit of progress report:
> 
> http://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/2016/04/20/passenger-rail-group-finding-priorities/83241732/
> 
> BTW ... this may be the time to split off the _Gulf Coast Service_ discussion into its own thread. It will have nothing to do with the _Sunset Limited_, other than some sort of connection at NOL.


btw. Nice article. Thanks.

No 'Breaking News' but good overview of the continued and growing support for this proposed train. First I've seen that focused on the Florida end of it, with the links to the _Silvers_ in Orlando and Jacksonville.

Also a hint of someone thinking about a future second frequency, Orlando-Tallahassee. I'm cool with that. Ask for two trains, settle for one now and one we'll talk about later. LOL.


----------



## PRR 60

Starting with the three posts above, discussion of proposals for restoration of Gulf Coast service east of New Orleans has been move to this new topic. Prior posts on this subject are available in the older Daily Sunset Limited topic. Discussion of proposals for daily operation of the Sunset Limited can be continued in the prior topic.


----------



## Caesar La Rock

So Amtrak will be inspecting the Tallahassee station.

http://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/2016/04/26/amtrak-inspect-tallahassee-train-station-wednesday/83565726/


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Caesar La Rock said:


> So Amtrak will be inspecting the Tallahassee station.
> 
> 
> http://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/2016/04/26/amtrak-inspect-tallahassee-train-station-wednesday/83565726/





> Former Mayor John Marks, a member of the Gulf Coast Rail Working Group, a federal transportation panel tasked with analyzing the restoration of rail service along the Gulf Coast, said inspectors will determine whether any improvements are needed in order to reimplement the service.
> 
> It's part of an effort to give Congress a cost estimate to re-establish train service. *Congress, Marks said, has already authorized Amtrak to renew the route, but hasn't allocated any funds.*


Nice report by Sean Rossman in the _Tallahassee Democrat_. New to me is the claim that Congress has already authorized Amtrak to renew the route. Of course, the do or don't here is the funds.

+++++++++++++++++++

Is it just me? Restore, renew, reopen, re-establish, restart, return ... I'm good, and I can do without that "reimplement" thingie. LOL.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

jis said:


> BTW, since it is highly unlikely that _Gulf Coast Service_ will have any relationship with the_ Sunset Limited_, this may be the time to split off the _Gulf Coast Service_ discussion into its own thread. It will either be a continuation of the _CONO _or a standalone trains. It will have nothing to do with the _Sunset Limited_, other than some sort of connection at NOL.


So, the reply to the _Jeopardy!_ clue "Rail service that was severed in 2005 by Hurricane Katrina" (from the referenced article), would not be "What was the Sunset Limited, Alex?".


----------



## Ryan

There is a difference between "was" and "will".


----------



## jis

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> So, the reply to the _Jeopardy!_ clue "Rail service that was severed in 2005 by Hurricane Katrina" (from the referenced article), would not be "What was the Sunset Limited, Alex?".


Huh? Could you explain why that would not be the answer and what has been stated here that is inconsistent with that? Or is it that the difference between the past and future does not exist in your world view?


----------



## A Voice

The two main points I took away from the article are (1), as previously noted that Congress has already authorized resumption of the route, and (2) the budget estimate is being provided to Congress as well. This should properly and legally be a completely federally funded train, and thus it appears to be the intention. But there has been person after person on these and other forums pronouncing that Amtrak will only run the route if the states foot the bill.


----------



## jis

A Voice said:


> The two main points I took away from the article are (1), as previously noted that Congress has already authorized resumption of the route, and (2) the budget estimate is being provided to Congress as well. This should properly and legally be a completely federally funded train, and thus it appears to be the intention. But there has been person after person on these and other forums pronouncing that Amtrak will only run the route if the states foot the bill.


Actually, at least what I have been saying is that Amtrak will only run trains beyond the ones that they already run in the national network, that are paid for explicitly from a source other than the standard Amtrak operations grant for the national network, unless directed otherwise by the Congress. So if Congress finds the funds and directs Amtrak to run a train, of course they will run it irrespective of how long its run is.

Fortunately the New Orleans - Orlando train is more than 750 miles, so the state funding angle strictly speaking is not an issue. Though conversely, if a collection of states decide to fund a train that runs for a distance greater than 750 miles, I doubt anyone will prevent them from running the train. More likely it looks like these things might evolve as a partnership between the feds and the state(s) and local communities involved.


----------



## Hytec

Aren't there existing LD routes that operate with joint federal/state funding? Please understand that I'm ignorant on any details, just have a vague memory of reading this.


----------



## A Voice

jis said:


> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> 
> The two main points I took away from the article are (1), as previously noted that Congress has already authorized resumption of the route, and (2) the budget estimate is being provided to Congress as well. This should properly and legally be a completely federally funded train, and thus it appears to be the intention. But there has been person after person on these and other forums pronouncing that Amtrak will only run the route if the states foot the bill.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, at least what I have been saying is that Amtrak will only run trains beyond the ones that they already run in the national network, that are paid for explicitly from a source other than the standard Amtrak operations grant for the national network, unless directed otherwise by the Congress. So if Congress finds the funds and directs Amtrak to run a train, of course they will run it irrespective of how long its run is.
> 
> Fortunately the New Orleans - Orlando train is more than 750 miles, so the state funding angle strictly speaking is not an issue. Though conversely, if a collection of states decide to fund a train that runs for a distance greater than 750 miles, I doubt anyone will prevent them from running the train. More likely it looks like these things might evolve as a partnership between the feds and the state(s) and local communities involved.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, I would expect local communities to be partially or wholly responsible for stations, etc.


----------



## jis

Hytec said:


> Aren't there existing LD routes that operate with joint federal/state funding? Please understand that I'm ignorant on any details, just have a vague memory of reading this.


Arguably the Empire Builder has used some state funding to maintain a route, as is SWC currently. The state funding comes partly from the state and partly from other federal grants (e.g. TIGER and such).
Gulf Coast folks are promising some amount of local funding for infrastructure like stations etc. but are depending on federal funding to provide the operations subsidy.


----------



## Hytec

jis said:


> Gulf Coast folks are promising some amount of local funding for infrastructure like stations etc. but are depending on federal funding to provide the operations subsidy.


I get the sense that a significant number of Mississippi's elected state officials, predominately upstate residents, are reluctant to fund something that, in their minds, benefits only the "sinful" Coast population. Of course what we all are aware, but they deny vehemently, is that these same officials often enjoy the Coast benefits, quietly returning to their home churches for Sunday morning services.

Fortunately, Senator Thad Cochran, R-MS, Chairman, Senate Appropriations Committee, fully supports reinstatement of this route. In fact, he was at the controls bringing the inspection train into Gulfport, fulfilling a boyhood dream of driving a locomotive. By all accounts, the train's arrival was spot on.


----------



## Palmetto

If you look at the current Amtrak timetable for the Sunset Limited, there's a footnote about suspended service east of New Orleans. I guess this means, then, that Amtrak is the responsible provider of said service should it ever be resuscitated?


----------



## jis

I think the only purpose served by that foot note is that Amtrak did not have to go through the service discontinuance rigmarole. It is the height of cynical behavior on the part of Amtrak. When service is restored the claim can be made that it was just suspended for umpteen years. At present the plan is for Amtrak to operate the service, and in reality until the law is changed only Amtrak enjoys the special track access privilages, so irrespective of what is written in the timetable, Amtrak has to be a party to any such project to gain track access using Amtrak's special privileges. Note how Amtrak continues to be the operator of Hoosier State.


----------



## Mystic River Dragon

I agree completely, jis. Especially the "height of cynical behavior" part.


----------



## trainviews

A Voice said:


> The two main points I took away from the article are (1), as previously noted that Congress has already authorized resumption of the route, and (2) the budget estimate is being provided to Congress as well. This should properly and legally be a completely federally funded train, and thus it appears to be the intention. But there has been person after person on these and other forums pronouncing that Amtrak will only run the route if the states foot the bill.


It's actually not people here but Amtrak itself, that has previously made it clear, that it will not be run on Amtrak's dime. Someone else will have to pay for the operating deficit (and probably any capital expenses for rebuilt stations etc too, but that's less controversial).

As I understand the current rules Amtrak has to fully fund the operation of the _current_ LD routes out of its operating subsidy. But the 750 mile rule says nothing about having to fund newly started (or restarted) LD routes. Under some conditions (which the Gulf coast service fulfills) Amtrak _could _fund the train out of its present budget and thus make it federally funded, but the law nowhere states that it _should._ I think this is probably what is meant by congress already having authorised the route. AFAIK there has been no act specifically mentioning the Gulf Coast service, but I can be mistaken.

On the other hand the length over 750 miles does excempt it from the PRIIA corridor rules, where the states are required to fund not only the immediate operating deficit but also most of the allocated overhead. And what Amtrak has stated is that in order to run the train, someone else has to pay the avoidable costs not covered by ticket revenue including network effects = roughly the amount that the train would increase Amtrak's total operating deficit with. But the bill will not be slashed with overhead as the shorter state supported corridors are.

Is that fair? Maybe not, but it is the political realities that the proponents of the service face.

This leaves three options as I see it:

- The states or other local entities gang together and pay up.

- Congress increases its operating subsidy to Amtrak to cover the costs of the route

- Congress tells Amtrak to run the train within the current budget

Each of these options lets lose its own political brouhaha. But as the amount is pretty limited (can be found in the study released a while ago) there might be enough momentum to push one of the models through, or some combo of them.

So clearly Marks is lobbying for Congress to pick up the tap. The current do-nothing Congress doesn't look very likely to do that, but the political climate might be somewhat different after the election. If not the states or the cities en route will have to pony up, also for the operating subsidy, however likely that is...


----------



## jis

^ **LIKE** A very concise and IMHO correct characterization of the current situation.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan

trainviews said:


> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> 
> The two main points I took away from the article are (1), as previously noted that Congress has already authorized resumption of the route, and (2) the budget estimate is being provided to Congress as well. This should properly and legally be a completely federally funded train, and thus it appears to be the intention. But there has been person after person on these and other forums pronouncing that Amtrak will only run the route if the states foot the bill.
> 
> 
> 
> It's actually not people here but Amtrak itself, that has previously made it clear, that it will not be run on Amtrak's dime. Someone else will have to pay for the operating deficit (and probably any capital expenses for rebuilt stations etc too, but that's less controversial).
> 
> As I understand the current rules Amtrak has to fully fund the operation of the _current_ LD routes out of its operating subsidy. But the 750 mile rule says nothing about having to fund newly started (or restarted) LD routes. Under some conditions (which the Gulf coast service fulfills) Amtrak _could _fund the train out of its present budget and thus make it federally funded, but the law nowhere states that it _should._ I think this is probably what is meant by congress already having authorised the route. AFAIK there has been no act specifically mentioning the Gulf Coast service, but I can be mistaken.
> 
> On the other hand the length over 750 miles does excempt it from the PRIIA corridor rules, where the states are required to fund not only the immediate operating deficit but also most of the allocated overhead. And what Amtrak has stated is that in order to run the train, someone else has to pay the avoidable costs not covered by ticket revenue including network effects = roughly the amount that the train would increase Amtrak's total operating deficit with. But the bill will not be slashed with overhead as the shorter state supported corridors are.
> 
> Is that fair? Maybe not, but it is the political realities that the proponents of the service face.
> 
> This leaves three options as I see it:
> 
> - The states or other local entities gang together and pay up.
> 
> - Congress increases its operating subsidy to Amtrak to cover the costs of the route
> 
> - Congress tells Amtrak to run the train within the current budget
> 
> Each of these options lets lose its own political brouhaha. But as the amount is pretty limited (can be found in the study released a while ago) there might be enough momentum to push one of the models through, or some combo of them.
> 
> So clearly Marks is lobbying for Congress to pick up the tap. The current do-nothing Congress doesn't look very likely to do that, but the political climate might be somewhat different after the election. If not the states or the cities en route will have to pony up, also for the operating subsidy, however likely that is...
Click to expand...

The age old question: Who should pay, the federal government and/or the states? I guess it would depend on whether a route is "national" or "regional". I feel the 750 mile rule is stupid. I can argue some trains that run fewer miles than that benefit the nation and some trains than run more miles than that benefit certain states/cities much more than others. If Amtrak did run a train from LAX to Vegas, anyone from the country that can get to LAX can get to Vegas so even if that train is only a few hundred miles and only passes two states that would clearly be IMO a national train. On the other hand the Downeaster is clearly a regional/local train (unless more people want to visit Maine than I think). Of course what separates Vegas from Maine is a judgment call. Maybe all trains (old and new, long and short) should be jointly funded by the federal government and the states/cities it passes through. Make it some percentage for each (50-50, 25 national-75 local, whatever you think is reasonable). I don't think it should be 100% federal or 100% state/local and that includes current trains.


----------



## jis

Basically who should pay will be decided by Congress and depending on how well the Southern Rail Commission and its supporters in Congress manage to play it.

Afterall all these 750 mile rules and whatever are Congressional inventions. What they giveth they can taketh away generally or on a case by case basis.

In general it is probably a good idea to substantially fund operating subsidies for trains that cross multiple states federally, just like national highways that cross multiple states are substantially funded federally.


----------



## Eric S

I think we sometimes focus too much attention on the 750 mile rule (not that it can be completely ignored either).

But, if Congress changed the law tomorrow, it's not as if that would magically mean that Amtrak suddenly has the funding to add new trains. We would still face the question of who will fund any additional service. And without increased federal funding it would still largely fall to non-federal entities (states or local governments) to do so.

The 750 mile rule is obviously an arbitrary one and I agree with some of the arguments that have been made against it. It has, however, had the effect of prodding states to increase funding for (what are now "their") trains.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan

Eric S said:


> I think we sometimes focus too much attention on the 750 mile rule (not that it can be completely ignored either).
> 
> But, if Congress changed the law tomorrow, it's not as if that would magically mean that Amtrak suddenly has the funding to add new trains. We would still face the question of who will fund any additional service. And without increased federal funding it would still largely fall to non-federal entities (states or local governments) to do so.
> 
> The 750 mile rule is obviously an arbitrary one and I agree with some of the arguments that have been made against it. It has, however, had the effect of prodding states to increase funding for (what are now "their") trains.


Would Amtrak/Congress be more likely to start a long 1000+ mile train which requires sleepers, multiple sets, more labor, and more food or a short 100-200 mile train which requires a lot less (and are more reliable)?

If I was in charge and there was no rule, I'd ask Congress for LAX-Vegas, DAL-HOS, and CIN-CLE in a heartbeat.

Do you think Congress put in this rule to discourage Amtrak from starting any new trains?


----------



## jis

Nope. Congress with the approval of Amtrak put in the rule to force states to pay a larger share of the cost of trains that primarily serve a single state thus reducing pressure on Congress to increase Amtrak's operating budget and give some small level of protection to the LD trains. That was pretty much it if you see the history behind what went into PRIIA.


----------



## Eric S

There is nothing to prevent Congress from appropriating the funds now for a less-than-750-mile route and directing Amtrak to operate it. Congress can change or choose to ignore the 750 mile requirement. (Notwithstanding PRIIA section blah blah blah, Amtrak is directed to operate blah blah blah.)

The rule only matters to the extent that Amtrak has extra/unallocated/unassigned funds and is looking to start a new route. And last I checked, Amtrak is hardly swimming in extra cash. Yes, it reduces Amtrak's flexibility to experiment with shorter routes (although this is due as much to the issue with needing to serve existing endpoints as much as 750 miles), but your (or my) Representative or Senators could still choose to amend or rewrite an Amtrak appropriation bill to fund some new route. Or your (or my) state elected officials could choose to fund a new route too.

EDIT: Perhaps it's rather *unlikely* that Congress would choose to fund a train through what would be essentially an earmark, given that those have fallen out of favor. And maybe I'm rambling on and just repeating myself - I just keep coming back to the idea that whether or not there is a 750-mile requirement or not, the funds for this Gulf Coast train, or any other train, still need to be found. Anyway, back to regularly scheduled programming...


----------



## ScouseAndy

When the service was suspended between New Orleans and Florida did Amtrak state funding go down? If not surely it could be argued that Amtrak are already getting funding to run this route?


----------



## WoodyinNYC

ScouseAndy said:


> When the service was suspended between New Orleans and Florida did Amtrak state funding go down? If not surely it could be argued that Amtrak are already getting funding to run this route?


As a general rule, the Long Distance trains do not receive ANY state funding.

The LD trains usually run overnight (the Palmetto is not), and so have sleepers and diners. The corridor trains are state-supported routes, where Amtrak pays 15% and the state sponsors put up 85%. They run shorter distances with no overnight service and so no sleepers and diners. The two types of trains have very different cost structures.

The Sunset Ltd. never had any state support. When it was suspended, it affected Amtrak's budget, but had no effect on any state's spending.

The proposed "Gulf Coaster" would be a new and unique arrangement. We don't know how much, or if, CSX will demand for returning a passenger train to their line. If CSX demands upgrades as compensation, apparently the states could be asked to help out. But nothing is for sure at this point.

We do have estimates for the operating loss; but it is calculated differently from any other LD train, putting aside costs that other trains carry. As a result, the forecast operating loss is as low as $5 million. Whether that puny amount will be covered by Congress is one possibility. Or the states and cities could be asked to contribute. We just don't know at this point.

Clearly Amtrak wants to do the thing. And clearly, some powerful members of Congress want to have this train. It is an awkwardness that the general position of the majority in Congress has been anti-Amtrak, trying to make it go away. Now here come some senior members asking for Amtrak to expand in their states.

Fun to see how it will turn out.


----------



## west point

One has to wonder if the support for the NOL - ORL train is passed then maybe other congress critters might put in funds for other routes ?


----------



## Deni

I like the idea of an extended CONO, if only because it restores a Chicago to FL service that has been missing for decades, but I would prefer to see a restoration of a service more like the Floridian that hits Louisville and Nashville on the way to Orlando and Miami.


----------



## nshvlcat

Deni said:


> ..... but I would prefer to see a restoration of a service more like the Floridian that hits Louisville and Nashville on the way to Orlando and Miami.


I am in agreement with you. The TN Gen. Assembly, TDOT, and Mayor Berry of Nashville need to get behind this. I am also an advocate of expanded Amtrak day service to Memphis via the Illini or the Saluki out of Carbondale. There is also some movement in Bristol TN/VA to get train service to DC. The TN Assoc. of RR Passengers is a tireless advocate for restoring/expanding passenger rail in TN.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Deni said:


> I like the idea of an extended CONO, if only because it restores a Chicago to FL service that has been missing for decades, but I would prefer to see a restoration of a service more like the Floridian that hits Louisville and Nashville on the way to Orlando and Miami.


Don't get hung up on the far points of LD service. Usually *the end-to-end riders*, in this case say Chicagoland to Miami/Ft Lauderdale/West Palm Beach, will be *only about 15% of the total*. The maximum is about 30% on the _Capitol Ltd_ and that's a short route.

Usually the trains pile on riders going to or coming from the intermediate points.

On the _City of New Orleans_, for example, the CHI-New Orleans city pair is the 4th busiest, and at more than 900 miles, we can see that's only 8.3% of the total riders. That CHI-NOLA share is far behind the city pair figures for Memphis-NOLA, CHI-Champaign, and Jackson-NOLA.

One strong feature of the proposed _CONO/Gulf Coaster_ service is the dense string of intermediate points -- Biloxi and the casino coast (390,000 metro)-Mobile (415,000)-Pensacola (478,000)-Tallahassee (378,000)-Jacksonville (1,450,000). It won't depend on mainly riders NOLA (1,263,000)-Orlando (2,387,000), tho those are good anchor cities..

Lots of good info at the NARP site:

http://www.narprail.org/site/assets/files/1038/trains_2015.pdf


----------



## WoodyinNYC

nshvlcat said:


> Deni said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..... but I would prefer to see a restoration of a service more like the Floridian that hits Louisville and Nashville on the way to Orlando and Miami.
> 
> 
> 
> I am also an advocate of expanded Amtrak day service to Memphis via the Illini or the Saluki out of Carbondale. ... The TN Assoc. of RR Passengers is a tireless advocate for restoring/expanding passenger rail in TN.
Click to expand...

The day train to Memphis should come first, of course.

No extra equipment required. Just extend the _Saluki_. It now departs CHI at 7:15 a.m., reaches Champaign at 10:25 a.m., and stops at Carbondale at 1:45 p.m. Instead keep it going for 220 miles, another 5 hours or so at the same speed as the _CONO_, and it would stop in Memphis in the evening, 7ish. Morning return, the same equipment could head northbound at 11:15 a.m., picking up the existing schedule of the _Illini_ at Carbondale at 4:15 p.m., arriving CHI 9:45 p.m. as now. Riders would have a choice of the overnight _CONO_ or the new day train to/from Memphis, and riders love choices.

This extension of the existing state-supported train would double the service to Memphis (1,344,000 metro). And it would require very little additional subsidy, because Illinois already pays for most of the mileage, and the ridership gains from Memphis would greatly help the revenue side.

Of course you'll know that Amtrak floated this idea, even sent representatives to Memphis to talk it up, but got no money from Tennessee. So it's no go.

Adding, or restoring, the train along the Gulf Coast, and adding service Atlanta-Dallas-Ft Worth, would change the Southern conversation from "When will Amtrak die?" to "Can we get one of them new trains?" Virginia will help by talking up its plans to serve Bristol -- and then Knoxville and Chattanooga. That would build political support for trains at the two ends of Tennessee. Then a successful second train to Memphis will have a big impact. It will take a while, no doubt, but keep up your good work.


----------



## Hytec

WoodyinNYC said:


> One strong feature of the proposed _CONO/Gulf Coaster_ service is the dense string of intermediate points -- Biloxi and the casino coast (390,000 metro)-Mobile (415,000)-Pensacola (478,000)-Tallahassee (378,000)-Jacksonville (1,450,000). It won't depend on mainly riders NOLA (1,263,000)-Orlando (2,387,000), tho those are good anchor cities..
> 
> Lots of good info at the NARP site:
> 
> http://www.narprail.org/site/assets/files/1038/trains_2015.pdf


I agree, intermediate stop ridership can be significant. When I rode the Crescent on business between NOL and WAS in the 90s, I was surprised by the number of passengers on the intermediate stop platforms, especially between ATL and NOL. The number of weekly tour buses serving the Coast casinos is significant. I have no figures, but see them almost every day on I-10 and US-49. So there is a market for a daily MEM-NOL-ORD train.


----------



## zepherdude

I found this article, sounds pretty positive.........what do you think?

http://weartv.com/news/local/amtrak-passenger-service-on-track-for-rail-service-across-gulf-coast

Note, it says Daily Service!


----------



## Hytec

zepherdude said:


> I found this article, sounds pretty positive.........what do you think?
> 
> http://weartv.com/news/local/amtrak-passenger-service-on-track-for-rail-service-across-gulf-coast
> 
> Note, it says Daily Service!


Positive article, though superficial. I'm concerned that the Commission members are meeting once a month, giving only four meetings before the report is due to Congress in September. This gives very little time for the extensive analysis to determine route, schedule, equipment, facility repairs, operating costs, and funding sources. I sincerely hope the commission has the staff, resources, and information sources in place to accomplish this. Even more concerning is that the article implies that no decision has been made whether to run one train (NOL/ORL), or two trains (NOL/ORL & NOL/Mobile). This decision must be made before any further analysis can even begin.


----------



## jis

Hytec said:


> zepherdude said:
> 
> 
> 
> I found this article, sounds pretty positive.........what do you think?
> 
> http://weartv.com/news/local/amtrak-passenger-service-on-track-for-rail-service-across-gulf-coast
> 
> Note, it says Daily Service!
> 
> 
> 
> Positive article, though superficial. I'm concerned that the Commission members are meeting once a month, giving only four meetings before the report is due to Congress in September. This gives very little time for the extensive analysis to determine route, schedule, equipment, facility repairs, operating costs, and funding sources. I sincerely hope the commission has the staff, resources, and information sources in place to accomplish this. Even more concerning is that the article implies that no decision has been made whether to run one train (NOL/ORL), or two trains (NOL/ORL & NOL/Mobile). This decision must be made before any further analysis can even begin.
Click to expand...

I suspect you have not yet come across the detailed analysis document somehow:

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5302778ee4b07a6f640874ef/t/5670735bd8af10d0d84e4965/1450210139160/Gulf+Coast+Initiative+Report+2015.pdf

The choice is basically among (1) running a CONO extension to Mobile (2) Running a self standing NOL - ORL train with connections at NOL and JAX to other trains, (3) Running a NOL - Mobile train plus a thruway bus Mobile to JAX. The routes, schedules, costs and benefits are spelled out in the report referred to above. it is the equivalent of an EIS for this service restoration. The choice will partly depend on how much resources can be mobilized. In the future there may be a Mobile or Atmore terminator from NOL, but it is highly unlikely that that would be the first thing to happen. That would really not be restoration of Gulf Coast Service in a complete sense.

So yeah, the analysis is more or less already done. Now it is the time to actually execute.

From the discussions that we had in Senator Nelson's (D-FL) office where the Florida, Mississippi and Alabama delegations from NARP were present it seemed like minimally the Senator will push for the NOL - ORL train and not be opposed to the CONO extension. The Thruway bus would not be acceptable. Senator Wicker (R-MS) concurred later in a conversation in which Senator Thune (R-SD) who Chairs the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, was also supportive of that position. I was told by Nelson's staff, who also seems to work part time for Cory Booker (D-NJ), that he is a strong supporter of the proposal. It was Booker and Wicker that led the charge on the Senate PRRIA and the more recent proposed appropriation bills.

On the House side there are several Congresspeople both R and D, from the states involved who are on board, and Rep Corrine Brown (D) from Florida is all over it.

That is why the chances look good that something positive might fall out


----------



## Hytec

jis said:


> Hytec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> zepherdude said:
> 
> 
> 
> I found this article, sounds pretty positive.........what do you think?
> 
> http://weartv.com/news/local/amtrak-passenger-service-on-track-for-rail-service-across-gulf-coast
> 
> Note, it says Daily Service!
> 
> 
> 
> Positive article, though superficial. I'm concerned that the Commission members are meeting once a month, giving only four meetings before the report is due to Congress in September. This gives very little time for the extensive analysis to determine route, schedule, equipment, facility repairs, operating costs, and funding sources. I sincerely hope the commission has the staff, resources, and information sources in place to accomplish this. Even more concerning is that the article implies that no decision has been made whether to run one train (NOL/ORL), or two trains (NOL/ORL & NOL/Mobile). This decision must be made before any further analysis can even begin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I suspect you have not yet come across the detailed analysis document somehow:
> 
> http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5302778ee4b07a6f640874ef/t/5670735bd8af10d0d84e4965/1450210139160/Gulf+Coast+Initiative+Report+2015.pdf
> 
> The choice is basically among (1) running a CONO extension to Mobile (2) Running a self standing NOL - ORL train with connections at NOL and JAX to other trains, (3) Running a NOL - Mobile train plus a thruway bus Mobile to JAX. The routes, schedules, costs and benefits are spelled out in the report referred to above. it is the equivalent of an EIS for this service restoration. The choice will partly depend on how much resources can be mobilized. In the future there may be a Mobile or Atmore terminator from NOL, but it is highly unlikely that that would be the first thing to happen. That would really not be restoration of Gulf Coast Service in a complete sense.
> 
> So yeah, the analysis is more or less already done. Now it is the time to actually execute.
> 
> From the discussions that we had in Senator Nelson's (D-FL) office where the Florida, Mississippi and Alabama delegations from NARP were present it seemed like minimally the Senator will push for the NOL - ORL train and not be opposed to the CONO extension. The Thruway bus would not be acceptable. Senator Wicker (R-MS) concurred later in a conversation in which Senator Thune (R-SD) who Chairs the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, was also supportive of that position. I was told by Nelson's staff, who also seems to work part time for Cory Booker (D-NJ), that he is a strong supporter of the proposal. It was Booker and Wicker that led the charge on the Senate PRRIA and the more recent proposed appropriation bills.
> 
> On the House side there are several Congresspeople both R and D, from the states involved who are on board, and Rep Corrine Brown (D) from Florida is all over it.
> 
> That is why the chances look good that something positive might fall out
Click to expand...

Thanks Woody, I was unaware that comments in this thread were anything more than speculation by members, not a discussion based on the completed studies. I believe that Steven Palazzo (R-MS4) also supports this, though I haven't seen anything formal from his office. I hope the commission resolves the "options" before September, and presents a single recommendation to Congress, even if the recommendation contains two trains. I learned long ago to never present options to the federal bureaucracy, it only serves to muddy the waters.


----------



## jis

Hytec said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> I suspect you have not yet come across the detailed analysis document somehow:
> 
> http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5302778ee4b07a6f640874ef/t/5670735bd8af10d0d84e4965/1450210139160/Gulf+Coast+Initiative+Report+2015.pdf
> 
> The choice is basically among (1) running a CONO extension to Mobile (2) Running a self standing NOL - ORL train with connections at NOL and JAX to other trains, (3) Running a NOL - Mobile train plus a thruway bus Mobile to JAX. The routes, schedules, costs and benefits are spelled out in the report referred to above. it is the equivalent of an EIS for this service restoration. The choice will partly depend on how much resources can be mobilized. In the future there may be a Mobile or Atmore terminator from NOL, but it is highly unlikely that that would be the first thing to happen. That would really not be restoration of Gulf Coast Service in a complete sense.
> 
> So yeah, the analysis is more or less already done. Now it is the time to actually execute.
> 
> From the discussions that we had in Senator Nelson's (D-FL) office where the Florida, Mississippi and Alabama delegations from NARP were present it seemed like minimally the Senator will push for the NOL - ORL train and not be opposed to the CONO extension. The Thruway bus would not be acceptable. Senator Wicker (R-MS) concurred later in a conversation in which Senator Thune (R-SD) who Chairs the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, was also supportive of that position. I was told by Nelson's staff, who also seems to work part time for Cory Booker (D-NJ), that he is a strong supporter of the proposal. It was Booker and Wicker that led the charge on the Senate PRRIA and the more recent proposed appropriation bills.
> 
> On the House side there are several Congresspeople both R and D, from the states involved who are on board, and Rep Corrine Brown (D) from Florida is all over it.
> 
> That is why the chances look good that something positive might fall out
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Woody, I was unaware that comments in this thread were anything more than speculation by members, not a discussion based on the completed studies. I believe that Steven Palazzo (R-MS4) also supports this, though I haven't seen anything formal from his office. I hope the commission resolves the "options" before September, and presents a single recommendation to Congress, even if the recommendation contains two trains. I learned long ago to never present options to the federal bureaucracy, it only serves to muddy the waters.
Click to expand...

Don't know what you are thanking Woody for considering that I posted the response to your post giving you all the information 

BTW the name Steven Palazzo sounds familiar, though I don't think I met him when I was on the Hill a few weeks back.

it seems that the primary choice of the local folks is to have their own self standing train which is not perturbed by late running of other trains etc. though the fact that the CONO extension actually performs better, might sway the decision.

We will probably find out from Nelson's office which way the wind blows before things get taken up for consideration in Senator Thune's Committee, which is the one that has to find the funds for it from the Senate side. It is unlikely that the House will do anything about it. If it gets into the final bill it will be through reconciliation between the House and the Senate bill. Most likely all that will have to wait until after the election anyway.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan

I have no problem with an extended CONO but if they are going with a standalone NOL-ORL they should consider running it to SAS to give daily service for NOL-HOS-SAS. Passengers wanting to go from Florida to California could then do it with a single transfer instead of two.


----------



## jis

No. They will not be running it to SAS. it will be a purely NOL - ORL service. There is already a train that runs to SAS. Just making it daily should be the first project. Please stop thinking up various schemes for mucking up something that we are close to getting in the bag.

Besides the very reason why they want a local train covering just the four states is defeated by extending it to anywhere else.

There is a separate effort in the works for what was called the "Crescent Star", the Meridien to Fort Worth section off of the Crescent. But that is not as far along as the Gulf Coast effort. As for Sunset Limited, I get the sense that the politics of it is more complicated and no one wants to touch it with a ten foot barge pole at this time.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Old sayings:

" Half a loaf is better than none! "

" Be careful what you ask for, you might just get it! "


----------



## Hytec

"Don't know what you are thanking Woody for considering that I posted the response to your post giving you all the information "

Mea Culpa.... :giggle:
Though I say again, thanks for the information, regardless of messenger. Definitely relieves my uninformed concerns.

Are there any reliable rumors as to funding sources and availability? The MS legislative session ended a few weeks ago without mentioning this issue. I doubt if Gov. Bryant would call a special session for this, especially since he signed corporate, individual, and economic inducement tax cuts, while simultaneously reducing most budgets by about 5%. Questionable economic frugality in light of projected lower FY16 income. :unsure:


----------



## jis

The Senators and Congress(wo)men are figuring out ways to add explicit funding/language either in the Amtrak LD operations appropriation or in some other suitable pot in the federal appropriation. Afterall, adding $5 to $10 million or so (with special instructions attached) to a $1 billion plus National Operations Appropriation should not be rocket science. But there are other possibilities that have been discussed too apparently.


----------



## ParanoidAndroid

How long would a restored Gulf Coast Service take to operate NOL-JAX right now, taking into account the condition of the tracks? I know that the reason that Amtrak didn't reinstate service immediately after the tracks were fixed, was that the condition of the tracks weren't acceptable for passenger rail (too slow). Anyone have ideas, other than looking at the employee timetables for all the subdivisions and doing the math?


----------



## dogbert617

WoodyinNYC said:


> nshvlcat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Deni said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..... but I would prefer to see a restoration of a service more like the Floridian that hits Louisville and Nashville on the way to Orlando and Miami.
> 
> 
> 
> I am also an advocate of expanded Amtrak day service to Memphis via the Illini or the Saluki out of Carbondale. ... The TN Assoc. of RR Passengers is a tireless advocate for restoring/expanding passenger rail in TN.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The day train to Memphis should come first, of course.
> 
> No extra equipment required. Just extend the _Saluki_. It now departs CHI at 7:15 a.m., reaches Champaign at 10:25 a.m., and stops at Carbondale at 1:45 p.m. Instead keep it going for 220 miles, another 5 hours or so at the same speed as the _CONO_, and it would stop in Memphis in the evening, 7ish. Morning return, the same equipment could head northbound at 11:15 a.m., picking up the existing schedule of the _Illini_ at Carbondale at 4:15 p.m., arriving CHI 9:45 p.m. as now. Riders would have a choice of the overnight _CONO_ or the new day train to/from Memphis, and riders love choices.
> 
> This extension of the existing state-supported train would double the service to Memphis (1,344,000 metro). And it would require very little additional subsidy, because Illinois already pays for most of the mileage, and the ridership gains from Memphis would greatly help the revenue side.
> 
> Of course you'll know that Amtrak floated this idea, even sent representatives to Memphis to talk it up, but got no money from Tennessee. So it's no go.
> 
> Adding, or restoring, the train along the Gulf Coast, and adding service Atlanta-Dallas-Ft Worth, would change the Southern conversation from "When will Amtrak die?" to "Can we get one of them new trains?" Virginia will help by talking up its plans to serve Bristol -- and then Knoxville and Chattanooga. That would build political support for trains at the two ends of Tennessee. Then a successful second train to Memphis will have a big impact. It will take a while, no doubt, but keep up your good work.
Click to expand...

I love that idea of extending the Illini and Saluki trains to Memphis, wish that would occur. It'd probably take Tennessee deciding to fund that extension(and maybe also Kentucky, if it were to stop in Fulton, KY?), for this to ever occur. And like others, I greatly agree in wishing there was some sort of Chicago to Florida train service. The Floridian never should've been eliminated all those years ago, but I suppose extending the CONO to go east to Florida to make up for the Sunset's elimination east of New Orleans is better than nothing. It really is sad that cities like Louisville and Nashville have no train service at all.  And I think the Floridian also served Bowling Green, KY, Birmingham, and Dothan, AL, right? Correct me if I'm wrong, I looked up that train and am only sure about it stopping in a few mentioned cities.

Trying to remember the URL of that historic Amtrak pdf timetable website, but I'm oddly forgetting it for whatever weird reason.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan

Best source for old timetables: timetables.org

Floridian, 1979: http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19790429&item=0041. Also comes with an old Panama Limited schedule.


----------



## DryCreek

jis said:


> There is a separate effort in the works for what was called the "Crescent Star", the Meridien to Fort Worth section off of the Crescent. But that is not as far along as the Gulf Coast effort.


Well, that would make a lot of sense. That could open up a lot of city pairs for travel to the east coast again. I say build HSR tracks right down the middle of I-20. Nothing would get the attention of sleepy drivers with bored, fussy kids better than to be passed by a train while "zooming" along the highway at 70 mph.


----------



## jis

maxbuskirk said:


> How long would a restored Gulf Coast Service take to operate NOL-JAX right now, taking into account the condition of the tracks? I know that the reason that Amtrak didn't reinstate service immediately after the tracks were fixed, was that the condition of the tracks weren't acceptable for passenger rail (too slow). Anyone have ideas, other than looking at the employee timetables for all the subdivisions and doing the math?


Ask and we shall deliver. No need to guess and do any math.

The current proposals are to run NOL to ORL, with a stop at JAX, which will involve wying the train to get it to head out in the right direction. Maintenance at the Florida end will be at the Sanford Auto Train facility.

Look at pages 21 and 33 for conceptual schedules developed by Amtrak taking into consideration all current facts on the ground, in the following document:

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5302778ee4b07a6f640874ef/t/5670735bd8af10d0d84e4965/1450210139160/Gulf+Coast+Initiative+Report+2015.pdf


----------



## Palmetto

All very interesting. I'm wondering how far along the discussions are between Amtrak and CSX concerning infrastructure improvements required by the latter, if any. My impression is that the route is not heavily populated with CSX traffic for most of the way, so perhaps there'll be nothing earth-shaking coming from CSX.


----------



## jis

PTC requirements from FRA may be an issue.


----------



## Palmetto

jis said:


> PTC requirements from FRA may be an issue.


A BIG issue.


----------



## jis

Palmetto said:


> All very interesting. I'm wondering how far along the discussions are between Amtrak and CSX concerning infrastructure improvements required by the latter, if any. My impression is that the route is not heavily populated with CSX traffic for most of the way, so perhaps there'll be nothing earth-shaking coming from CSX.


Overall the current state that I have heard from various sources is that it is at least three to five years away. It will take that much time to line the ducks up and execute on the modifications needed to get the thing going. Some very optimistic people are saying two years, but I cannot see how anyone would be able to pull that off even if Congress actually appropriated the money in the 2018 spending bill.


----------



## Shanghai

Perhaps the termination point should be Tampa rather than Orlando.

The currently is a wy capability in use for the Silver Star and the city

of Tampa is one of the fastest growing cities in the USA.


----------



## jis

Shanghai said:


> Perhaps the termination point should be Tampa rather than Orlando.
> 
> The currently is a wy capability in use for the Silver Star and the city
> 
> of Tampa is one of the fastest growing cities in the USA.


The choice of Orlando is because it is close to Sanford where the consist can be serviced. There is more to turning a train than just putting it around a wye. The Tampa servicing base could be reinstated, but that costs more money, when we don;t even have the money to start the basic service, and Florida State that will not throw in a single dime as long as we have the current government in Florida. Florida DOT is conspicuously absent from the group that is trying too restore this service, and no attempt so far to get the current government to make a move on that has born any fruit so far.


----------



## ToniCounter

were there ever any Amtrak service from Chicago to stations in Florida?


----------



## jis

Yes. The Floridian. Chicago to Miami.


----------



## battalion51

Yes, the Floridian was run until 1979 via Nashville and Birmingham.

Also, as to the Tampa idea, it looks like they're going to try and turn the eastbound train for the westbound same day (note only two additional sets of equipment needed). If the train continued to Tampa that would be impossible. Even turning same day in Sanford seems like a heavy lift to me, but I guess if the eastbound is late they could just make up a set from equipment in the yard at Sanford.


----------



## ToniCounter

jis said:


> Yes. The Floridian. Chicago to Miami.


What Amtrak trains would I have been on, if travelling from Washington, DC to Orlando, FL, back in 1980 or 1981?

(sadly, I only remember 2 things about the train... pretty good food in the dining car... and multiple BIG roaches in the coach cars!!!)  

Thanks!


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan

ToniCounter said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. The Floridian. Chicago to Miami.
> 
> 
> 
> What Amtrak trains would I have been on, if travelling from Washington, DC to Orlando, FL, back in 1980 or 1981?
> 
> (sadly, I only remember 2 things about the train... pretty good food in the dining car... and multiple BIG roaches in the coach cars!!!)
> 
> Thanks!
Click to expand...

Same ones that exist today:

http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19811025&item=0029

They also had the Silver Palm/Palmetto to Florida but they eventually got truncated to Savannah.


----------



## ToniCounter

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> Same ones that exist today:
> 
> http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19811025&item=0029
> 
> They also had the Silver Palm/Palmetto to Florida but they eventually got truncated to Savannah.


wait. is there a chance that the same cars are still running today???


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Is there a proposed schedule yet for the route? Will it have connections to the Silver Star and/or Silver Meteor? Personally if there will be a bus connection rather than train between Orlando and Tampa I would rather go via WAS. At least going south a direct train to Tampa is available and one could easily be made going north with few adjustments to the schedule. I also believe the scenery to be better going via WAS.

I believe the mileage is actually shorter via the CL and SM and is only slightly longer between the CL and SS when compared to the CONO. Of course, if there was a connection between the CONO and SS I would definitely take that going north rather than the TPA-ORL bus to connect to the SM.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Is there a proposed schedule yet for the route?


Yes, jjs's post on the previous page (#49)


----------



## jis

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Is there a proposed schedule yet for the route? Will it have connections to the Silver Star and/or Silver Meteor?


For a reference to the document that contains the proposed schedule for the proposed New Orleans - Orlando service see message 49 above.

The CONO extension is one of the choices among three. I understand that many of the locals prefer the separate train option due to the likelihood of a more reliable schedules for the largest number of expected users of the service, but the CONO option overall costs less. So it is not quite given that the CONO option will be finally chosen. Either way, the distance is such that it will be a national system train.

And no, it does not connect with the Silver Star either northbound or southbound at Orlando or Jacksonville.


----------



## Palmetto

ToniCounter said:


> Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Same ones that exist today:
> 
> http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19811025&item=0029
> 
> They also had the Silver Palm/Palmetto to Florida but they eventually got truncated to Savannah.
> 
> 
> 
> wait. is there a chance that the same cars are still running today???
Click to expand...

Only the dining cars.


----------



## ParanoidAndroid

If we delay eastbound 2 and southbound 97 then Tallahassee on 2 and Savannah on 97 will get better call times, while Pensacola gets 11:45pm. (Tallahassee at 6am, Savannah at 7:40am)

How will that go?

And westbound really can't get fixed. Pensacola will be in the graveyard shift westbound, but I'd rather leave it rather than putting Mobile in it too.


----------



## keelhauled

maxbuskirk said:


> If we delay eastbound 2 and southbound 97 then Tallahassee on 2 and Savannah on 97 will get better call times, while Pensacola gets 11:45pm. (Tallahassee at 6am, Savannah at 7:40am)
> 
> How will that go?
> 
> And westbound really can't get fixed. Pensacola will be in the graveyard shift westbound, but I'd rather leave it rather than putting Mobile in it too.


Lengthening the eastbound schedule makes an already tight (4 hour) same day turn in Orlando even harder. So the answer is badly. I don't know what relevance 97 has to anything, it connects southbound on its existing schedule just fine, and 2 is entirely out of the picture.


----------



## jis

Yeah. I think the proposed schedule is just fine and does not really need to be changed. Any improvement in connectivity will be very marginal at the cost of inconveniencing many locally.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan

I don't think you gain much by connecting from a Gulf Coast route to either the Silver Meteor/Star. New Orleans has direct access to the NEC already with the Crescent.

I would like to see more connectivity in NOL but with the SL leaving early morning and arriving in the evening kills any possible same day connections as is the case in CHI. Florida to Texas will at the very least require a connection and an overnight stay.


----------



## battalion51

The idea behind Meteor connectivity is mostly to allow connections to the rest of Florida. Passengers stay on the CONO til Orlando, and then get on the Meteor (where it usually has a lot of surplus capacity from folks exiting there). Certainly it opens the door to connections at Jacksonville to parts of the Carolinas with a longer connection time, or for those boarding on the Gulf a Coast to reach the Northeast.


----------



## Hytec

It will be interesting to see what affect the new Amtrak President's policy and personnel changes have on this proposal. Hopefully, before the end of 2017 we will see a trend in his management actions regarding nationwide LD train service. I know both of Mississippi's Senators are 100% behind restoration and have their staffs actively working the proper Washington and State corridors. I only hope that Alabama's and Florida's Senators share that enthusiasm and effort.


----------



## jis

It is Congress' appropriation which is way more critical than Amtrak CEO's policy I think. All the policy in the world cannot be acted upon without money.

In Florida, Nelson shares the enthusiasm and Rubio definitely does not (that is when actually deigns to present himself in the Senate and vote at all). He is up for re-election if he makes it through the primary on the 30th. It is the Alabama folks who are really enthusiastic. Louisiana is lukewarm.


----------



## Hytec

jis said:


> It is Congress' appropriation which is way more critical than Amtrak CEO's policy I think. All the policy in the world cannot be acted upon without money.
> 
> In Florida, Nelson shares the enthusiasm and Rubio definitely does not (that is when actually deigns to present himself in the Senate and vote at all). He is up for re-election if he makes it through the primary on the 30th. It is the Alabama folks who are really enthusiastic. Louisiana is lukewarm.


I agree whole-heartedly, that's why I raised the behind-the-scenes persuasion role of Senators Cochran and Wicker and their staffs. Without the legislative thrust, even the greatest of plans is dead in the water. MS, AL, and FL, both Federal and State, are the major players. Louisiana is a minor player in this issue. LA would have no station stops. LA's only benefit might be Coastal travelers wanting to enjoy NOLA as an interim or end-point destination. Otherwise these trains would let New Orleanians leave the Big Easy to enjoy MS casinos, and FL beaches.


----------



## jis

The fly in the ointment at present is there is very little support in the Florida legislature or in the Governor's office. It is mostly an Alabama project for now with some town and county level support in a far corner of Florida. There is strong support from a Dem Congresswoman who is under indictment and probably will lose the upcoming election.


----------



## ParanoidAndroid

I didn't mean connection. Just wanted to improve Tallahassee at 5am. I didn't spot the tight turn around time at ORL.


----------



## Palmetto

keelhauled said:


> maxbuskirk said:
> 
> 
> 
> If we delay eastbound 2 and southbound 97 then Tallahassee on 2 and Savannah on 97 will get better call times, while Pensacola gets 11:45pm. (Tallahassee at 6am, Savannah at 7:40am)
> 
> How will that go?
> 
> And westbound really can't get fixed. Pensacola will be in the graveyard shift westbound, but I'd rather leave it rather than putting Mobile in it too.
> 
> 
> 
> Lengthening the eastbound schedule makes an already tight (4 hour) same day turn in Orlando even harder. So the answer is badly. I don't know what relevance 97 has to anything, it connects southbound on its existing schedule just fine, and 2 is entirely out of the picture.
Click to expand...

What about the option of teminating both the Palmetto and the CONO in Jacksoville, and move the crew/service base down to Jacksonville? The negative there is that folks going to places between JAX and ORL lose a one-seat ride, but the positive is that there is more time to service the CONO and establish some recovery time for the return westbound.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Palmetto said:


> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> maxbuskirk said:
> 
> 
> 
> If we delay eastbound 2 and southbound 97 then Tallahassee on 2 and Savannah on 97 will get better call times, while Pensacola gets 11:45pm. (Tallahassee at 6am, Savannah at 7:40am)
> 
> How will that go?
> 
> 
> 
> Lengthening the eastbound schedule makes an already tight (4 hour) same day turn in Orlando even harder. So the answer is [it will go] badly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What about the option of terminating both the Palmetto and the CONO in Jacksonville, and move the crew/service base down to Jacksonville? The negative is that folks going to places between JAX and ORL lose a one-seat ride, but the positive is more time to service the CONO and establish some recovery time for the return westbound.
Click to expand...

Won't the Orlando theme parks be a huge draw for riders?

And besides losing riders heading for metro Daytona Beach, we'd lose 1 of 3 trains JAX-ORL. I see that as the beginning of a corridor service. Now all three trains will head south within a few morning hours. Perhaps add a northbound train ORL-JAX that becomes an afternoon train JAX-Tallahassee. That gets you go-and-return same day business. (The cure for what ails Amtrak is more Amtrak.)

This CONO-based train will be successful, fearless forecast -- and then improvements can begin. Lots of slow track on this route.

The long segment Pensacola-Tallahassee can stay slow; overnight has to happen somewhere (until there's a second frequency).

But shave 15 minutes off New Orleans-Mobile? Make it half an hour out of the timetable there with any Stimulus-sized funding.

Will any minutes come out of the trip when Orlando's commuter rail extends north on the shared tracks?

Put some of the next Stimulus money into upgrades JAX-ORL to make faster times and room for more trains on that by-then emerging corridor.

Somewhere those total up and the turn-around time gets more comfortable.


----------



## jis

Actually DLD - ORL is now owned and operated by Central Florida Rail Commuter who runs SunRail. JAX - DLD is owned by CSX. So no. nothing will come off on DLD - ORL. It is what it is. Currently there are no further plans or funds for acquiring the rest of the trackage between DLD and JAX.

If the locals have their druthers, they'd rather spend any funds available to extend from DeBary to Daytona along the I-4 Corridor, which would be a new construction. There has already been calls to retain easements along I-4 to construction of such at a future date.


----------



## AmtrakLKL

battalion51 said:


> Yes, the Floridian was run until 1979 via Nashville and Birmingham.
> 
> Also, as to the Tampa idea, it looks like they're going to try and turn the eastbound train for the westbound same day (note only two additional sets of equipment needed). If the train continued to Tampa that would be impossible. Even turning same day in Sanford seems like a heavy lift to me, but I guess if the eastbound is late they could just make up a set from equipment in the yard at Sanford.


The train will not turn same-day in Sanford. The consist will overnight for maintenance and go back out the next day. It will same-day turn in New Orleans. There are three sets of equipment required and stated as such in the report.

As was mentioned elsewhere in the thread, there are no servicing facilities or personnel in Tampa, nor any spare station tracks to service/store the train even if you did an overnight turn. The schedules allow for connections to Tampa/St Pete/Ft Meyers via the existing Thruway bus service for 97/98 at Orlando.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

By the time this gets going in one form or another, won't there be a plethora of rail connections available from Orlando (I assume not all the same station of course)?


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

There is plenty of space at TPA if money was put into constructing a servicing facility. They have 2 tracks usable as of right now but the other 4 could be brought back into use.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Metra Electric Rider said:


> By the time this gets going in one form or another, won't there be a plethora of rail connections available from Orlando (I assume not all the same station of course)?


SunRail will be at Winter Park, Orlando, Kissimmee, and possibly DeLand. Brightline will be at the airport so would require a bus from Orlando.


----------



## jis

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Metra Electric Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> By the time this gets going in one form or another, won't there be a plethora of rail connections available from Orlando (I assume not all the same station of course)?
> 
> 
> 
> SunRail will be at Winter Park, Orlando, Kissimmee, and possibly DeLand. Brightline will be at the airport so would require a bus from Orlando.
Click to expand...

SunRail Phase III is the connection from Sandlake Road to the Orlando Airport Intermodal Center. It is not funded yet, but it is already designated as a priority project, and should get funded in the near foreseeable future, and there is even a possibility that it might get built before the northern extension from Debary to Deland. SunRail will connect with Brightline at the Airport station which is designed with space for Brightline, SunRail, and an yet to be determined LRV service. Provision is also made for space to build out Brightline from the station towards Tampa at some point in the future. The original design of the station was actually to accommodate the Florida HSR to Tampa. Addition of Brightline happened much later.

The primary bus connection to Orlando Airport from SunRail is not from Orlando Amtrak/ORMC Station . It is from Sandlake Road.Station.

Once SunRail is built out to the airport in three to five years from now one would be able to take SunRail from Orlando Amtrak/ORMC to the Airport Station.


----------



## AmtrakLKL

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> There is plenty of space at TPA if money was put into constructing a servicing facility. They have 2 tracks usable as of right now but the other 4 could be brought back into use.


The revenue wouldn't put even the slightest dent in the initial construction costs nor the ongoing cost of running to Tampa plus operating and maintaining a turn-around facility. If turned in Tampa, they wouldn't do much more than the required daily inspections and very basic running repairs. Sanford is a full mechanical facility that can do everything, and if a car must be shopped there would likely be a protect available. Amtrak isn't going to hold protect cars in Tampa.


----------



## Don Newcomb

Hi everyone. I'm new on this forum. I live on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, where we have not had Amtrak service for over 10 years. I like train travel. I've traveled on trains around Europe and Japan. I also traveled on long-distance trains around the US as a child. I'm also a realist and can see the serious issues of train travel in the US. I was at the "10-years-out" meetings when the topic was rail service and I was in the crowd when the "inspection train" rolled into Gulfport. When you discuss restoration of Amtrak service to the pre-Katrina status quo, you need to look at exactly what that means. What was the service before Katrina and why was Amtrak so keen to dump the NOLA-Jax section of the Sunset?

1. The whole Amtrak schedule was synchronized out of Chicago. Three trains came to New Orleans. You couldn't transfer from any train to any other without an overnight stay in New Orleans. So, someone arriving on the City of New Orleans could not transfer to the Crescent to travel on to Biloxi or Lake Charles. This was a pretty unusable situation.

2. Look at this map on the Southern Rail Commission's web page. What do you see wrong? Hmmm? It could have been ripped out of one of my favorite books: How to Lie with Maps. Notice that the route of the CSX line along the Mississippi Gulf Coast is displaced about 20 miles north. Notice that the city of Mobile has been moved about 20 miles north. Notice that from Mobile the route actually is displaced about 30 miles to the south, not running to Flomaton then directly south to Pensacola but making a gentle curve connecting the dots. The fact is that the Amtrak route from Mobile describes a huge "N", turning straight north out of Mobile, running up to Atmore/Flomaton, then diving straight south into the southern part of Pensacola before turning NE again and following a more reasonable route from Milton to Tallahassee. The delay caused by this 80-ish mile detour so disrupted the timing that all the stops beyond P'cola occurred at oh-dark-30.

3. Add to this the every-other-day schedule and you ended up with a perfect recipe for irrelevance.

IMHO, restoring what existed before Katrina would just be a restoration of an irrelevant service. For 27 years I lived a few miles from the Gulfport Amtrak station and never once found a reason to use the service. I tried! I kept a copy of the schedule to see if there was any way to make use of the Sunset service. Once I looked at taking the train to visit family in DeFuniak Springs but when I realized that someone would have to pick me up at 3:30AM I gave up the plan and drove there. I looked at taking the train to Jackson, MS but that would have entailed an overnight stay in New Orleans. We drove instead.

Where I live restoration of pre-Katrina service would not help us at all. What might help is frequent commuter service between Mobile and New Orleans which also connects to long-distance service at Union Station. It's doubtful that CSX could spare 8 or 10 slots on that single trackage per day. And I'm sorry about that, Pensacola. You really are a hitch in the get-along. Until someone comes along and straightens out the rail lines into and out of Pensacola and moving their Amtrak station about 15 miles north, it just won't be practical.

Donald Newcomb


----------



## jphjaxfl

DonNewcomb said:


> Hi everyone. I'm new on this forum. I live on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, where we have not had Amtrak service for over 10 years. I like train travel. I've traveled on trains around Europe and Japan. I also traveled on long-distance trains around the US as a child. I'm also a realist and can see the serious issues of train travel in the US. I was at the "10-years-out" meetings when the topic was rail service and I was in the crowd when the "inspection train" rolled into Gulfport. When you discuss restoration of Amtrak service to the pre-Katrina status quo, you need to look at exactly what that means. What was the service before Katrina and why was Amtrak so keen to dump the NOLA-Jax section of the Sunset?
> 
> 1. The whole Amtrak schedule was synchronized out of Chicago. Three trains came to New Orleans. You couldn't transfer from any train to any other without an overnight stay in New Orleans. So, someone arriving on the City of New Orleans could not transfer to the Crescent to travel on to Biloxi or Lake Charles. This was a pretty unusable situation.
> 
> 2. Look at this map on the Southern Rail Commission's web page. What do you see wrong? Hmmm? It could have been ripped out of one of my favorite books: How to Lie with Maps. Notice that the route of the CSX line along the Mississippi Gulf Coast is displaced about 20 miles north. Notice that the city of Mobile has been moved about 20 miles north. Notice that from Mobile the route actually is displaced about 30 miles to the south, not running to Flomaton then directly south to Pensacola but making a gentle curve connecting the dots. The fact is that the Amtrak route from Mobile describes a huge "N", turning straight north out of Mobile, running up to Atmore/Flomaton, then diving straight south into the southern part of Pensacola before turning NE again and following a more reasonable route from Milton to Tallahassee. The delay caused by this 80-ish mile detour so disrupted the timing that all the stops beyond P'cola occurred at oh-dark-30.
> 
> 3. Add to this the every-other-day schedule and you ended up with a perfect recipe for irrelevance.
> 
> IMHO, restoring what existed before Katrina would just be a restoration of an irrelevant service. For 27 years I lived a few miles from the Gulfport Amtrak station and never once found a reason to use the service. I tried! I kept a copy of the schedule to see if there was any way to make use of the Sunset service. Once I looked at taking the train to visit family in DeFuniak Springs but when I realized that someone would have to pick me up at 3:30AM I gave up the plan and drove there. I looked at taking the train to Jackson, MS but that would have entailed an overnight stay in New Orleans. We drove instead.
> 
> Where I live restoration of pre-Katrina service would not help us at all. What might help is frequent commuter service between Mobile and New Orleans which also connects to long-distance service at Union Station. It's doubtful that CSX could spare 8 or 10 slots on that single trackage per day. And I'm sorry about that, Pensacola. You really are a hitch in the get-along. Until someone comes along and straightens out the rail lines into and out of Pensacola and moving their Amtrak station about 15 miles north, it just won't be practical.
> 
> Donald Newcomb


Unfortunately, Amtrak's last schedule in 2001-2004 did not connect with the City of New Orleans in New Orleans. Amtrak had to adjust the schedule east of New Orleans to accommodate Union Pacific traffic problems west of New Orleans which caused the Sunset to run very late. Prior to that in the 1990s and 2000, the Sunset from Florida was schedule to arrive in New Orleans around 9:20AM. Even if it ran late, it had no problems connecting with the Northbound City of New Orleans which left around 2:00PM. I made that connection several times and other through passengers were connecting at the same time. Of course, it was 3 times per week because that's how the Sunset was scheduled, Southbound the City of New Orleans arrived in New Orleans around 3:30PM. The eastbound Sunset was scheduled at around 8:45PM but was often late. Neither direction required an over night stay in New Orleans. I even traveled from the Crescent through New Orleans to the eastbound Sunset Limited once. It wasn't possible to make the connection the other way because the Sunset left New Orleans too early. When the Mobile - Birmingham section of the Crescent ran, it was possible to connect from the Crescent to the Sunset and vv in Bay Minette, Alabama. Between UP, CSX and Amtrak, a lot was done to kill the long distance ridership on the Sunset east of New Orleans,


----------



## jis

No one is proposing restoring what was there before Katrina. What is proposed is a daily service not associated with the Sunset Limited. It helps to read the document in addition to getting excited about a misprinted map


----------



## Don Newcomb

jis said:


> No one is proposing restoring what was there before Katrina. What is proposed is a daily service not associated with the Sunset Limited. It helps to read the document in addition to getting excited about a misprinted map


Another proposal is to have the Crescent make a hook at New Orleans and run out to Mobile. I've seen several plans proposed, including restoring the pre-Katrina status quo. What we really need is frequent diesel rail car service between Mobile and New Orleans but alas, rail cars aren't allowed any more.


----------



## jis

No. there is no official proposal involving the Crescent. The only proposals on the table at present are:

1. Extension of the CONO.

2. A standalone NOL to Orlando train.

3. A standalone NOL to Mobile train and a Thruway Bus from Mobile to Jacksonville.

Currently there are no proposals under serious consideration involving either the Crescent or the Sunset.

Of course anyone is free to imagine whatever they like. But those do not automatically get included in the stuff that is being advanced for actual implementation.


----------



## CCC1007

DonNewcomb said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one is proposing restoring what was there before Katrina. What is proposed is a daily service not associated with the Sunset Limited. It helps to read the document in addition to getting excited about a misprinted map
> 
> 
> 
> Another proposal is to have the Crescent make a hook at New Orleans and run out to Mobile. I've seen several plans proposed, including restoring the pre-Katrina status quo. What we really need is frequent diesel rail car service between Mobile and New Orleans but alas, rail cars aren't allowed any more.
Click to expand...

They are allowed, but they are more expensive than the ones built for European markets as they need to be built stronger and heavier.


----------



## A Voice

DonNewcomb said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one is proposing restoring what was there before Katrina. What is proposed is a daily service not associated with the Sunset Limited. It helps to read the document in addition to getting excited about a misprinted map
> 
> 
> 
> Another proposal is to have the Crescent make a hook at New Orleans and run out to Mobile. I've seen several plans proposed, including restoring the pre-Katrina status quo. What we really need is frequent diesel rail car service between Mobile and New Orleans but alas, rail cars aren't allowed any more.
Click to expand...

As jls noted, there are no current proposals involving either the "status quo" of the_ Sunset Limited_ or the _Crescent_ (which would be particularly implausible given the need to establish servicing facilities in Mobile, an additional _Crescent_ trainset would be required, and arrival and departure times at Mobile would fall during the overnight hours).

There is really nothing a rail-diesel car (RDC, SPV-2000, IC3, etc.) can do that a locomotive and a couple cars cannot, and using them on just the one route wouldn't be the most practical option (maintaining oddball equipment would overcome any savings in operating cost).



CCC1007 said:


> DonNewcomb said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one is proposing restoring what was there before Katrina. What is proposed is a daily service not associated with the Sunset Limited. It helps to read the document in addition to getting excited about a misprinted map
> 
> 
> 
> Another proposal is to have the Crescent make a hook at New Orleans and run out to Mobile. I've seen several plans proposed, including restoring the pre-Katrina status quo. What we really need is frequent diesel rail car service between Mobile and New Orleans but alas, rail cars aren't allowed any more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are allowed, but they are more expensive than the ones built for European markets as they need to be built stronger and heavier.
Click to expand...

Does Tri-Rail still operate diesel multiple unit (DMU) cars, or did those fall out of favor?


----------



## Palmland

In the interest of actually getting a train running, rather than more studies and hand wringing, those supporting the service should try the incremental approach. Do what's easiest first and build some ridership. It seems to me that an extension of the CONO just to Mobile would be relatively easy and desirable.

Leave the CONO baggage, transition sleeper, sleeper, and diner in New Orleans for servicing. Depart NOL with the coaches (maybe one of them coach-bag) and the lounge with the cafe open for business. No additional equipment needed. With the heavy chemical traffic I'm sure CSX will be installing PTC and the line is already signaled with CTC (unlike the portion from Flomaton to Chattahoochie).

The only investment needed is for a new station and station track in Mobile for the layover and whatever CSX requires. The timing appears to be ideal - an early evening departure from New Orleans and a morning return from Mobile. I suspect any improvements needed for intermediate stops along the gulf coast could be funded locally if those communities are as interested in getting service as reported.


----------



## west point

For the CNO the New Orleans layover is important as its equipment is rotated thru CHI from same day's Eagle. You have to work on the equipment with the 20+ hour layover in New Orleans. One solution might be to do as airlines do. Called a change of gauge or smaller plane same flight number. So why not have passengers get off the inbound train ( which one leave it to Amtrak ) and cross platform and get on other coaches probably Horizon ? Call it the same train.

Once there are enough thru passenger counts every day then work out logistics of thru cars. Thru cars would need to layover one way or other in NOL or maybe two cars one way and two the other way or one and one.


----------



## A Voice

west point said:


> For the CNO the New Orleans layover is important as its equipment is rotated thru CHI from same day's Eagle. You have to work on the equipment with the 20+ hour layover in New Orleans. One solution might be to do as airlines do. Called a change of gauge or smaller plane same flight number. So why not have passengers get off the inbound train ( which one leave it to Amtrak ) and cross platform and get on other coaches probably Horizon ? Call it the same train.
> 
> Once there are enough thru passenger counts every day then work out logistics of thru cars. Thru cars would need to layover one way or other in NOL or maybe two cars one way and two the other way or one and one.


The Superliner equipment on the _City of New Orleans_ can be serviced at the Sanford _Auto Train_ facility; You don't have to do the work in New Orleans.

Whatever you call it, there is no need to change train consists anyway, and such a move would not be popular with passengers.


----------



## jis

Since one of the factors that makes the CONO extension financially attractive is the revenue from CHI - Florida through passengers, which will tend to diminish with gauge change, the analysis would place the gauge change option to be the same as option two - separate train. Option 2 is supposed to provide connection from CONO if possible anyway. Though the locals prefer a train with timings convenient to them and are willing to sacrifice connections for that. It will depend on who is funding it and their willingness to pick up potential revenue losses.


----------



## Don Newcomb

Palmland said:


> In the interest of actually getting a train running, rather than more studies and hand wringing, those supporting the service should try the incremental approach............ I suspect any improvements needed for intermediate stops along the gulf coast could be funded locally if those communities are as interested in getting service as reported.


An incremental approach sounds good to me. There is not a whole lot of facilities upgrades needed on the MS Gulf Coast. The stations/platforms at Bay St. Louis, Gufport, Biloxi and Ocean Springs are there and mostly just waiting. Might need sprucing up and signage. They took out the platform at Pass Christian (I think). In an unaccustomed fit of forethought, Biloxi has placed their new main bus terminal about a block from the old Amtrak platform and may want to move the platform to be right across the street.


----------



## dlagrua

I have great hope for restoration of NOL to ORL service in 2017. While the discussion is away from returning the Sunset Ltd, it would seem to make the most sense to just extend the route back to pre-Katrina days. No new equipment would be needed. Perhaps the CONO brings the same option but the Sunset seems like the easiest option to me.


----------



## jis

It does not make any sense to start a three times a week service when it is funded by the local folks. That is what you get by extending the Sunset. Everyone that is involved in planning this that I have talked to is firmly opposed to this idea. The restored service will be a daily service.


----------



## nshvlcat

When the new daily service begins east of NOL, does anyone feel this might provide an impetus for daily Sunset service to LAX?


----------



## Don Newcomb

jis said:


> It does not make any sense to start a three times a week service when it is funded by the local folks. That is what you get by extending the Sunset. Everyone that is involved in planning this that I have talked to is firmly opposed to this idea. The restored service will be a daily service.


This was my point earlier. Until something is done about that hitch at Pensacola, by restoring pre-Katrina service, you might as well walk where you're going. I apologize to the folks in west Florida but I'm not the one that laid the tracks. The only people who benefited from the eastern half of Sunset were the few people who had the time to make a very leisurely trip between New Orleans and Jacksonville. I agree that train service along the coast needs to return incrementally. Bootstrapped back into service. The logical way to do this is with some sort of service between Mobile and New Orleans on an at least daily basis. One problem is with state and local funding. People, in the rest of the country have no idea how difficult it is to find a few million dollars to spare in the Mississippi state budget.

I'm not sure what the final solution will be. Politically, it's impossible to bypass Pensacola but it's a practical impediment to the service, without some new trackage.


----------



## A Voice

Don Newcomb said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does not make any sense to start a three times a week service when it is funded by the local folks. That is what you get by extending the Sunset. Everyone that is involved in planning this that I have talked to is firmly opposed to this idea. The restored service will be a daily service.
> 
> 
> 
> This was my point earlier. Until something is done about that hitch at Pensacola, by restoring pre-Katrina service, you might as well walk where you're going. I apologize to the folks in west Florida but I'm not the one that laid the tracks. The only people who benefited from the eastern half of Sunset were the few people who had the time to make a very leisurely trip between New Orleans and Jacksonville. I agree that train service along the coast needs to return incrementally. Bootstrapped back into service. The logical way to do this is with some sort of service between Mobile and New Orleans on an at least daily basis. One problem is with state and local funding. People, in the rest of the country have no idea how difficult it is to find a few million dollars to spare in the Mississippi state budget.
> 
> I'm not sure what the final solution will be. Politically, it's impossible to bypass Pensacola but it's a practical impediment to the service, without some new trackage.
Click to expand...

New trackage isn't going to happen, nor is it necessary; That's little more than a fantasy (at least for passenger service). Sure, in theory a dedicated, direct, high-speed passenger only line would be great, but we aren't even getting a new route in the Northeast Corridor. You have to consider the bigger picture. Remember that while the route (and perhaps schedule) isn't ideal for local passengers, they aren't the only consideration; It is much less of an impediment for through passengers travelling from west of New Orleans to/from Florida.

Again, *nobody* is proposing a restoration of pre-Katrina service (an eastern extension of the _Sunset Limited_). What *is* under consideration is either an eastern extension of the _City of New Orleans_ (to Florida) *or* a stand-alone Mobile to New Orleans train (both daily). While an incremental approach is normally the correct one, in this case the costs are reasonable enough for a long-distance train extension that should arguably be the first step. Should the local train option be chosen, it will have to be state funded under current law, and you still have that Mobile to Jacksonville gap.


----------



## jis

Once we decide to return from the fantasy-land of anyone building any new trackage to go around Pensacola or whatever, and bother to read the actual proposal we will come to realize that what is most likely to happen is a New Orleans to Orlando service, either as an extension of the CONO or as a standalone daily service. It will be funded by a mix of federal appropriation and some local funding (latter mainly for establishing and maintaining the necessary en route stations. The Wicker-Booker effort in Senate is the one that will eventually lead to funding this if anything materializes at all. Absent some federal funding this is not going to happen. At present its chances look pretty good even after the election.

The Mobile to New Orleans train options has the worst financial performance of them all, so will happen only if the entire lot is funded by the states, which they won't, is the current prognostication.

No matter what, the service between New Orleans and Jacksonville will be a service at a leisurely pace, and no one that is actually working on getting it going views Pensacola as an impediment. It ain't gonna be 110mph or 125mph blazing fast service.It will be a 60-79mph service on not the ideal straight route (since that does not exist) The proposed timetables are available in the Southern Rail Commission sponsored study done by Amtrak, and those working on the proposed restoration are quite comfortable with those.

But as they say, you can't tell for sure until the fat lady sings.


----------



## Don Newcomb

One thing that any proposal needs to take into account is the coordination (or lack thereof) of train schedules at New Orleans.

This is the current situation

AV DP

CONO 0934 1345

Crescent 1932 0700

Sunset 2140 0900

If these schedules hold, the only passengers who will be able to continue from New Orleans to the Gulf Coast and return by the same route, without an overnight stay in New Orleans, will be those on the CoNO. No one could arrive on the Sunset from, say, Houston and continue to Biloxi, without staying overnight in New Orleans. No one can currently travel from Houston to Jackson, MS by train without an overnight stay in New Orleans. I'm not sure if one can get from Atlanta to Houston without an overnight lay-over someplace. Same for traveling from Birmingham to Biloxi.

Would continuation of CoNO to Mobile be better than what's currently offered? Yes, marginally. I could maybe take the train to visit family in Nebraska, but I'll still have to drive to Hattiesburg (or Picayune) to catch the Crescent to any points northeast. What would be ideal is if all three trains managed to be in NOLA at the same time but that privilege has been accorded to Chicago.


----------



## jis

Indeed. Sunset Limited was eliminated as a contender because it does not provide Daily Service and it as well as the Crescent provide for very unattractive timings at the west end of the route - specially between New Orleans and Mobile. After that all the combinations of local service (New Orleans - Mobile) and LD service were considered and the CONO connection was found to be financially the most viable, requiring least amount of subsidy. Hence the first choice of CONO run through.

The other thing going for the CONO continuation is that it provides for a single seat ride from Chicago to Florida - not the most ideal one but one of sorts.

The "ideal" of getting all trains to arrive into New Orleans in the morning and depart in the afternoon is not realizable due to scheduling constraints that their other end, and equipment turns impose.


----------



## Steve4031

The CNO does not arrive at 9:34. It is in the afternoon after 58 departs.


----------



## jis

Steve4031 said:


> The CNO does not arrive at 9:34. It is in the afternoon after 58 departs.


Actually I have no idea what numbers he is quoting. The arrivals and departures from the proposal are:

South/East bound

New Orleans a: 3:32pm, d: 5:00pm

West/North bound

New Orleans a: 9:30am d: 1:45pm


The arrival from Chicago and departure to Chicago remain substantially unchanged.


----------



## Don Newcomb

Steve4031 said:


> The CNO does not arrive at 9:34. It is in the afternoon after 58 departs.


I read the wrong column. CNO arrives New Orleans at 1532. However, this does not change the fact that both the Sunset and Crescent depart New Orleans before the CNO arrives. The Sunset and Crescent both arrive in New Orleans after the CNO has departed. The way I read this, anyone who wants to change trains in New Orleans will be in for an overnight lay-over there. (No?) This pretty much squashes the idea of any practical utility to rail travel in the Gulf South. Unless you want to go to or from Chicago, it's not much use. If I'm wrong, please tell me how I'd get from Houston to Biloxi by train or maybe Houston to Atlanta.

I understand that, as has been mentioned, to get Federal funding, the restored service has to be a continuation of some existing long-distance route. So, this may be the best option. It just does not seem to be a very good option.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Don Newcomb said:


> One thing that any proposal needs to take into account is the coordination (or lack thereof) of train schedules at New Orleans.
> 
> This is the current situation
> 
> AV DP
> 
> CONO 0934 1345
> 
> Crescent 1932 0700
> 
> Sunset 2140 0900
> 
> If these schedules hold, the only passengers who will be able to continue from New Orleans to the Gulf Coast and return by the same route, without an overnight stay in New Orleans, will be those on the CoNO. No one could arrive on the Sunset from, say, Houston and continue to Biloxi, without staying overnight in New Orleans. No one can currently travel from Houston to Jackson, MS by train without an overnight stay in New Orleans. I'm not sure if one can get from Atlanta to Houston without an overnight lay-over someplace. Same for traveling from Birmingham to Biloxi.
> 
> Would continuation of CoNO to Mobile be better than what's currently offered? Yes, marginally. I could maybe take the train to visit family in Nebraska, but I'll still have to drive to Hattiesburg (or Picayune) to catch the Crescent to any points northeast. What would be ideal is if all three trains managed to be in NOLA at the same time but that privilege has been accorded to Chicago.


If by Northeast you meant Atlanta or Charlotte, than the gulf coast train will not help with that. However, if you meant the Northeastern US, transfers will be available in Jacksonville to the Silver trains.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan

Don Newcomb said:


> One thing that any proposal needs to take into account is the coordination (or lack thereof) of train schedules at New Orleans.
> 
> This is the current situation
> 
> AV DP
> 
> CONO 0934 1345
> 
> Crescent 1932 0700
> 
> Sunset 2140 0900
> 
> If these schedules hold, the only passengers who will be able to continue from New Orleans to the Gulf Coast and return by the same route, without an overnight stay in New Orleans, will be those on the CoNO. No one could arrive on the Sunset from, say, Houston and continue to Biloxi, without staying overnight in New Orleans. No one can currently travel from Houston to Jackson, MS by train without an overnight stay in New Orleans. I'm not sure if one can get from Atlanta to Houston without an overnight lay-over someplace. Same for traveling from Birmingham to Biloxi.
> 
> Would continuation of CoNO to Mobile be better than what's currently offered? Yes, marginally. I could maybe take the train to visit family in Nebraska, but I'll still have to drive to Hattiesburg (or Picayune) to catch the Crescent to any points northeast. What would be ideal is if all three trains managed to be in NOLA at the same time but that privilege has been accorded to Chicago.


First things first, get the NOL-ORL or NOL-JAX running again.

But absolutely the lack of connectivity in NOL is a IMO a big problem restricting the effectiveness of Amtrak. You should be able to get from Florida to Texas without an overnight stay and without having to go to Chicago (even if the CONO extends to Florida and you can do CONO/TE going all the way north to Chicago to go all the way south is a waste of time).

My SL reschedule proposal: http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/65927-proposal-for-extending-crescent-to-sas-improving-te-schedule/?p=640928

The privilege of a same day transfer should not be limited to just Chicago. It works well for cities with good access to Chicago but not for others. Plus, you can escape the gridlock/hassles going into CHI. In the old days of the National Limited, you can make the change at KCY. Ideally if the Cresent/CONO and SL line up NOL can be the second Chicago. Or if you do the Crescent Star maybe Dallas or Ft. Worth could be the second Chicago.


----------



## west point

One possible solution for the Crescent. Run a dedicated thruway ( not the dog ) Hattiesburg - Gulfport connecting to the NOL - JAX - ORL train. The Jackson section thruway on the dog would not be needed once passengers could connect in NOL - FL. Although not ideal with a thruway bus in the middle it would allow persons from Greenville - Spartanburg - ATL - BHM - Meridian - Hattiesburg to travel mostly by train to Florida. That would eliminate the gosh awful BHM - ATL - CLT ( change trains ) - Raleigh ( change trains ) - JAX / FL.

Only if UP / BNSF would allow speed up of Sunset east of SAS could passengers connect to CNO Florida. Another possibility would be for NOL east Passengers off the SL would be a thruway Houston - NOL ? HOU - NOL is ~350 road miles so a 6-1/2 hour thruway bus instead of 9-1/2 hour SL.-


----------



## Don Newcomb

A Voice said:


> New trackage isn't going to happen, nor is it necessary; That's little more than a fantasy (at least for passenger service). Sure, in theory a dedicated, direct, high-speed passenger only line would be great, but we aren't even getting a new route in the Northeast Corridor. You have to consider the bigger picture. Remember that while the route (and perhaps schedule) isn't ideal for local passengers, they aren't the only consideration; It is much less of an impediment for through passengers travelling from west of New Orleans to/from Florida.
> 
> Again, *nobody* is proposing a restoration of pre-Katrina service (an eastern extension of the _Sunset Limited_). What *is* under consideration is either an eastern extension of the _City of New Orleans_ (to Florida) *or* a stand-alone Mobile to New Orleans train (both daily). While an incremental approach is normally the correct one, in this case the costs are reasonable enough for a long-distance train extension that should arguably be the first step. Should the local train option be chosen, it will have to be state funded under current law, and you still have that Mobile to Jacksonville gap.


I understand about the trackage but was only trying to point out that a shortcut from Bay Minette to somewhere north of Cantonment would make Pensacola a little more rational.

While it has been stated repeatedly that restoration of pre-Katrina service is not an option, several members here seem to have a hard time accepting that.



Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> First things first, get the NOL-ORL or NOL-JAX running again.
> 
> But absolutely the lack of connectivity in NOL is a IMO a big problem restricting the effectiveness of Amtrak. You should be able to get from Florida to Texas without an overnight stay and without having to go to Chicago (even if the CONO extends to Florida and you can do CONO/TE going all the way north to Chicago to go all the way south is a waste of time).
> 
> My SL reschedule proposal: http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/65927-proposal-for-extending-crescent-to-sas-improving-te-schedule/?p=640928
> 
> The privilege of a same day transfer should not be limited to just Chicago. It works well for cities with good access to Chicago but not for others. Plus, you can escape the gridlock/hassles going into CHI. In the old days of the National Limited, you can make the change at KCY. Ideally if the Cresent/CONO and SL line up NOL can be the second Chicago. Or if you do the Crescent Star maybe Dallas or Ft. Worth could be the second Chicago.


From what everyone says, NOL-JAX is not an option. I'm glad we could get the lack of NOL connections into the discussion. From my point of view, this is one of the most serious issues with passenger rail service in the Southeast.



west point said:


> One possible solution for the Crescent. Run a dedicated thruway ( not the dog ) Hattiesburg - Gulfport connecting to the NOL - JAX - ORL train. The Jackson section thruway on the dog would not be needed once passengers could connect in NOL - FL. Although not ideal with a thruway bus in the middle it would allow persons from Greenville - Spartanburg - ATL - BHM - Meridian - Hattiesburg to travel mostly by train to Florida. That would eliminate the gosh awful BHM - ATL - CLT ( change trains ) - Raleigh ( change trains ) - JAX / FL.
> 
> Only if UP / BNSF would allow speed up of Sunset east of SAS could passengers connect to CNO Florida. Another possibility would be for NOL east Passengers off the SL would be a thruway Houston - NOL ? HOU - NOL is ~350 road miles so a 6-1/2 hour thruway bus instead of 9-1/2 hour SL.-


I'm still trying to sort out most of what you're proposing but if there's no NOL-JAX train, I'm not sure how it would work. Yes, it would be nice if there were a way to get the schedules in NOL to match up better.

Sorry if I got any quotes wrong. I'm still getting used to this forum's quoting and editing system.


----------



## Steve4031

This same day connection is difficult to accomplish with the crescent and sunset limited. If the crescent arrives early enough in New Orleans to connect to 1, then it would be passing through Atlanta in the middle of the night. If the schedule for 1 is changed to later, the connection to the coast starlight in LA is broken.


----------



## Don Newcomb

Steve4031 said:


> This same day connection is difficult to accomplish with the crescent and sunset limited. If the crescent arrives early enough in New Orleans to connect to 1, then it would be passing through Atlanta in the middle of the night. If the schedule for 1 is changed to later, the connection to the coast starlight in LA is broken.


Yep. People care about Chicago and L.A. No one cares about NOL, so we don't bother getting the connections to sync there. Low usage of Amtrak in NOL then becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. Small wonder that Amtrak ditched the NOL-JAX run at the first convenient opportunity.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Amtrak has an entire system of trains that connect in practically every city where a useful connection can happen. In order to orchestrate that, there has to be a city where they don't. Given its night life, and its relatively small ridership, New Orleans is the one chosen for non working connections.

Which honestly makes sense.


----------



## Eric S

I think it's a bit over the top to say that no one cares about NOL - rather that with only one train a day (or less), it's not really possible to make connections on the NOL end and the other (CHI, LAX, various NEC points) ends as well.

I haven't toyed around with the schedules for these trains the way some have, so I can't say for sure, but I'd imagine it's difficult if not impossible to come up with a set schedules that make connections in NOL and still maintain various other connections in CHI, LAX, and elsewhere, and also keep decent times at (some or most) major en-route markets (whether ATL, MEM, or others).


----------



## Don Newcomb

Green Maned Lion said:


> Amtrak has an entire system of trains that connect in practically every city where a useful connection can happen. In order to orchestrate that, there has to be a city where they don't. Given its night life, and its relatively small ridership, New Orleans is the one chosen for non working connections.
> 
> Which honestly makes sense.


I wonder if there is anyone here (besides me) who lives within 100 miles of NOL?


----------



## jis

Ultimately it will be a competition between how much revenue accrues from Sunset to Coast Starlight Connection in LAX vs. Sunset to other trains connection at NOL on the one hand for rescheduling the Sunset, and on the other hand the revenue from beyond New York passengers on the Crescent vs. those transferring from the Crescent to other trains at NOL, and the potential loss of Atlanta ridership due to oh-dark thirty time at Atlanta that is the consequence of rescheduling the Crescent to make the connections in NOL. My bet is that connections at NOL will be sacrificed.


----------



## A Voice

Don Newcomb said:


> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> 
> New trackage isn't going to happen, nor is it necessary; That's little more than a fantasy (at least for passenger service). Sure, in theory a dedicated, direct, high-speed passenger only line would be great, but we aren't even getting a new route in the Northeast Corridor. You have to consider the bigger picture. Remember that while the route (and perhaps schedule) isn't ideal for local passengers, they aren't the only consideration; It is much less of an impediment for through passengers travelling from west of New Orleans to/from Florida.
> 
> Again, *nobody* is proposing a restoration of pre-Katrina service (an eastern extension of the _Sunset Limited_). What *is* under consideration is either an eastern extension of the _City of New Orleans_ (to Florida) *or* a stand-alone Mobile to New Orleans train (both daily). While an incremental approach is normally the correct one, in this case the costs are reasonable enough for a long-distance train extension that should arguably be the first step. Should the local train option be chosen, it will have to be state funded under current law, and you still have that Mobile to Jacksonville gap.
> 
> 
> 
> I understand about the trackage but was only trying to point out that a shortcut from Bay Minette to somewhere north of Cantonment would make Pensacola a little more rational.
> 
> While it has been stated repeatedly that restoration of pre-Katrina service is not an option, several members here seem to have a hard time accepting that.
> 
> 
> 
> Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> First things first, get the NOL-ORL or NOL-JAX running again.
> 
> But absolutely the lack of connectivity in NOL is a IMO a big problem restricting the effectiveness of Amtrak. You should be able to get from Florida to Texas without an overnight stay and without having to go to Chicago (even if the CONO extends to Florida and you can do CONO/TE going all the way north to Chicago to go all the way south is a waste of time).
> 
> My SL reschedule proposal: http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/65927-proposal-for-extending-crescent-to-sas-improving-te-schedule/?p=640928
> 
> The privilege of a same day transfer should not be limited to just Chicago. It works well for cities with good access to Chicago but not for others. Plus, you can escape the gridlock/hassles going into CHI. In the old days of the National Limited, you can make the change at KCY. Ideally if the Cresent/CONO and SL line up NOL can be the second Chicago. Or if you do the Crescent Star maybe Dallas or Ft. Worth could be the second Chicago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> From what everyone says, NOL-JAX is not an option. I'm glad we could get the lack of NOL connections into the discussion. From my point of view, this is one of the most serious issues with passenger rail service in the Southeast.
> 
> 
> 
> west point said:
> 
> 
> 
> One possible solution for the Crescent. Run a dedicated thruway ( not the dog ) Hattiesburg - Gulfport connecting to the NOL - JAX - ORL train. The Jackson section thruway on the dog would not be needed once passengers could connect in NOL - FL. Although not ideal with a thruway bus in the middle it would allow persons from Greenville - Spartanburg - ATL - BHM - Meridian - Hattiesburg to travel mostly by train to Florida. That would eliminate the gosh awful BHM - ATL - CLT ( change trains ) - Raleigh ( change trains ) - JAX / FL.
> 
> Only if UP / BNSF would allow speed up of Sunset east of SAS could passengers connect to CNO Florida. Another possibility would be for NOL east Passengers off the SL would be a thruway Houston - NOL ? HOU - NOL is ~350 road miles so a 6-1/2 hour thruway bus instead of 9-1/2 hour SL.-
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm still trying to sort out most of what you're proposing but if there's no NOL-JAX train, I'm not sure how it would work. Yes, it would be nice if there were a way to get the schedules in NOL to match up better.
> 
> Sorry if I got any quotes wrong. I'm still getting used to this forum's quoting and editing system.
Click to expand...

Again, extension of the _City of New Orleans_ to Orlando will* restore train service to the entire New Orleans to Jacksonville segment*. That is not the only proposal on the table, a short distance state-funded train to Mobile is another option, but the extension to Florida seems *the most likely* as it arguably produces the greatest benefits for the (federal) subsidy required.


----------



## JoeBas

Don Newcomb said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak has an entire system of trains that connect in practically every city where a useful connection can happen. In order to orchestrate that, there has to be a city where they don't. Given its night life, and its relatively small ridership, New Orleans is the one chosen for non working connections.
> 
> Which honestly makes sense.
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if there is anyone here (besides me) who lives within 100 miles of NOL?
Click to expand...

I live in Houston. A city about 6x bigger than NOL. With 1/6 the train service, as things stand now.

So you'll have to forgive me while I go break out the world's smallest violin...


----------



## A Voice

west point said:


> One possible solution for the Crescent. Run a dedicated thruway ( not the dog ) Hattiesburg - Gulfport connecting to the NOL - JAX - ORL train. The Jackson section thruway on the dog would not be needed once passengers could connect in NOL - FL. Although not ideal with a thruway bus in the middle it would allow persons from Greenville - Spartanburg - ATL - BHM - Meridian - Hattiesburg to travel mostly by train to Florida. That would eliminate the gosh awful BHM - ATL - CLT ( change trains ) - Raleigh ( change trains ) - JAX / FL.
> 
> Only if UP / BNSF would allow speed up of Sunset east of SAS could passengers connect to CNO Florida. Another possibility would be for NOL east Passengers off the SL would be a thruway Houston - NOL ? HOU - NOL is ~350 road miles so a 6-1/2 hour thruway bus instead of 9-1/2 hour SL.-


The real solution is, of course, more than one train a day on the route(s). It is really hard to advocate for that, however, when we haven't even taken the simpler and (relatively) low cost initial steps of making tri-weekly trains daily and restoring some "bones" (routes) cut previously from Amtrak's already too skeletal national system.


----------



## Gulfwind2

The Southern Rail Commission is actively pursuing a state-funded train from New Orleans to Mobile departing NOL daily at 0800 and returning from Mobile after the close of the business day. The goal is for this pocket-sized state train (The 3rd Amtrak incarnation of the Gulf Coast Limited) to run with a daily extension of the City Of New Orleans, which will drop part of its consist in New Orleans each day for servicing whilst an abridged portion of the consist will proceed to Orlando & be serviced at the Sanford Auto Train turning facility. The weak link of this plan is the Orlando extension of the CoNO. It is seeing substantial difficulty becoming reality predictably due to CSX's resistance to adding passenger service, particularly on the non-signaled trackage between Flomaton and Tallahassee.


----------



## jis

Gulfwind. Thanks for the update.


----------



## west point

In the short term Amtrak's lack of equipment is making all discussions of solving the problems of NOL very difficult. For example this past Thanksgiving Amtrak pulled every car ( and LOCOS ) possible from maintenance and put them on the road. If cars during slack times are assigned to a Sunset east ( CNO ) they are not available to beef up rush time trains on Amtrak. Another factor is that in very cold weather times Horizons have to be removed from Midwest trains. So the idle equipment has to be assigned to those trains. The ability for some persons to travel on holidays has an unknown effect on those persons to schedule train travel at other times ?

Amtrak cannot maintain the rush time availability year around due to maintenance assignments. Obviously much more equipment is the answer. IMHO to effect the following Amtrak will need an additional 50 - 75 sleeper mix of V-2 sleepers and Superliner sleepers. As well a LD V-2 coach order of at least 200. These numbers allow for no retirements of any cars.

Once Horizons are replace out of CHI and are assigned to a Sunset, east of San Antonia (SAS) and possibly some to southern California scheduling then becomes possible.

A first step might be running SAS - JAX/ORL. That way Crescent and CNO passengers can connect. Still have problem of sleepers space but Horizon will displace at least a couple sleepers or a transition. Then thru cars could be scheduled on both Crescent and Sunset from SAS. If ORL - NOL arrives at NOL by 0500 then passengers could connect the other way. Would thru passengers like the long layover in NOL ? who knows ?

All this will require at least another 10 operable locos.


----------



## jis

There will be no SAS - JAX - ORL. The timings are not acceptable to the NOL - JAX users who are the primary sponsors of the service. So just keep dreaming.  Additionally any timing that causes one to lose the same day turn of equipment in Orlando adds the need for one more incremental consist which makes it that much harder to find the equipment.

The basic incremental need for the CONO extension as proposed is 2 Coach-Baggage, 2 Sleepers and 2 CCCs + 2 P42s. Amtrak already claims that they can find that equipment. The only issue right now is negotiation with CSX.


----------



## Caesar La Rock

It doesn't surprise me CSX is slowing the progress of the restoration of City of New Orleans extension. You would think they would remember that Amtrak never discontinued the route east of New Orleans.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Don Newcomb said:


> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> 
> . . . *nobody* is proposing a restoration of pre-Katrina service
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> First things first, get the NOL-ORL . . . running again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> west point said:
> 
> 
> 
> One possible solution . . .
> 
> If UP / BNSF would allow speed up of Sunset east of SAS could passengers connect to CNO Florida.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm still getting used to this forum's quoting and editing system.
Click to expand...

Please note that you can use the delete key to zero in on the points you are replying to in previous posts. In fact, you are encouraged to cut copied text, so readers don't have to scroll down so much.


----------



## MikefromCrete

Caesar La Rock said:


> It doesn't surprise me CSX is slowing the progress of the restoration of City of New Orleans extension. You would think they would remember that Amtrak never discontinued the route east of New Orleans.


Who said CSX is impeding the progress of this plan? As far we know, negotiations with the railroad are proceeding at a good pace. The main problem is the service isn't funded.


----------



## jis

MikefromCrete said:


> Who said CSX is impeding the progress of this plan? As far we know, negotiations with the railroad are proceeding at a good pace.


And your source is who?


----------



## MikefromCrete

jis said:


> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who said CSX is impeding the progress of this plan? As far we know, negotiations with the railroad are proceeding at a good pace.
> 
> 
> 
> And your source is who?
Click to expand...

I don't have a source. The previous poster said CSX was dragging out the process. I've seen no previous reports of this. I just pointed out that we don't know how negotiations are going. Seems to me the biggest delays are coming from the state governments involved. Besides, with the new secretary of transportation being a fellow of the notoriously anti-rail Heritage Foundation, all this talk of LD or even SD expansion is probably moot.


----------



## jis

You just had to read a few posts back to see a short discussion of the issue. I have actually heard of certain well ahem ... obstacles in the negotiation for trackage agreement ... that have come up. My source is a certain legislative assistant of Senator Wicker originally. I agree it is hearsay. But at least one with a putative source attached


----------



## Gulfwind2

MikefromCrete said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who said CSX is impeding the progress of this plan? As far we know, negotiations with the railroad are proceeding at a good pace.
> 
> 
> 
> And your source is who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't have a source. The previous poster said CSX was dragging out the process. I've seen no previous reports of this. I just pointed out that we don't know how negotiations are going. Seems to me the biggest delays are coming from the state governments involved. Besides, with the new secretary of transportation being a fellow of the notoriously anti-rail Heritage Foundation, all this talk of LD or even SD expansion is probably moot.
Click to expand...

Hi Mike,

My source (whom I will not name as a courtesy to said person and their affiliates) personally reviewed the letter sent to the US Department of Transportation by the CSX Passenger Relations Department which cites an absolutely monumental amount (worth more money than is appropriated each year by Congress to all facets of passenger rail combined) of infrastructure upgrades which they claim will be needed before Amtrak returns to the Gulf Coast. Of course anyone with experience in railroad operations would know that almost none of the cited infrastructure will actually be necessary for passenger trains to run regularly on CSX trackage between Orlando and New Orleans.

I will be a bit bold here and say that CSX concocted an intentionally dishonest review of the situation at hand in order to call attention to the STB 80% Passenger OTP ruling which they (through the auspices of AAR) are working once again to repeal. The political strategy from CSX is to hold the Gulf Coast Amtrak negotiations hostage, so to speak, until the STB Ruling ends up being bent to their liking. It is a deceptive strategy but it is hardly any different from the usual set of playbook maneuvers that Class I's will use in order to protest government regulatory actions which their shareholders disapprove of.


----------



## CCC1007

Gulfwind2 said:


> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who said CSX is impeding the progress of this plan? As far we know, negotiations with the railroad are proceeding at a good pace.
> 
> 
> 
> And your source is who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't have a source. The previous poster said CSX was dragging out the process. I've seen no previous reports of this. I just pointed out that we don't know how negotiations are going. Seems to me the biggest delays are coming from the state governments involved. Besides, with the new secretary of transportation being a fellow of the notoriously anti-rail Heritage Foundation, all this talk of LD or even SD expansion is probably moot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> My source (whom I will not name as a courtesy to said person and their affiliates) personally reviewed the letter sent to the US Department of Transportation by the CSX Passenger Relations Department which cites an absolutely monumental amount (worth more money than is appropriated each year by Congress to all facets of passenger rail combined) of infrastructure upgrades which they claim will be needed before Amtrak returns to the Gulf Coast. Of course anyone with experience in railroad operations would know that almost none of the cited infrastructure will actually be necessary for passenger trains to run regularly on CSX trackage between Orlando and New Orleans.
> 
> I will be a bit bold here and say that CSX concocted an intentionally dishonest review of the situation at hand in order to call attention to the STB 80% Passenger OTP ruling which they (through the auspices of AAR) are working once again to repeal. The political strategy from CSX is to hold the Gulf Coast Amtrak negotiations hostage, so to speak, until the STB Ruling ends up being bent to their liking. It is a deceptive strategy but it is hardly any different from the usual set of playbook maneuvers that Class I's will use in order to protest government regulatory actions which their shareholders disapprove of.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the same thing UP did with the sunset route.


----------



## bretton88

CCC1007 said:


> Gulfwind2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who said CSX is impeding the progress of this plan? As far we know, negotiations with the railroad are proceeding at a good pace.
> 
> 
> 
> And your source is who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't have a source. The previous poster said CSX was dragging out the process. I've seen no previous reports of this. I just pointed out that we don't know how negotiations are going. Seems to me the biggest delays are coming from the state governments involved. Besides, with the new secretary of transportation being a fellow of the notoriously anti-rail Heritage Foundation, all this talk of LD or even SD expansion is probably moot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> My source (whom I will not name as a courtesy to said person and their affiliates) personally reviewed the letter sent to the US Department of Transportation by the CSX Passenger Relations Department which cites an absolutely monumental amount (worth more money than is appropriated each year by Congress to all facets of passenger rail combined) of infrastructure upgrades which they claim will be needed before Amtrak returns to the Gulf Coast. Of course anyone with experience in railroad operations would know that almost none of the cited infrastructure will actually be necessary for passenger trains to run regularly on CSX trackage between Orlando and New Orleans.
> 
> I will be a bit bold here and say that CSX concocted an intentionally dishonest review of the situation at hand in order to call attention to the STB 80% Passenger OTP ruling which they (through the auspices of AAR) are working once again to repeal. The political strategy from CSX is to hold the Gulf Coast Amtrak negotiations hostage, so to speak, until the STB Ruling ends up being bent to their liking. It is a deceptive strategy but it is hardly any different from the usual set of playbook maneuvers that Class I's will use in order to protest government regulatory actions which their shareholders disapprove of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sounds like the same thing UP did with the sunset route.
Click to expand...

The difference is UP isn't really committed to that number, they put that out there when Amtrak made a blunder and pissed UP off. This is just CSX saying that they are not interested.


----------



## Bob Dylan

The deal between UP and Amtrak for the Sunset Ltd. was bungled because of the arrogance of an ex-Amtrak Suit.

Now that the time limit on renogiating has been reached,its time to once again consider the Daily Texas Eagle between CHI and LAX with the stub train from SAS-NOL-SAS as part of the deal.


----------



## neroden

CSX is a notoriously mismanaged railroad, just on the freight side, even apart from their illegal and dishonest actions when it comes to passenger trains. Don't imagine that the shareholders like the incompetent way it's been run; there have been multiple activist-shareholder attempts to change the management in recent memory.

They can be strongarmed by a combination of state Governors and US Senators -- the CSX weasels know that they're lying weasels, so if push comes to shove, they'll capitulate on their dishonest and overpriced demands, the way they capitulated in Massachusetts (twice) and in New York. (They'll be capitulating in NY again one of these days.) However, I'm not sure the state governments and US Senators in the Gulf Coast area are unified enough and presenting a strong enough threat to make CSX capitulate. In Massachusetts, IIRC, it got to the point of open threats from the governor and the US Senators from Massachusetts to change federal railroad law. (These were not empty threats; although it was not guaranteed that the Senators could do that, it was certainly possible.) At that point CSX backed down and started making reasonable requests.

CSX is testing the resolve of the government officials in the Gulf Coast region, seeing if the coalition is solid or not.


----------



## amtrakpass

I think these kind of issues show there needs to be a change in the law. There needs to be some kind of neutral way to decide how much it actually costs to add some passenger trains with the regulatory authority to encforce their decision. Now you have a situation where freight carriers can basically make demands for huge spending out of thin air. Of course the situation could be reversed and you could have a passenger carrier demanding unreasonable things also. So that is why there should be independance to how it is decided. But the situation now is basically pretend railroading in my book. Any mainline in the United States should be able to add a few daily trains without a lot of investment as is. When needed, some new investment may be good for everyone. But this current situation is a recipe for inaction or wasteful spending.


----------



## jis

If what CSX is demanding comes anywhere near the liquidated cost of the property then just for the heck of it the states should make a counter proposal for an eminent domain acquisition of the entire property involved together with a subsidiary trackage rights to CSX agreement and watch CSX's reaction. Heck they might even agree like they have been crying door to door to try to sell off their properties to any takers in FL. Too bad that the states involved would not have the intestinal fortitude for such.


----------



## MikefromCrete

Well. it looks like CSX is being is usual obstinate self. This is a railroad that takes seven days to run six days worth of freight trains. CSX is the worst managed railroad in the U.S. I would hope the Gulf Coast politicians have the resolve to stand up to this outfit.


----------



## jis

Status update from Senator Nelson. No mention of CSX issue is probably a good thing.

http://www.chipleypaper.com/news/20161213/officials-briefed-on-amtraks-return-to-panhandle

Good to see Nelson moving ahead bypassing the quagmire of Tallahassee, and trying to bring together all the involved Counties to bring pressure on all involved.


----------



## MARC Rider

jis said:


> Ultimately it will be a competition between how much revenue accrues from Sunset to Coast Starlight Connection in LAX vs. Sunset to other trains connection at NOL on the one hand for rescheduling the Sunset, and on the other hand the revenue from beyond New York passengers on the Crescent vs. those transferring from the Crescent to other trains at NOL, and the potential loss of Atlanta ridership due to oh-dark thirty time at Atlanta that is the consequence of rescheduling the Crescent to make the connections in NOL. My bet is that connections at NOL will be sacrificed.


Hey, how about a through sleeper and coach from the Crescent that gets hooked on to the Sunset? Wasn't that done once upon a time? Sure, the cars would sit overnight in New Orleans, but you'd have a place to crash after enjoying the French Quarter and not have to pay for a hotel room.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan

MARC Rider said:


> Hey, how about a through sleeper and coach from the Crescent that gets hooked on to the Sunset? Wasn't that done once upon a time? Sure, the cars would sit overnight in New Orleans, but you'd have a place to crash after enjoying the French Quarter and not have to pay for a hotel room.


The last schedule I could find with that option advertised was way back in 1977 (the National Limited and SWC also had the same option in KCY):

http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19770622&item=0036


----------



## west point

MARC Rider said:


> Hey, how about a through sleeper and coach from the Crescent that gets hooked on to the Sunset? Wasn't that done once upon a time? Sure, the cars would sit overnight in New Orleans, but you'd have a place to crash after enjoying the French Quarter and not have to pay for a hotel room.


That was done with the SOU Crescent with steam line cars. Once the Sunset went to HEP the thru sleeper was discontinued.

Very unlikely as there isn't a transition sleeper on sunset for a V-1 or V-2 sleeper. Other problem there will not be enough V-1&2 sleepers available. Now if sometime in future more single level sleepers were built ? ? ?


----------



## Palmetto

There was a through sleeper only. It was great when I used it--a long, long time ago. What was NOT great was the next morning when there was knocking on the door for a ticket check. In those days, the Southern Crescent was still running and the Southern Railway conductor had to do a ticket check upon leaving New Orleans.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

west point said:


> MARC Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, MARC Rider said:
> 
> Hey, how about a through sleeper and coach from the Crescent that gets hooked on to the Sunset?
> 
> 
> 
> Very unlikely as there isn't a transition sleeper on sunset for a V-1 or V-2 sleeper. Other problem there will not be enough V-1&2 sleepers available. Now if sometime in future more single level sleepers were built ? ? ?
Click to expand...

In a few years, most of the Sunset/Eagle should go daily, using Superliners. Then the plan is for a daily Sunset Shuttle, running New Orleans-Houston-San Antonio, using (rehabbed) Horizon cars. That could be worth doing without a transition car; cross platform transfer at SAS for everybody, even sleeper passengers.

Of course, we'd need more Viewliner sleepers to do that. But we need more Viewliner sleepers anyway.

By the time the last of the current order comes off the line, we should know if Amtrak as we know it will survive.


----------



## striker64

http://m.wlox.com/wlox/db_345521/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=yAtXcNRw

Sounds like 4 coastal towns are getting money to start repairing/upgrading their train stations, so that seems like a great first step. I can't speak to the others, but the station in Bay St Louis was renovated a while ago and has been in use as sort of a tourism center, so it needs very little work.


----------



## me_little_me

striker64 said:


> http://m.wlox.com/wlox/db_345521/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=yAtXcNRw
> 
> Sounds like 4 coastal towns are getting money to start repairing/upgrading their train stations, so that seems like a great first step. I can't speak to the others, but the station in Bay St Louis was renovated a while ago and has been in use as sort of a tourism center, so it needs very little work.


Means little. The state of NC was going to run a train to Asheville back in 2005 and the local towns had their stations restored. No train. No hint of a train.


----------



## xyzzy

There was never a firm schedule for an Asheville train, just a basic outline adopted in 2001 in response to grassroots activity in the western part of the state. NCDOT did not have the necessary equipment or operational funding from the General Assembly. There was no agreement with Norfolk Southern who wanted $135 million at the time for CTC and track improvements. Stations were renovated in Marion, Morganton, and Old Fort as a holding measure, with interim usage allowed. Stations in Stateville and Hickory were separately renovated.

Now the Asheville-Salisbury line is all 25 mph, creating another hurdle. And people in Wilmington want a train, too. I don't see anything happening for quite some time.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

The FRA announcement states that 1 communities will share a $2 million grant to make station facility improvements. This is a good first step. Naturally, additional funding and agreements will need to be secured for track,trains and operations.

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/passenger_rail/news/FRA-allocates-funds-for-Amtrak-Gulf-Coast-service--50433


----------



## neroden

This is an odd mishmash of grants.

http://www.southernrailcommission.org/fra-station-grants

-- Three grants to Alabama are for stations on the Crescent! This is good news, of course.

Anniston gets $139,500 to rebuild the parking lot and extend the platform. (Extended platform presumably means they don't have to stop the train twice, speeding up the Crescent a little.)

Birmingham gets $150,000 for vague purposes ("enhancement and construction of new multimodal station"). I'd love to know what part of the station this is being applied to. They already have full funding for a new multimodal station, which is under construction, *except* that it feeds back into the old passenger tunnel, elevator, and decrepit platform. Here's hoping this is doing something to improve the platform.

Tuscaloosa gets $314,457 for a brand new station.

-- Mobile gets planning funding: a master plan and architectural design for a new station. No construction

-- All three grants to Louisiana are for station design and planning (no construction) for stations on the *Baton Rouge to New Orleans* route! I hope something comes of this but that one's been in limbo as long as I can remember.

-- Mississipi is the one which is serious about Gulf Coast Service Restoration. All four suspended Sunset stations are being fixed up.

Bay St. Louis gets $55,000 for ADA compliance and general improvements

Biloxi gets $252,000 for a new platform and a walkway to the city bus station

Gulfport gete $190,000 for ADA compliance (new platform) and general improvements

Pascagoula gets $659,943 for restoration of the historic station building

So we have three Crescent projects which should be constructed immediately, and the Gulf Coast stations in Mississippi should be ADA-compliant and ready for service, and the rest of the funding is for planning. Given this, I'm a little suspicious that we might see a stub run from New Orleans out to Pascagoula or Mobile long before we see full service restoration along the Gulf Coast; the Mississippi Gulf Coast communities seem really eager.

The PDF gives the total project budgets as well as the size of the grants. I haven't looked to see which projects are now fully funded, which would require figuring out what *other* sources of funding were used for each project. I'm strongly guessing that most of the construction projects are now fully funded, since they're mostly about 50% and the cities have probably provided the other half.

OK, looking further, Tuscaloosa isn't fully funded. They have $1.5 million local and $314457 federal, but the total is 2.95 million so they have a 1.1 million dollar gap

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/news/20160419/city-seeks-money-for-new-train-station

Anniston only requires a $20,000 local match so it's presumably funded, though apparently agreement with NS is still necessary and the plan seems a little screwy (platform extension on the other side of West Fourth Street?).

Birmingham seems to be an add-on to an existing project, so although I can't tell for sure, I really expect that it's fully funded.

It appears that the four Gulf Coast cities in Mississippi have already guaranteed their local funding matches. The local governments are talking about the projects as done deals.

http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/34088043/115m-coming-to-4-coast-cities-to-prepare-for-passenger-rail-service


----------



## WoodyinNYC

DSS&A said:


> The FRA announcement states that *11* communities will share a $2 million grant to make station facility improvements.
> 
> http://www.progressiverailroading.com/passenger_rail/news/FRA-allocates-funds-for-Amtrak-Gulf-Coast-service--50433


To me the news is that almost $400,000 is going to Baton Rouge (and Gonzales and St John Parish, which lie between Baton Rouge and New Orleans).

There's been beaucoup studies about adding passenger trains or light rail to this busy industrialized stretch of the Mississippi. In favor, obviously, Greater Baton Rouge with roughly 600,000 citizens is only 80 miles from New Orleans, with its 1,250,000 metro area. Working against it, the usual: no money, no equipment, current rail system crowded with freights, Louisiana's corrupt and disfunctional politics.

Baton Rouge would nicely extend the proposed New Orleans-Biloxi-Pascagoula-Mobile corridor service. Looks like the FRA could be trying to help smooth the way by dropping a few pennies along the future route.


----------



## Don Newcomb

Gulfport and Biloxi have high hopes that Amtrak will bring lots of fresh pigeons to their casinos.


----------



## neroden

WoodyinNYC said:


> DSS&A said:
> 
> 
> 
> The FRA announcement states that *11* communities will share a $2 million grant to make station facility improvements.
> 
> http://www.progressiverailroading.com/passenger_rail/news/FRA-allocates-funds-for-Amtrak-Gulf-Coast-service--50433
> 
> 
> 
> To me the news is that almost $400,000 is going to Baton Rouge (and Gonzales and St John Parish, which lie between Baton Rouge and New Orleans).
> There's been beaucoup studies about adding passenger trains or light rail to this busy industrialized stretch of the Mississippi. In favor, obviously, Greater Baton Rouge with roughly 600,000 citizens is only 80 miles from New Orleans, with its 1,250,000 metro area. Working against it, the usual: no money, no equipment, current rail system crowded with freights, Louisiana's corrupt and disfunctional politics.
Click to expand...

Given the notorious attitude of CN towards passenger service, this may require buying the tail end of the CN corridor from Orleans Junction (where KCT merges in) until it terminates at the New Orleans Public Belt railway. Or rebuilding the former KCS route through this part of Metairie which is currently empty (though amazingly nobody has built on top of it).
Worth noting: A New Orleans Airport station is possible and proposed along the route.


----------



## jis

Proposed location for future Mobile AL station:

https://www.facebook.com/cityofmobile/photos/a.481796593769.263086.91505048769/10154877854393770/?type=3&theater


----------



## Ryan

Nice! Just a block from the hotel I always stay in.  Wonder if I'll still be working the program when the trains start running...


----------



## WoodyinNYC

WoodyinNYC said:


> DSS&A said:
> 
> 
> 
> The FRA announcement states that *11* communities will share a $2 million grant to make station facility improvements.
> 
> http://www.progressiverailroading.com/passenger_rail/news/FRA-allocates-funds-for-Amtrak-Gulf-Coast-service--50433
> 
> 
> 
> The news is that almost $400,000 is going to Baton Rouge (and Gonzales and St John Parish, which lie between Baton Rouge and New Orleans).
> 
> There's been beaucoup studies about adding passenger trains or light rail to this busy industrialized stretch of the Mississippi. In favor, obviously, Greater Baton Rouge with roughly 600,000 citizens is only 80 miles from New Orleans, with its 1,250,000 metro area.
> 
> Baton Rouge would nicely extend the proposed New Orleans-Biloxi-Pascagoula-Mobile corridor service.
Click to expand...

Baton Rouge has two large casinos of its own.

What the city lacks -- what the entire state of Louisiana lacks -- is a beach. The Mississippi coast enjoys a beautiful beach, built and maintained by the (Army Corps of Engineers) federal government!


----------



## Don Newcomb

Just an aside. When Amtrak runs an "inspection train" full of VIP's, like they did here a few months ago, who crews the train? I mean what would the usual engineer do if a US Senator said he wanted to bring the train into station? This is what happened in Gulfport. I'd imagine if it were a regular Amtrak crew (part friendly and helpful, part surly, just serving out the time waiting for retirement) that Amtrak would find their budget cut to zero during the next session. They must have a group of crew members who are specially selected for their ability to be nice to Senators, Governors and the like.


----------



## jis

I have not met a surly crew even on the Autumn Special, and I am thankfully quite far from being a slimey Congresscritter. So I am sure it is not hard for them to find such volunteers.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Amtrak always makes sure that the "Best of the Best" crew such Specials.

And the Amtrak Suits that go along on such trips are all very practiced Diplomats and VIP handlers.

No Chicago attitudes allowed!


----------



## LookingGlassTie

I understand that a restored Amtrak route along the Gulf Coast is in the works (following the destruction from Katrina).

Two questions:

1. Will that new route be named "Gulf Coast" or something else?

2. Will the route run from New Orleans to Miami (as the Sunset Limited used to do), or will there be different endpoints for it?

Thanks!


----------



## pennyk

MODERATOR NOTE: a new thread was merged with the existing thread on the same topic.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

LookingGlassTie said:


> I understand that a restored Amtrak route along the Gulf Coast is in the works (following the destruction from Katrina).
> 
> Two questions:
> 
> 1. Will that new route be named "Gulf Coast" or something else?
> 
> 2. Will the route run from New Orleans to Miami (as the Sunset Limited used to do), or will there be different endpoints for it?
> 
> Thanks!


1. The train will likely be an extension of the City of New Orleans. If it is not I do not believe that the name is known yet.

2. The Western/Northern endpoint will be either New Orleans or Chicago and the Eastern/Southern endpoint will be either Mobile or Orlando.


----------



## LookingGlassTie

Oops I forgot there was already a thread started about this!


----------



## Don Newcomb

An item in the local news: http://www.wlox.com/clip/13117521/push-continues-to-bring-amtrak-to-the-coast


----------



## dlagrua

After Katrina hit CSX repaired the route fairly quickly. In a matter of weeks (or was it months) that freight trains were rolling again. I find it odd that once Amtrak train service is discontinued it takes years and millions of dollars to get it started again. We will no doubt have gulf state service again but my estimate is in 2025..


----------



## CCC1007

dlagrua said:


> After Katrina hit CSX repaired the route fairly quickly. In a matter of weeks (or was it months) that freight trains were rolling again. I find it odd that once Amtrak train service is discontinued it takes years and millions of dollars to get it started again. We will no doubt have gulf state service again but my estimate is in 2025..


Could the secret have something to do with the missing station buildings?


----------



## Palmetto

I suppose it could be, but there are multiple stops where there is no building to go into. So why would this route be any different, after the platforms were spruced up after the storm?


----------



## Don Newcomb

CCC1007 said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> 
> After Katrina hit CSX repaired the route fairly quickly. In a matter of weeks (or was it months) that freight trains were rolling again. I find it odd that once Amtrak train service is discontinued it takes years and millions of dollars to get it started again. We will no doubt have gulf state service again but my estimate is in 2025..
> 
> 
> 
> Could the secret have something to do with the missing station buildings?
Click to expand...

No. The buildings were pretty much in tact. I think Pass Christian's platform was messed up but they aren't even talking about stopping there this time. I think the problem was Amtrak. They simply didn't want to run this route. The station in Gulfport was and is fine. The old platform in Biloxi is still in the same spot. They just want to move it to align with their new transportation center. Nothing much changed in Pascagoula.


----------



## CCC1007

Don Newcomb said:


> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> 
> After Katrina hit CSX repaired the route fairly quickly. In a matter of weeks (or was it months) that freight trains were rolling again. I find it odd that once Amtrak train service is discontinued it takes years and millions of dollars to get it started again. We will no doubt have gulf state service again but my estimate is in 2025..
> 
> 
> 
> Could the secret have something to do with the missing station buildings?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No. The buildings were pretty much in tact. I think Pass Christian's platform was messed up but they aren't even talking about stopping there this time. I think the problem was Amtrak. They simply didn't want to run this route. The station in Gulfport was and is fine. The old platform in Biloxi is still in the same spot. They just want to move it to align with their new transportation center. Nothing much changed in Pascagoula.
Click to expand...

Articles in Trains Magazine from the period indicated that eleven station buildings were demolished or severely damaged by the hurricanes in 2005. Were those reports false?


----------



## Don Newcomb

CCC1007 said:


> Articles in Trains Magazine from the period indicated that eleven station buildings were demolished or severely damaged by the hurricanes in 2005. Were those reports false?


The Bay St. Louis station may have suffered some damage but it's still there. Pass Christian was just a platform with no station. Gulfport station is still exactly where it ever was. I can't say if it suffered damage but if so, it was repaired. The Biloxi platform is exactly where it was in '05, behind the cathedral. Pascagoula station would not have suffered damage. I think Mobile station was sold and repurposed, so they need to build a new one. Pensacola station is exactly where it was. May need some sprucing up, having been unused all those years.

Think about the claim of 11 station buildings demolished or severely damaged. Which 11? I can only count 9 that were in the path of Katrina: New Orleans, Slidell, Picayune, Hattiesburg, Bay St. Louis, Pass Christian, Gulfport, Biloxi, Pascagoula. The first four are currently in operation. Four of the other five still exist and are in pretty good shape. What changes need to be made to Gulfport? A new awning to keep sun and rain off passengers. Biloxi? Move the platform a block east to the new transportation center. Pascagoula was too far away to have suffered any serious damage.

Gulfport Station: https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3684968,-89.0948821,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1E3LCPI4V-08MgrDGVHYcQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Bay St. Louis: https://www.google.com/maps/@30.308078,-89.334286,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1s23556050!2e1!3e10!6s%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fproxy%2FFn0obfLqORj29hyioyrbbQyQ6ynJdlguiqWT9ST2F3D8EQ5ySUJbsybZeHZ4XBOyZc_OoH4GZHtDBXNpPVLkDiYgO2f35g%3Dw203-h114!7i3296!8i1854

Biloxi: https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3987449,-88.8911272,3a,75y,270h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si-bEQSd25FbNtPNI3_6HYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656(the platform on the right of the photo is all there ever was, AFAIK)

Pascagoula: https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3676371,-88.5599322,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVsMLMqsiH3s1-oZJsP7s_g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Mobile: https://www.google.com/maps/@30.6998273,-88.0457728,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sy-8HgFHiRwbO3yjR0U-x4w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Pensacola: https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4192168,-87.1976604,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVMwO2FHk3Brkt7aB3gH0cQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656(sort of hard to see through the trees but the building is fine)

Better view of the Pensacola station but from farther away: https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4195558,-87.1986394,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4qFxCQQatHmr4IlvXrZPsQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


----------



## Ryan

CCC1007 said:


> Articles in Trains Magazine from the period indicated that eleven station buildings were demolished or severely damaged by _*the hurricanes in 2005*_. Were those reports false?


There was more than one hurricane that made landfall on the Gulf Coast that year.... Look at more than just Katrina.


----------



## Greg

I'm sure everyone has already seen this re: Moorman support. Some crazy comments!

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/Moorman-Amtrak-committed-to-reviving-Gulf-Coast-service--51033


----------



## xyzzy

The Amtrak station in Mobile (ex-L&N, 1956) was damaged by water beyond economic repair. It was demolished, and its site was reused for surface parking (reportedly, CSX sold the parcel). Some other site would have to be identified.

The photograph of the Mobile station in the link provided by Don Newcomb is the ex-GM&O station. It was reused for non-rail purposes many years ago. The L&N/CSX tracks on which Amtrak operated do not serve the ex-GM&O station, which was stub-ended.


----------



## C&FWRR

Not that there's new information, but for the sake of reading material here's a recent article posted on the website of a FL Panhandle media outlet ....

http://www.wzep1460.com/restoration-of-rail-service-makes-progress/


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

Re-establishing Amtrak service east of New Orleans just hit a roadblock named Hunter Harrison. Many people, including Govenors, Senators, and the Southern Rail Commission, need to remind CSX that they wouldn't have a railroad east of New Orleans without significant taxpayer funds to rebuild their railroad after Katrina. Mr. Harrison and his negotiators have apparently forgot this important financial fact. Here's an article from a few days ago.

http://atmorenews.com/2017/06/14/amtrak-returning-not-so-fast/


----------



## Ryan

> "We were down to a little less than $800 million when the Federal Railroad Administration thought the number should be $117 million to get us back up and going,” Gehman said. “There was still a distance, but CSX has since undergone an ownership change. Hunter Harrison took over, and he is not amenable to our interests. Their position was fixed and firm. They said we should go back to the original estimate of $2.3 billion, that they would have no further negotiations, and they walked out of the meeting.”


Well isn't that special.


----------



## west point

DSS&A said:


> Hi,
> 
> Re-establishing Amtrak service east of New Orleans just hit a roadblock named Hunter Harrison. Many people, including Govenors, Senators, and the Southern Rail Commission, need to remind CSX that they wouldn't have a railroad east of New Orleans without significant taxpayer funds to rebuild their railroad after Katrina. Mr. Harrison and his negotiators have apparently forgot this important financial fact. Here's an article from a few days ago.
> 
> http://atmorenews.com/2017/06/14/amtrak-returning-not-so-fast/


Well maybe they can take the track in payment ? Hard headiness takes hard headiness.


----------



## A Voice

Two things stick out from the article. First, the obvious, that CSX's position "is simply a negotiating tool" and, second, that prior to this setback there were real plans to have train service restored this year - in 2017. 

If there is sufficient political will (pressure) for this to happen, CSX will not remain so intransigent.


----------



## DSS&A

A Voice said:


> Two things stick out from the article. First, the obvious, that CSX's position "is simply a negotiating tool" and, second, that prior to this setback there were real plans to have train service restored this year - in 2017.
> 
> If there is sufficient political will (pressure) for this to happen, CSX will not remain so intransigent.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

I also noted those two items in the article. That is why I mentioned it would be a good negotiating item to mention that without taxpayer money after Katrina, CSX would not have this section of track anymore.

I would think that Amtrak CEO's experience will be very helpful as discussions continue. The next few meetings should be interesting...


----------



## Thirdrail7

DSS&A said:


> Hi,
> 
> Re-establishing Amtrak service east of New Orleans just hit a roadblock named Hunter Harrison. Many people, including Govenors, Senators, and the Southern Rail Commission, need to remind CSX that they wouldn't have a railroad east of New Orleans without significant taxpayer funds to rebuild their railroad after Katrina. Mr. Harrison and his negotiators have apparently forgot this important financial fact. Here's an article from a few days ago.
> 
> http://atmorenews.com/2017/06/14/amtrak-returning-not-so-fast


It would take serious political will and pressure to make this happen. The southern states seem to lack both of them. They should take a page from Virginia. Negotiate in good faith or we'll eyeball your operation into a standstill...and prepare to take it if necessary.



Ryan said:


> "We were down to a little less than $800 million when the Federal Railroad Administration thought the number should be $117 million to get us back up and going,” Gehman said. “There was still a distance, but CSX has since undergone an ownership change. Hunter Harrison took over, and he is not amenable to our interests. Their position was fixed and firm. They said we should go back to the original estimate of $2.3 billion, that they would have no further negotiations, and they walked out of the meeting.”
> 
> 
> 
> Well isn't that special.
Click to expand...


Perhaps we should send in the experts from this board that wonder why there isn't a separate West Palm Beach special to negotiate with CSX. I'm sure they'll make headway.


----------



## west point

Sanford station was destroyed by a hurricane that was listed as a station stop for restored service. We still have the problem what train)s are you going to rob the equipment ? You need more equipment either rebuilt wrecks or new !.


----------



## A Voice

west point said:


> Sanford station was destroyed by a hurricane that was listed as a station stop for restored service. We still have the problem what train)s are you going to rob the equipment ? You need more equipment either rebuilt wrecks or new !.


Amtrak has previously stated it has the equipment for a _City of New Orleans_ extension to Orlando.


----------



## Anderson

(1) I thought the ICC was abolished long ago?
(2) So, a practical question: Since NOL-ORL is only "suspended", what would the result be if the plan became to extend the CONO three days a week (in line with the old schedule)? I do _not_ like that, but technically there's a (suspended due to track damage) 3x weekly train on those tracks...so I do have to sincerely ask if Amtrak couldn't just say "Well, I guess negotiations broke down...so we're going to be running the old 3x weekly schedule starting on Day X." The Sunset East _did_ connect to the CONO and while the layover would be awkward I see no reason that the old Sunset East timetable couldn't just be slapped back into use (especially since the layover would be _longer_ this time). Don't get me wrong, I like a daily train and I'd like to see a more efficient schedule, but in this specific case I think CSX has (albeit due to a management dispute) basically acted in bad faith.

Again, I've always been under the impression that Amtrak has had the ability to restore the Sunset East with relative ease and that if CSX refused to let them back on they probably wouldn't have much of a leg to stand on (else what's been the point of the fig leaf line on the map all these years)...the reluctance to restore the train was always Amtrak's reluctance, after all.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Not true, because CSX would argue that a 12 year suspension due to track conditions is de facto a service discontinuation, and any first year bar member could deliver that with adequate conviction.


----------



## A Voice

Anderson said:


> (1) I thought the ICC was abolished long ago?
> 
> (2) So, a practical question: Since NOL-ORL is only "suspended", what would the result be if the plan became to extend the CONO three days a week (in line with the old schedule)? I do _not_ like that, but technically there's a (suspended due to track damage) 3x weekly train on those tracks...so I do have to sincerely ask if Amtrak couldn't just say "Well, I guess negotiations broke down...so we're going to be running the old 3x weekly schedule starting on Day X." The Sunset East _did_ connect to the CONO and while the layover would be awkward I see no reason that the old Sunset East timetable couldn't just be slapped back into use (especially since the layover would be _longer_ this time). Don't get me wrong, I like a daily train and I'd like to see a more efficient schedule, but in this specific case I think CSX has (albeit due to a management dispute) basically acted in bad faith.
> 
> Again, I've always been under the impression that Amtrak has had the ability to restore the Sunset East with relative ease and that if CSX refused to let them back on they probably wouldn't have much of a leg to stand on (else what's been the point of the fig leaf line on the map all these years)...the reluctance to restore the train was always Amtrak's reluctance, after all.





Green Maned Lion said:


> Not true, because CSX would argue that a 12 year suspension due to track conditions is de facto a service discontinuation, and any first year bar member could deliver that with adequate conviction.


It is in neither Amtrak's nor CSX's best interest for disputes such as this to be settled in a court of law or by regulatory edict, that much is certain (potentially, they have too much to lose).


----------



## west point

A Voice said:


> Amtrak has previously stated it has the equipment for a _City of New Orleans_ extension to Orlando


That statement may have been made but by whom ? Boardman ? If Amtrak takes equipment for this extension we need to look at possible consequences. Face it the present equipment has some age. It is going to take more shop time to keep them in top condition. If the equipment does not get proper care there will be more complaints that such and such car is crummy. Those statements are already prevalent on many forums. Another thing to consider is the inability for Amtrak to surge its capacity very much during high travel times. Many posts over the years mention how the legacy RRs brought out older equipment during rush periods.

This gets us to the problem of equipment. Tell your congress critter Amtrak needs more equipment.

FYI----- The airline industry does not have as high percentage availability of equipment.


----------



## railbuck

west point said:


> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak has previously stated it has the equipment for a _City of New Orleans_ extension to Orlando
> 
> 
> 
> That statement may have been made but by whom ? Boardman ?
Click to expand...

Equally important is *when* the statement was made. At the time, I believe the NS bilevel order would still have been in play and may have been factored in.


----------



## west point

railbuck said:


> west point said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak has previously stated it has the equipment for a _City of New Orleans_ extension to Orlando
> 
> 
> 
> That statement may have been made but by whom ? Boardman ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Equally important is *when* the statement was made. At the time, I believe the NS bilevel order would still have been in play and may have been factored in.
Click to expand...

Wish I had said that, Very good point! The old / new equipment bug a boo. Amtrak may have been planning for expansion of several routes and trains based on the N-S bi level order. If the order had been proceeding on time would they have been already certified for 125 running and being delivered about 2 a week ? They would also have taken pressure off the single level fleet.


----------



## Anderson

I wonder where we are in terms of slack in the Superliner sleeper fleet, since that's a pretty near to immutable constraint at the moment. I think some equipment was freed by the shuffling of the Sunset Limited's timetable, but the CONO running CHI-NOL is about an 18:30 train while presuming the 2005 timetable were to prevail east of there (roughly 21 hours) the total run would be somewhere in the range of 40-42 hours (depending on padding at NOL, negotiations with CSX, etc.). That means five sets. Of course, if one set were freed by the Sunset East then Amtrak might be able to cobble together a second set from the slack they were able to use as an extra set when the Builder went to pieces, that would do it...but that sure feels like it's cutting it close.


----------



## Don Newcomb

Green Maned Lion said:


> Not true, because CSX would argue that a 12 year suspension due to track conditions is de facto a service discontinuation, and any first year bar member could deliver that with adequate conviction.


At the time, Amtrak was all too happy to just let that route die and blame it on Katrina. Big mistake.


----------



## CCC1007

Anderson said:


> I wonder where we are in terms of slack in the Superliner sleeper fleet, since that's a pretty near to immutable constraint at the moment. I think some equipment was freed by the shuffling of the Sunset Limited's timetable, but the CONO running CHI-NOL is about an 18:30 train while presuming the 2005 timetable were to prevail east of there (roughly 21 hours) the total run would be somewhere in the range of 40-42 hours (depending on padding at NOL, negotiations with CSX, etc.). That means five sets. Of course, if one set were freed by the Sunset East then Amtrak might be able to cobble together a second set from the slack they were able to use as an extra set when the Builder went to pieces, that would do it...but that sure feels like it's cutting it close.


40-42 hours equates to four sets to me, with 12-16 hours of turnaround time to share between Orlando and Chicago.


----------



## jis

CCC1007 said:


> Anderson said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder where we are in terms of slack in the Superliner sleeper fleet, since that's a pretty near to immutable constraint at the moment. I think some equipment was freed by the shuffling of the Sunset Limited's timetable, but the CONO running CHI-NOL is about an 18:30 train while presuming the 2005 timetable were to prevail east of there (roughly 21 hours) the total run would be somewhere in the range of 40-42 hours (depending on padding at NOL, negotiations with CSX, etc.). That means five sets. Of course, if one set were freed by the Sunset East then Amtrak might be able to cobble together a second set from the slack they were able to use as an extra set when the Builder went to pieces, that would do it...but that sure feels like it's cutting it close.
> 
> 
> 
> 40-42 hours equates to four sets to me, with 12-16 hours of turnaround time to share between Orlando and Chicago.
Click to expand...

Instead orf randomly speculating I would like to draw your attention to the detailed analysis already done by Amtrak on page 22-23 of http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5302778ee4b07a6f640874ef/t/5670735bd8af10d0d84e4965/1450210139160/Gulf+Coast+Initiative+Report+2015.pdf

In particular, the proposal is not to run the entire NOL consist all the way to Orlando, but to run a shorter train beyond NOL.The proposal is to run one Coach, one Coach-Baggage, one sleeper and one CCC with one P42 from NOL to ORL 5 such consists are required. which means in effect two additional consists for this shorter train will be required over and above what is already allocated for the three consists used for the CONO. See the table on page 23 for the incremental requirement,


----------



## Anderson

Interesting...the timetable is 42 hours westbound but only 38 hours eastbound. However, I can't find the "extra" hours.


----------



## jis

Anderson said:


> Interesting...the timetable is 42 hours westbound but only 38 hours eastbound. However, I can't find the "extra" hours.


It is in the dwell time at New Orleans.


----------



## Anderson

...I have no idea how I missed that. There's also some dwell time at Tallahassee the other way (as far as I can tell) to try and give Tallahassee at least passable times (neither 2310 nor 0500 are great, but at least they're not completely "in the hole" a la CIN).


----------



## John Bobinyec

CSX's rebuttal.

I'm wondering whether the installation of PTC should be included in the estimates of necessary investment. If there remains no passenger service from New Orleans to Florida, would it be necessary for CSX to install PTC on that line anyway?

jb


----------



## RPC

If CSX wants to send hazmat (including crude oil) that way, PTC is required by end of 2018. (And this is the east end of the Chemical Coast we're discussing!) I suspect they see an opportunity to have someone else pay for the installation.


----------



## MikefromCrete

You got to remember that CSX needs to find the $80 million it has to pay to Hunter Harrison and his Wall Street buddies to "compensate" him for his move from CP that nobody requested but Hunter and his buddies.


----------



## John Bobinyec

RPC said:


> If CSX wants to send hazmat (including crude oil) that way, PTC is required by end of 2018. (And this is the east end of the Chemical Coast we're discussing!) I suspect they see an opportunity to have someone else pay for the installation.


Perhaps the reestablishment of passenger service on the line will have to wait until after CSX has installed PTC there.

jb


----------



## west point

Several different posts have mentioned that CSX has or is planning to route all New Orleans - JAX haz mat traffic from Mobile - Montgomery - LaGrange - Manchester - Jacksonville. now whether that will or is ever going to happen ??? Now as to how intermediate Haz Mat traffic will be handled is problematic.


----------



## Anderson

John Bobinyec said:


> CSX's rebuttal.
> 
> I'm wondering whether the installation of PTC should be included in the estimates of necessary investment. If there remains no passenger service from New Orleans to Florida, would it be necessary for CSX to install PTC on that line anyway?
> 
> jb


I'm wondering how it was that CSX came down to the $800m-ish proposal.


----------



## nshvlcat

Latest CSX concerns about restored Gulf Coast service.


----------



## Greg

That is so disturbing. I've lost hope that this will ever happen.


----------



## DSS&A

The letter is not too disturbing. The PTC Federal requirement is a known fact. The Feds have started to provide some funding for PTC installation, bit not a large amount of money. If delays due to bridge openings (which not controlled by either Amtrak or CSX) are not counted towards on time performance, then CSX cannot be charged for something it can't control and it becomes a non-issue for CSX. One question is is there existing freight traffic on all or portions of this route that requires PTC installation even if there is no passenger train service. If so, then CSX is responsible for that cost. Also, if it is advantageous for CSX to start routing freight that requires PTC installation (and they plan to do it within 3 years of PTC installation), then they should pay their fair share.


----------



## neroden

I checked my railroad atlases to figure out where the drawbridges were. 7 are between New Orleans and Mobile and 3 immediately east of Mobile.

Yuck.

Sea level rise means that the scientific consensus is that New Orleans is doomed. I guess I should visit soon. Anyway, I'm realizing this route isn't just coastal, it's *dangerously* coastal.


----------



## Carolina Special

Seems like a negotiating ploy to get more money for CSX out of the deal, rather than an absolute hindrance.

Also interesting this letter comes from an assistant VP, not a higher level executive. Compare to Moorman having pieces under his own byline to justify the Penn Station repairs.


----------



## Don Newcomb

Coming out of New Orleans, there's a bascule bridge on the Industrial Canal, a swing bridge at the Rigolets, Pearl River, Bay St. Louis, Biloxi, Pascagoula. Not sure if there's another before Mobile. Out of Mobile, there'd be at least one on the river. One over Escambia Bay coming out of Pensacola. That should be about it until you get to the Chattahoochee River.

P.S. Forgot Chef Menteur Pass. That makes 7 between NOLA and Mobile.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

I agree that these letters & announcements are negotiating ploys. Amtrak runs hundreds of trains on the Northeast Corridor daily on a route with multiple lift bridges and they still keep good on time performance. If Amtrak can do it on the NEC with over 100 daily trains, CSX can do it with a much smaller number of trains, even with a single mainline and appropriate sidings.


----------



## west point

Wasn't the Pensacola draw ( swing ? ) bridge replaced by a fixed high span concrete bridge ?


----------



## Don Newcomb

west point said:


> Wasn't the Pensacola draw ( swing ? ) bridge replaced by a fixed high span concrete bridge ?


Yeah. After Ivan (2004) took out the old wooden bridge. For 100 years it was a wooden bridge with a swing in the center and for 12 it's been an elevated concrete bridge. I forgot.


----------



## Thirdrail7

If the 80% OTP tolerances are eventually found to be unenforceable, that would knock down a large part of their argument. I suspect they still wouldn't budge even if all of the their requests were met.

I'm not sure why people don;t understand that CSX really doesn't want passenger trains on their tracks. This is like the 90's all over again.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

CSX is pointing to Amtraks report and using it in their negotiations. Has Amtrak or the Southern Rail Commission considered "updating" the report which might have a different financial cost result?


----------



## Don Newcomb

I can actually see how those 7 bridges can, potentially mess up scheduling on a single trackage line. AFAIK, only the Industrial Canal bridge in New Orleans has two tracks. Although, only the Industrial Canal, Mobile and Tensaw River bridges open very frequently. There is not that much traffic through the other bridges.

However, L&N ran the Humming Bird over these same tracks for many years. At least as far as Flomaton, where it turned north.


----------



## PaulM

Don Newcomb said:


> However, L&N ran the Humming Bird over these same tracks for many years. At least as far as Flomaton, where it turned north.


And the Pan American, Piedmont, and Azalean. Not to mention the Gulf Wind which was tacked on to one of the others and split at Flomaton.


----------



## Don Newcomb

One other issue is that between Waveland and Pascagoula, MS, there must be 100 grade-level crossing. Just today a semi-truck got stuck on a crossing in Biloxi and stopped auto & rail traffic for several hours. It looks like the trailer's sand shoe (landing gear) got caught on the crossing and ripped up the rubber crossing pad, which had to be removed and replaced.


----------



## Caesar La Rock

Moorman isn't giving up on the service.

http://www.pnj.com/story/news/2017/07/17/amtrak-co-ceo-optimistic-restoring-service-gulf-coast/485000001/


----------



## Karl1459

Used car negotiating rules: Make your asking sale price high... you can always go down but never up. Make your buying offer low... you can always go up but never down.

The dance is just beginning, sit back and enjoy.


----------



## nshvlcat

The Gulf Coast Working Group's report has been submitted.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

That's not used car negotiating rules, that's the rules of negotiating anything where the selling party is willing to sell.


----------



## Don Newcomb

Local newspaper: Gulf Coast wants two trains: One NOL to Orlando, the other NOL to Mobile.

http://www.sunherald.com/news/politics-government/article162135023.html


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Don Newcomb said:


> Local newspaper: Gulf Coast wants two trains: One NOL to Orlando, the other NOL to Mobile.
> 
> http://www.sunherald.com/news/politics-government/article162135023.html


That Mobile-New Orleans route will be a great corridor someday. It's short enuff that business types could leave one city around breakfast time, spend the day in meetings, and return home before bedtime. The casinos along the Mississippi Coast will attract riders. And they will produce them: It's easy to imagine visitors in the beachfront hotels grabbing a train for a day trip to the city.

Meanwhile, a route Baton Rouge-New Orleans has been talked about and studied for years. Corridor trains there may have to wait until the Florida train is operating successfully to build solid support for state-financed operating costs. Of course, the Florida and Mobile trains would feed passengers to the Baton Rouge train, and vice versa.

Louisiana has plenty of gambling opportunities, so the Mississippi casinos would not be a big draw. But Louisiana has basically no beaches -- certainly none to compete with those on the Mississippi Coast. (Sand is pumped to create and maintain these beaches by the Army Corps of Engineers, thus making them, like Amtrak, a service paid for by federal funds.)

Both the Mobile and Baton Rouge corridors would use freed-up Horizon coaches, if their replacements ever arrive on the Midwest corridors.


----------



## Karl1459

Green Maned Lion said:


> That's not used car negotiating rules, that's the rules of negotiating anything where the selling party is willing to sell.


Then there is government contract negotiating rules... bid low on flawed specifications and charge through the nose for change orders.


----------



## Carolina Special

CSX is evidently telling shippers to expect "bumps in the road" including extra days for shipping times as CSX tightens up schedules. This comes from today's earning call. Claiming short-term pain for long-term gain.

Probably not a good sign for Amtrak negotiations along the Gulf Coast.


----------



## LookingGlassTie

If the service does get restored, would it make more sense to route it through Jacksonville or Orlando, FL?


----------



## Woodcut60

Seventeen drawbridges. Wow! That sounds not good in terms of On-Time Performance for the proposed route.


----------



## west point

17 drawbridges ? what is needed is the current openings that occur or maybe just the closings if that is what some draw bridges do ? Traffic thru the bridge openings and times would need documenting as well. Any calendar differences ? You take the train schedule and match them to the boat transit times with tide tables as well if tides affect the bridge transits. What bridges not manned full time ? Not so simple is it ?


----------



## A Voice

LookingGlassTie said:


> If the service does get restored, would it make more sense to route it through Jacksonville or Orlando, FL?


The route from New Orleans passes through Jacksonville before turning south to Orlando.


----------



## LookingGlassTie

A Voice said:


> LookingGlassTie said:
> 
> 
> 
> If the service does get restored, would it make more sense to route it through Jacksonville or Orlando, FL?
> 
> 
> 
> The route from New Orleans passes through Jacksonville before turning south to Orlando.
Click to expand...

True, but I wasn't sure which would be the ideal stop based on Amtrak revenue and/or passenger preferences.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

LookingGlassTie said:


> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LookingGlassTie said:
> 
> 
> 
> If the service does get restored, would it make more sense to route it through Jacksonville or Orlando, FL?
> 
> 
> 
> The route from New Orleans passes through Jacksonville before turning south to Orlando.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> True, but I wasn't sure which would be the ideal stop based on Amtrak revenue and/or passenger preferences.
Click to expand...

It has to go somewhere to get serviced and turned. The Sanford shops north of Orlando will handle that.

But seriously, which is the more popular destination, Jacksonville or Disney World?

The to-be-restored line has been carefully worked out. Give the study some study.

www.newsherald.com/assets/pdf/DA2111216.PDF


----------



## neroden

WoodyinNYC said:


> Don Newcomb said:
> 
> 
> 
> Local newspaper: Gulf Coast wants two trains: One NOL to Orlando, the other NOL to Mobile.
> 
> http://www.sunherald.com/news/politics-government/article162135023.html
> 
> 
> 
> That Mobile-New Orleans route will be a great corridor someday.
Click to expand...

If it gets built before sea level rise floods that coastline. At the current rate.... I'm thinking not.

I wish advocates in these states the best of luck in spending local money on this project, but I would prioritize routes which aren't going to get washed out.


----------



## Greg

It was just announced on another list that CSX has put up the Tallahassee and PA subdivisions for sale. These stretch from Baldwin to Pensacola. I'm sure this throws a monkey wrench into the entire non-moving process. But it sure can't help to dream what it would be like if Amtrak could buy this line.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## Anderson

Greg said:


> It was just announced on another list that CSX has put up the Tallahassee and PA subdivisions for sale. These stretch from Baldwin to Pensacola. I'm sure this throws a monkey wrench into the entire non-moving process. But it sure can't help to dream what it would be like if Amtrak could buy this line.
> 
> Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Amtrak Forum mobile app


On the one hand it throws a monkey wrench in the works since there would likely be yet another operator on the route in question. On the other hand, I rather suspect that a Class II/III railroad is probably more likely to be friendly towards the guaranteed paycheck that Amtrak would offer (a daily Sunset East over perhaps 300 miles of track would offer about 219,000 train-miles; multiply as appropriate to sort out the annual paycheck) with virtually no cost towards the railroad in question than CSX has been. If it came with, say, $50-100m in track improvements and the like then I'd be hard to see the railroad in question turning it down. The only real risk on that side is that Amtrak might have to pick up more of the maintenance bill than they would otherwise.

The real risk, though, is simply the addition of another party to the process (and with it, room for finger-pointing about delays if the train were to get started).


----------



## west point

If we study the Ethan Allen performance many years has no delays at all for a month. VTR certainly comes thru.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Greg said:


> ... CSX has put up the Tallahassee and PA subdivisions for sale. ... from Baldwin to Pensacola.


CSX, 2017: "That stretch is vital to our system. Putting any Amtrak trains on it will seriously disrupt our freight operations. We'll need a Billion for upgrades to avoid harm to our core business."

CSX, 2018: "We don't even need those tracks in Florida for our freight business. See if we can unload them on a short-line or some other sucker."

(Edit: Removed quote marks, but then restored them. I don't believe a reader should think that CSX would so bluntly say "unload them on a short-line or some other sucker". The cartoonish language reveals that it is a paraphrase for editorial effect, not a real quote.)


----------



## niemi24s

WoodyinNYC said:


> CSX, 2017: "That stretch is vital to our system. Putting any Amtrak trains on it will seriously disrupt our freight operations. We'll need a Billion for upgrades to avoid harm to our core business."
> 
> CSX, 2018: "We don't even need those tracks in Florida for our freight business. See if we can unload them on a short-line or some other sucker."


The quotation marks used above imply these are actual statements (verbal or written) by CSX. If so, the source should be given. If not, they should be deleted.


----------



## Thirdrail7

niemi24s said:


> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> CSX, 2017: "That stretch is vital to our system. Putting any Amtrak trains on it will seriously disrupt our freight operations. We'll need a Billion for upgrades to avoid harm to our core business."
> 
> CSX, 2018: "We don't even need those tracks in Florida for our freight business. See if we can unload them on a short-line or some other sucker."
> 
> 
> 
> The quotation marks used above imply these are actual statements (verbal or written) by CSX. If so, the source should be given. If not, they should be deleted.
Click to expand...


Assuming the subs are for sale, even if they didn't directly say it, it couldn't be more clear. Haven't you heard Niemi24s? Actions speak LOUDER than words.


----------



## Anderson

So, just to wonder, but how much of that $1bn or so in improvements was on these two subs?


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Anderson said:


> So, just to wonder, but how much of that $1bn or so in improvements was on these two subs?


Actually, I don't recall an exact amounted demanded by CSX, or where they wanted to spend it. I just heard that they asked so much altogether that it seemed to stop the discussion. But the dark, unsignaled stretch (where the new train is to run overnight) lies between Pensacola and Tallahassee. My hunch is that's where a lot of money could be spent.


----------



## xyzzy

CSX could run New Orleans - Waycross freight via Montgomery and Lagrange. The underlying issue is that CSX is deemphasizing east-west freight interchange in New Orleans in favor of Memphis, which does not have the hurricane vulnerability or the drawbridge irritations.

I doubt a shortline buyer of Pensacola-Baldwin, even G&W, would have any enthusiasm for Class IV track. Class III is the best that could be hoped for in that scenario. It wouldn't make much difference to the dark territory which is 59 mph anyway, but it would on the signaled territory. The real question is whether Pensacola-Baldwin would be allowed to fall to Class II.


----------



## nshvlcat

Here is an update.

http://www.northescambia.com/2018/03/budget-bill-puts-gulf-coast-amtrak-service-back-on-track

Sent from my SM-T350 using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## jis

Ideally SRC through government funding should simply acquire the trackage from CSX and setup a compact for maintaining and running it by contracting with or leasing to an outfit capable of doing so. As Neroden often says, gaining ownership of the property is the best way to enable a viable and user friendly passenger service. As for whether the states will develop adequate intestinal fortitude to do so is a different matter.

Offered enough money, almost anyone will develop and enthusiasm.




Look at what UP has been enthusiastically doing in California!


----------



## Palmland

With the additional funding Amtrak received for the FY 2018 budget, if this is going to happen it will be this year. In Amtrak's 5 year plan, working on the Gulf Coast project was the only route specifically mentioned and it fits in with Anderson's emphasis on corridor services in areas were the economy is growing. But, I still think the best we can hope for, at least in the near term, is service between New Orleans and Mobile. It avoids extremely expensive track and signal upgrades.

And, that segment of the route is where the money is in terms of the gulf coast casinos for the tourists and upscale beach communities as well as a growing Mobile metro area. It also might be a justification for improving the CONO if it used to provide the crew/equipment for the service. Mobile is also the logical spot for Thruway bus connections. Time to Pensacola is about 50 min, the Sunset took 2.5 hours because of the circuitous routing via Flomaton. Tallahassee is 3.5 hours from Mobile on the highway compared to 7 on the Sunset.


----------



## jis

At least that will let the reluctant Florida DOT off the hook.



They can then say it is not their problem and the Florida cities will most likely lose enthusiasm too. Very few wish to subsidize a bus operation, so they won't from the Florida end.

I don't understand the logic of why any of this will help improve the CONO. In any case only a few cars from CONO were going to run through using NOL based crew.


----------



## Palmland

Good points, jls. Regarding improvements to CONO, I guess I was naively hoping Amtrak might market the train as a through route to the Gulf Coast and upgrade the dining/lounge to be comparable to other LD trains. But as we know, Amtrak doesn’t do marketing well.

I had never thought about who pays for Thruway connections. If it is alway the state and not Amtrak, you are probably right. But who knows, Florida might see it as an opportunity to promote a connection to the national rail network from that area. That would be especially so if the bus connection went beyond Pensacola to the beach communities along US 98: Destin, Fort Walton Beach, and Panama City beach.


----------



## Don Newcomb

Palmland said:


> ....That would be especially so if the bus connection went beyond Pensacola to the beach communities along US 98: Destin, Fort Walton Beach, and Panama City beach.


US-98 has become so congested from P'cola eastward that it's just not viable for transportation any more. Sections that used to be open highway are now urban sprawl with a stop-light every 1/4 mile. Going from P'cola to say, Port St. Joe, I'd never consider going 98. Rather, I'd take I-10 then down SR-71 through Blountstown and Wewahitchka, even though that's a much longer route. US-98 is just that bad.


----------



## Gulfwind2

I think any funding is better than no funding, but I'm going to be the skeptical one and start writing some letters demanding an explanation as to how $35 million in funding is supposed to get this project anywhere.

The Southern Rail Commission has a small budget which it is responsible for, but they have not been notorious for spending that money wisely. Most members of the commission have no experience whatsoever with class I railroads, MPOs, Passenger rail or public transit authorities, or anything of the like. Despite my finicky attitude on how this was done, I am going to hope that the $35 million is spent in the right places (i.e. facilitating the extension of a couple of sidings and building a small track in Mobile to park small corridor trains for a same day turnaround to NOL).


----------



## nshvlcat

Some additional information.

http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article207122879.html

Sent from my SM-T350 using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## Don Newcomb

I sometimes wish that diesel cars hadn't been banned. The NOLA-MOB run would be perfect for a pair of diesel cars.


----------



## jis

Don Newcomb said:


> I sometimes wish that diesel cars hadn't been banned. The NOLA-MOB run would be perfect for a pair of diesel cars.


There are DMUs available now that are not banned.


----------



## Don Newcomb

jis said:


> Don Newcomb said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sometimes wish that diesel cars hadn't been banned. The NOLA-MOB run would be perfect for a pair of diesel cars.
> 
> 
> 
> There are DMUs available now that are not banned.
Click to expand...

It certainly would seem more efficient that dragging a typical Amtrak consist on what amounts to a 4-hour (145 mi) commuter run. Since the proposal cited in the Sun-Herald (above) is for two trains per day, one of them could be a FRA-compliant DMU. The other could be the extension of CONO.


----------



## jis

I agree. Though it would involve buying new stuff and depreciating it as opposed to using existing depreciated equipment which would otherwise be lying idle in NOL

Any reasonably capitalized project would take the former route, while an undercapitalized project would tend to go the latter route.


----------



## neroden

jis said:


> Ideally SRC through government funding should simply acquire the trackage from CSX and setup a compact for maintaining and running it by contracting with or leasing to an outfit capable of doing so. As Neroden often says, gaining ownership of the property is the best way to enable a viable and user friendly passenger service. As for whether the states will develop adequate intestinal fortitude to do so is a different matter.
> 
> Offered enough money, almost anyone will develop and enthusiasm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at what UP has been enthusiastically doing in California!


Indeed. Unfortunately, in large portions of the South in particular, there seems to be a doctrinaire opposition to governments actually buying or owning anything.

So while upstate NY counties have purchased rail lines with no particular plan for using them, and while Massachusetts has bought entire packages of trackage including sections of marginal usage from CSX and Pan Am, and while Metrolink and NCTD in California purchased great hunks of Southern Pacific, and while Florida agencies have purchased large pieces of trackage from CSX and its predecessors, it sadly seems unlikely to me that the Gulf Coast agencies will do the same thing.

Maybe they will; Gulf Coast culture isn't quite the same as Southern culture, and New Orleans seems to show less opposition to government ownership of resources than most of the South. But it would have to be the cities buying the line, not the states, since I don't see *any* of those states buying *any* of the tracks.


----------



## Palmland

Regarding the doctrinaire opposition to governments actually buying or owning anything, generalizations are just that. In my state:

https://palmettorailways.com/about-us.html

Another railroad planned in the Charleston area and an inland port in the Greenville area and two more being developed.


----------



## Don Newcomb

neroden said:


> Maybe they will; Gulf Coast culture isn't quite the same as Southern culture, and New Orleans seems to show less opposition to government ownership of resources than most of the South. But it would have to be the cities buying the line, not the states, since I don't see *any* of those states buying *any* of the tracks.


AFAIK, no one is talking about buying or selling the CSX track in LA, MS or AL; only the section from P'cola eastward. That would be entirely in the bailiwick of Fla. DOT.


----------



## jis

That is correct. And at least this year Florida DOT will do nothing about it. They are not even active in SRC.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Don Newcomb

Blurb on local TV news: https://www.wxxv25.com/2018/04/02/possible-amtrack-train-re-open/


----------



## jis

Don Newcomb said:


> Blurb on local TV news: https://www.wxxv25.com/2018/04/02/possible-amtrack-train-re-open/


Amtrak spelled as Amtrack


----------



## Don Newcomb

jis said:


> Don Newcomb said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blurb on local TV news: https://www.wxxv25.com/2018/04/02/possible-amtrack-train-re-open/
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak spelled as Amtrack
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's not a very good report. I was actually hesitant to post it. WXXV is the 2nd station in a 1-station market. They tend to use a lot of trainees.


----------



## Gulfwind2

Don Newcomb said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don Newcomb said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blurb on local TV news: https://www.wxxv25.com/2018/04/02/possible-amtrack-train-re-open/
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak spelled as Amtrack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah, it's not a very good report. I was actually hesitant to post it. WXXV is the 2nd station in a 1-station market. They tend to use a lot of trainees.
Click to expand...

WXXV is low rent to the extent that it is almost reminiscent of SCTV or one of those other satirical news stations. I'm at least glad that the reporting is slanted very much in favor of getting the public opinion further behind the restoration effort. As an aside, I got quite a chuckle from that pun you managed to squeeze in at the end of that post.


----------



## JoeBas

Seems to me that in the current mode (BC on AT/C... gone! PV's... GONE! Charters... GONE! Chefs on CL... GONE! American call centers... GONE! All in just the last month...), hoping for any kind of expansion, service restoration, or dare I say even service CONTINUANCE at current levels seems to be little more than wishful thinking.


----------



## Ryan

American call centers, PVs, and Charters are not gone.


----------



## jis

JoeBas said:


> Seems to me that in the current mode (BC on AT/C... gone! PV's... GONE! Charters... GONE! Chefs on CL... GONE! American call centers... GONE! All in just the last month...), hoping for any kind of expansion, service restoration, or dare I say even service CONTINUANCE at current levels seems to be little more than wishful thinking.


Half of the things that you suggest are gone are actually not gone. However, if it is necessary to overstate reality in a way so as to stir up bile rather than have a reasoned discussion, I guess everything is par for the course.





Gulf Coast service has somewhere between $20 million and #35 million available to move forward. It is viewed as a Corridor service rather than an LD service at least at the most populated end of it. It is likely to proceed either in the context of LD trains or corridorized LD setup. What happens to BC, PVs, Charters and call centers may have relatively little relevance to a local initiative creating a service. No one expects the PRIIA State funded and similar corridor services or NEC to be affected greatly anyway. And given that the National account just received $1.3 billion, I doubt that most LD trains would be negatively affected. But that is again of little relevance as far as Gulf Coast restoration goes.


----------



## JoeBas

That's all well and good guys. I'd love seeing this service restored more than most, as I live in Houston and am a FSU alum who would love an all-rail option to attend football games.

All I'm saying is that my attitude with Amtrak right now is "Hope in one hand, crap in the other, see which fills up first.". Until I'm given a *REASON *to change that outlook, I feel comfortable in my stance.


----------



## jis

No problem with that attitude at all. I think many including me have similar feelings. But the point I am trying to make is, it is more important than ever to remain grounded in reality and facts, and not get swayed by exaggerations and unfounded statements, which is so easy to do when one is feeling crappy or exhilarated about a situation.


----------



## railgeekteen

So is this thing happening this year? Next year? Soon?


----------



## dlagrua

railgeekteen said:


> So is this thing happening this year? Next year? Soon?


I believe that restoring Gulf passenger service is a great idea. Currently Florida residents have only one direction to travel out of the state and that is due North. Allowing a service West may become popular. As for when service can resume that's a tough question. A month after hurricane Katrina freight trains were running on the Gulf Coast line again but for reasons unknown Amtrak did not resume service. Now 13 years later requirements for signaling and for passenger operation have change so this could be one reason why service has yet to resume. Amtrak also required state funding along the route to restore service that never came. If I am incorrect in my assessment of the situation, members please fell free to chime in.


----------



## Don Newcomb

dlagrua said:


> ..... Allowing a service West may become popular. ...... but for reasons unknown Amtrak did not resume service..


Everyone needs to keep in mind that the SL segment between NOL and Tallahassee was one of the least popular, least utilized, Amtrak routes. The reason Amtrak was quick to drive a stake in its heart and very happy to leave it there was that it lost so much money. This is why I try to make the point that just restoring what was there before would be insane. Turning the CONO left at NOL may work. Running two trains from MOB into NOL each day, may work. Whatever is tried, it has to be different from what we had before or it won't work.


----------



## chrsjrcj

I dont think you can really expect much out of a 3 day a week train, often hours late, that was scheduled to travel along the Gulf Coast during the middle of the night.


----------



## jis

Don Newcomb said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..... Allowing a service West may become popular. ...... but for reasons unknown Amtrak did not resume service..
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone needs to keep in mind that the SL segment between NOL and Tallahassee was one of the least popular, least utilized, Amtrak routes. The reason Amtrak was quick to drive a stake in its heart and very happy to leave it there was that it lost so much money. This is why I try to make the point that just restoring what was there before would be insane. Turning the CONO left at NOL may work. Running two trains from MOB into NOL each day, may work. Whatever is tried, it has to be different from what we had before or it won't work.
Click to expand...

I have seen claims, sometimes quite bombastic, made in both directions on this. Can you please share some real (i.e. from a trustworthy source) numbers to support your claim of relative ridership on the east segment of the Sunset when it ran to Florida, vs. say the western segment of it, west of NOL? Thanks.


----------



## chrsjrcj

jis said:


> Don Newcomb said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..... Allowing a service West may become popular. ...... but for reasons unknown Amtrak did not resume service..
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone needs to keep in mind that the SL segment between NOL and Tallahassee was one of the least popular, least utilized, Amtrak routes. The reason Amtrak was quick to drive a stake in its heart and very happy to leave it there was that it lost so much money. This is why I try to make the point that just restoring what was there before would be insane. Turning the CONO left at NOL may work. Running two trains from MOB into NOL each day, may work. Whatever is tried, it has to be different from what we had before or it won't work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have seen claims, sometimes quite bombastic, made in both directions on this. Can you please share some real (i.e. from a trustworthy source) numbers to support your claim of relative ridership on the east segment of the Sunset when it ran to Florida, vs. say the western segment of it, west of NOL? Thanks.
Click to expand...

The website unitedrail.org used to have the Florida ridership from the 90s. I actually typed it out on another forum before the site was taken down. www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=75580&p=1313504#p1313504

Edited to add:

Here is a link through the internet archive- http://web.archive.org/web/20140914145458/http://www.unitedrail.org/1999/03/05/suggested-rationalization-of-amtrak-florida-service/

Again, the entire table does not show up on the website. You can copy and paste the table in a Word document to view the whole thing. The most surprising to me is that Pensacola had better ridership numbers than Tallahassee. I'd expect the reverse to be true today.


----------



## Don Newcomb

chrsjrcj said:


> The most surprising to me is that Pensacola had better ridership numbers than Tallahassee. I'd expect the reverse to be true today.


Perhaps but you can pick out the SL stations on the list by their very low activity. P'cola, Crestview, Chipley, Tallahassee, Madison, Lake City. Only Okeechobee comes close and it's in the middle of nowhere. I know it's only anecdotal but I watched the SL run through Gulfport for many years and it was usually running well below 50%. I tried to use the SL to get to places between Houston and Tallahassee and it always turned out to be much quicker, easier and cheaper to drive. This is why I make the case, every chance I get, that doing the same thing they did before will only guarantee the same result. And the next time there's a disruption Amtrak will get out the hammer and stake and kill it again.


----------



## frequentflyer

Per the Anderson interview

https://www.ustream.tv/recorded/114596550

Amtrak is seriously looking at bringing back NOL-Mobile service.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

I'd imagine Amtrak is willing to seriously look at operating virtually any U750 route that will be paid up in full by way of contract.


----------



## Don Newcomb

frequentflyer said:


> Per the Anderson interview
> 
> https://www.ustream.tv/recorded/114596550
> 
> Amtrak is seriously looking at bringing back NOL-Mobile service.


Is there a time hack we should look for in that 2.5 hour video?


----------



## jis

Don Newcomb said:


> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Per the Anderson interview
> 
> https://www.ustream.tv/recorded/114596550
> 
> Amtrak is seriously looking at bringing back NOL-Mobile service.
> 
> 
> 
> Is there a time hack we should look for in that 2.5 hour video?
Click to expand...

Last 45 minutes or so of it is Anderson.


----------



## Don Newcomb

jis said:


> Don Newcomb said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there a time hack we should look for in that 2.5 hour video?
> 
> 
> 
> Last 45 minutes or so of it is Anderson.
Click to expand...

The only thing I got was a quick blurb at about 2:10. Not exactly a dissertation on the subject.


----------



## Lonestar648

Unfortunately, the Mississippi/Alabama coast line seems to be a magnet for Gulf of Mexico storms, so as this route is being upgraded/approved for passenger rail, is Amtrak responsible for storm damage, not if, but when another comes inland?


----------



## frequentflyer

Don Newcomb said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don Newcomb said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there a time hack we should look for in that 2.5 hour video?
> 
> 
> 
> Last 45 minutes or so of it is Anderson.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The only thing I got was a quick blurb at about 2:10. Not exactly a dissertation on the subject.
Click to expand...

At least they are looking at it.


----------



## Woodcut60

...and in the System Timetable there still is a dotted line between New Orleans and Jacksonville... ["Future service has not been determined", a sentence which has been printed there since 2005...]


----------



## cpotisch

Woodcut60 said:


> ...and in the System Timetable there still is a dotted line between New Orleans and Jacksonville... ["Future service has not been determined", a sentence which has been printed there since 2005...]


Yep, just a "temporary service suspension".


----------



## west point

How about a temporary timetable suspension. Then find a map.


----------

