How far can they extend the Amtrak California Capitol Corridor?

Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
South would be the Mexico border.
Going north should be the Oregon State Line.
However you run low on population north of Eureka and Redding.

What is on the schedule after the HSR (High Speed Rail) is done and the state see the ridership/demand jump? Well the HSR is bogged down and with no clear finish time so expansion plans are not a priority at this time.
 
Metra Electric Rider said:
But seriously, there's been talk of Reno for the Capital Corridor, but it seems unlikely at the moment.

I think there are plans for a NE extension, to Chico, but I think that's the San Joaquin via Yuba City.
Click to expand...
Would it be totally off base to think they could run Oakland/EMY to Reno 2-3 days a week. Fri to Sun. Airlines have started targeted service like that the last 10 years. The infrastructure is in place. Won’t happen but I think it would work especially if you could use idled equipment over the weekend. Basic transportation without the fun of the former fun train.
 
Metra Electric Rider said:
But seriously, there's been talk of Reno for the Capital Corridor, but it seems unlikely at the moment.
Click to expand...

See Capitol Corridor (PDF) for the developing plans for extending Capitol Corridor Service to Reno.

I think there are plans for a NE extension, to Chico, but I think that's the San Joaquin via Yuba City.
Click to expand...

Right. That is not Capitol Corridor. That is what is now called Valley Rail and managed by the San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission which handles both the San Joaquin Service and the ACE Service and any extensions of either of those two. See Valley Rail - San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission.
 
It’s better to build a passenger service before it’s needed! Also there is “induced demand” for good on time passenger rail. Being on time is more important than reaching “ high speed “ goals.
The route that needs attention on the west Coast is from Sacramento to Eugene via the original SP route. It should go thru Sacramento Airport. From Redding south it would be on a Class 3 road from Tehama Junction to Woodland or even all the way to Davis were it would connect to the Capital Corridir route. The Swiss model should be used. If your not aware of this do some research on YouTube for Railways Explained!
The route to Chico also needs to be established. California and specifically the Sacramento Valley north to Southetn Oregon and Eugene needs passenger rail. Not high Speed but Just in Time!!
 
Herb said:
It’s better to build a passenger service before it’s needed! Also there is “induced demand” for good on time passenger rail. Being on time is more important than reaching “ high speed “ goals.
The route that needs attention on the west Coast is from Sacramento to Eugene via the original SP route. It should go thru Sacramento Airport. From Redding south it would be on a Class 3 road from Tehama Junction to Woodland or even all the way to Davis were it would connect to the Capital Corridir route. The Swiss model should be used. If your not aware of this do some research on YouTube for Railways Explained!
The route to Chico also needs to be established. California and specifically the Sacramento Valley north to Southetn Oregon and Eugene needs passenger rail. Not high Speed but Just in Time!!
Click to expand...
The Siskiyou line between SAC and EUG would take five hours longer than on the Cascade line. On the internet there used to be a well-done analysis of turning it into a European high-speed rail line and the cost was horrible. I would never say never, but there are a lot of other things to be done first.

As of right now, Greyhound and FlixBus service for Weed, Ashland, Medford, Grants Pass, and Roseburg has been discontinued again. If I lived in Mt. Shasta, I'd be after Caltrans to lead negotiations for a pooled operation with ODOT for a EUG <> SAC Thruway route via I-5 stops. THEN, let's talk about rail service.
 
Siskiyou Summit was always slower than going thru K Falls. If I remember right, I looked up timetables from when the SP last ran passenger service both ways and it was a 2-hour difference. However, a route from Portland to Ashland might be workable since Medford is much larger than it used to be and Ashland gets tourist trade for the Shakespear Festival. But Grant's Pants to Roseburg is still pretty slow and always will be.
 
danasgoodstuff said:
Siskiyou Summit was always slower than going thru K Falls. If I remember right, I looked up timetables from when the SP last ran passenger service both ways and it was a 2-hour difference. However, a route from Portland to Ashland might be workable since Medford is much larger than it used to be and Ashland gets tourist trade for the Shakespear Festival. But Grant's Pants to Roseburg is still pretty slow and always will be.
Click to expand...
Yep, SP completed the Natron Cutoff (Cascade Line) through Klamath Falls in 1927 to avoid the grades and curves on the Siskiyou Line (not just Siskiyou Summit). It was very slow even when it was the mainline. The Siskiyou became a secondary line immediately upon completion of the Natron Cutoff. How Grant's pants wound up in Oregon remains a mystery, though 😉.
 
Willbridge said:
The Siskiyou line between SAC and EUG would take five hours longer than on the Cascade line. On the internet there used to be a well-done analysis of turning it into a European high-speed rail line and the cost was horrible. I would never say never, but there are a lot of other things to be done first.

As of right now, Greyhound and FlixBus service for Weed, Ashland, Medford, Grants Pass, and Roseburg has been discontinued again. If I lived in Mt. Shasta, I'd be after Caltrans to lead negotiations for a pooled operation with ODOT for a EUG <> SAC Thruway route via I-5 stops. THEN, let's talk about rail service.
Click to expand...
https://zierke.com/shasta_route/
This one? it didn't have any cost associated with it
 
Salinas to Sacramento makes sense as a one-seat ride. I don't think there is much freight service on the line south of San Jose. Ideally, they could start the higher frequency service in Paso Robles. IMHO, it would not be cost-prohibitive to improve these tracks for at least 79 mph. 90 or 110 would be better.

The tracks between Sacramento and Reno are more complex. Between Roseville and Colfax, the eastbound and westbound tracks follow different alignments to allow for a more manageable grade for freights climbing Donner Pass. Introducing additional passenger trains into this mix would be a no-go for UP.
 
Steve4031 said:
Salinas to Sacramento makes sense as a one-seat ride. I don't think there is much freight service on the line south of San Jose. Ideally, they could start the higher frequency service in Paso Robles. IMHO, it would not be cost-prohibitive to improve these tracks for at least 79 mph. 90 or 110 would be better.

The tracks between Sacramento and Reno are more complex. Between Roseville and Colfax, the eastbound and westbound tracks follow different alignments to allow for a more manageable grade for freights climbing Donner Pass. Introducing additional passenger trains into this mix would be a no-go for UP.
Click to expand...
There is a few freight moves south of San Jose but it drops down to less than daily south of Salinas. Salinas is the southern end of high frequency service with the state outlining 30 min service to SF or Oakland. Salinas to Santa Barbra is currently planned as "less than bi hourly"
its already 79mph but might as well go to 90.
 
Steve4031 said:
Salinas to Sacramento makes sense as a one-seat ride. I don't think there is much freight service on the line south of San Jose. Ideally, they could start the higher frequency service in Paso Robles. IMHO, it would not be cost-prohibitive to improve these tracks for at least 79 mph. 90 or 110 would be better.

The tracks between Sacramento and Reno are more complex. Between Roseville and Colfax, the eastbound and westbound tracks follow different alignments to allow for a more manageable grade for freights climbing Donner Pass. Introducing additional passenger trains into this mix would be a no-go for UP.
Click to expand...
I had thought that when UP acquired the former WP, they did it partially to use the much lower grade Feather River Canyon route for thru freights?🤔
 
railiner said:
I had thought that when UP acquired the former WP, they did it partially to use the much lower grade Feather River Canyon route for thru freights?🤔
Click to expand...
When UP acquired the WP, UP only went as far as Utah on the "Central Corridor". They reached the West Coast at LA and Portland (Seattle via trackage rights). They wanted an outlet to the Bay Area that didn't depend on another railroad, especially because the SP started using the Cotton Belt to solicit traffic and cut out/short haul UP. SSW enabled SP to work around the routing agreements between UP and SP for the Ogden Gateway (and which dated back to the Pacific Railroad Acts). WP gave UP the Bay Area access, independent of SP, they wanted.

Once UP acquired SP, they almost immediately started routing more traffic over the much shorter Donner Pass route. That saved time and fuel despite the heavier grades.

The main through freight traffic on the Feather River route now are now BNSF trackage rights trains. BNSF got trackage rights on the former WP (and D&RGW) as a condition of the UP-SP merger.
 
Last edited:
Willbridge said:
The Siskiyou line between SAC and EUG would take five hours longer than on the Cascade line. On the internet there used to be a well-done analysis of turning it into a European high-speed rail line and the cost was horrible. I would never say never, but there are a lot of other things to be done first.

As of right now, Greyhound and FlixBus service for Weed, Ashland, Medford, Grants Pass, and Roseburg has been discontinued again. If I lived in Mt. Shasta, I'd be after Caltrans to lead negotiations for a pooled operation with ODOT for a EUG <> SAC Thruway route via I-5 stops. THEN, let's talk about rail service.
Click to expand...
I've always thought of what it would be like to have the Coast Starlight use the Siskiyou line, but I believe that would cut Klamath Falls out of the route and the five extra hours of travel time would be awkward at the Coast Starlight's end points.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top