Kansas City-Oklahoma City Expansion Inspection Train

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

It is this Friday leaving OKC in the morning and heading north to KCY. Craig Sanders' web site has a story on it: https://csanders429.wordpress.com/2017/06/05/amtrak-to-inspect-okc-kansas-city-route/

 

[amtkstn]

Lots of info including a schedule posted on Facebook.

 

[PerRock]

hmmm not the route I would have chosen...

peter

 

[Lonestar648]

The route hits the major cities in Kansas which should build the ridership on the HF, but the actual call times may not be the best depending on the link up with the SWC.

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

If the times are similar to the Thruway Bus connection times and the HF schedule remains at or near the current times, there will be graveyard shift times for Wichita.

 

[Lonestar648]

So a passenger from Temple, TX going to KCY wanting to arrive in the morning instead of late afternoon, would change trains in FTW, OKC, and Newton unless there are any through cars FTW to Newton.

 

[Anthony V]

If they do through cars with the SWC, it would make sense to continue them onto Chicago. That way, they wouldn't have to take them off at KCY after being on the train for only a few hundred miles.

 

[AmtrakLKL]

The inspection equipment is moving on 19 arriving NOL tonight, then to SAS and FTW via 1 and 22, respectively.

 

[Bob Dylan]

The inspection equipment is moving on 19 arriving NOL tonight, then to SAS and FTW via 1 and 22, respectively.

Isn't 22 detouring from TAY to LVW on the old Mopac Eagle Route till 6/22.
This means no Train to FTW unless there is a Special or the cars are carried on a Freight!

 

[gswager]

Is Kansas has enough money to pay for Heartland Flyer, along with Oklahoma (probably a little more) and Texas?

 

[ehbowen]

I want the Lone Star (aka Texas Chief!) back!

 

[Woodcut60]

This is good news. I have always wondered why the Heartland Flyer just cuts off in 'the middle of nowhere', OKC, without any connections to the north (Tulsa, Wichita, Topeka).

 

[Anderson]

(1) I'm a little surprised this happened before the rumored inspection train from Meridien-Dallas did.

(2) I presume that if through cars were a thing, they would run through to Chicago. As it is, Amtrak has examined adding an extra coach CHI-KCY but there wasn't sufficient business for it. Add in through-service on this route and there should be enough business to justify a pair of cars (a sleeper and a coach) running through.

(3) I think it's an open question as to what the times will be. There's a case for seriously adjusting the schedules...as it stands, the proposed schedule from 2010 gave us a five-hour turn time in FTW and about a 2:30 turn time in Newton. Based on what I've seen elsewhere, this is seriously pushing it and provides no practical room for recovery from delays on the Newton end. I know they're trying to make that timetable work with a single equipment set, but it looks too clever by half to me. I also think that the idea of running this without a through sleeper, at least, is not a wise business decision. I can tell you how thrilled I'd be at having to stagger off of one train at 0200 and board another at 0300 (or to stagger off at 0300 and board another at 0400). I really don't quite see the tens of thousands of riders being projected for Newton materializing at those times. With that being said, I also don't think there's much of a precedent for such a bad transfer time in the present system between trains. The closest would be the clumsy connections in Sacramento between the Zephyr and Starlight, in Los Angeles between the Sunset and Starlight, or in New York between the Adirondack/Maple Leaf and 66/67 (this last one being a hellish connection I've steadfastly refused to even consider).

(4) The Heartland Flyer does have a bus connection to Newton right now...and I'm sure that we're all chomping at the bit to spend the middle of the night on a bus in the middle of nowhere.

The bottom line to all of this is that I would like to see service restored here...but I'm scared that we're going to get a real turkey of a schedule out of this due to Amtrak trying to be too slick with equipment utilization. If Amtrak is dead set on trying to push a transfer, they'd be better off running the trains through to KCY and having it be an early-morning/late-evening transfer at KCY (with a direct connection to both the SWC and the River Runner) for folks heading east (leaving the messy transfer to only folks connecting to/from the west). Granted, this runs into a separate issue (such a train would need a sleeper and those are not exactly in plentiful supply these days)...but I'm going to refer back to some of the discussion elsewhere about buying some more single-level sleepers and converting the CONO to single-level service.

Source: http://www.ksdot.org/PDF_Files/PDF-Passenger-Rail-SDP.pdf

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

I want the Lone Star (aka Texas Chief!) back!

I still have no idea why they haven't even considered extending the HF to Houston. I don't know why Texas would spend money for a train almost entirely for Oklahoma residents (who in the DFW area wants to go to Oklahoma on a regular basis?) If I'm Texas I tell Oklahoma to chip in to extend the HF to HOS or we will pull out of funding it as it is worthless to Texas residents.

 

[Karl1459]

(1) I'm a little surprised this happened before the rumored inspection train from Meridien-Dallas did.

(2) I presume that if through cars were a thing, they would run through to Chicago. As it is, Amtrak has examined adding an extra coach CHI-KCY but there wasn't sufficient business for it. Add in through-service on this route and there should be enough business to justify a pair of cars (a sleeper and a coach) running through.

(3) I think it's an open question as to what the times will be. There's a case for seriously adjusting the schedules...as it stands, the proposed schedule from 2010 gave us a five-hour turn time in FTW and about a 2:30 turn time in Newton. Based on what I've seen elsewhere, this is seriously pushing it and provides no practical room for recovery from delays on the Newton end. I know they're trying to make that timetable work with a single equipment set, but it looks too clever by half to me. I also think that the idea of running this without a through sleeper, at least, is not a wise business decision. I can tell you how thrilled I'd be at having to stagger off of one train at 0200 and board another at 0300 (or to stagger off at 0300 and board another at 0400). I really don't quite see the tens of thousands of riders being projected for Newton materializing at those times. With that being said, I also don't think there's much of a precedent for such a bad transfer time in the present system between trains. The closest would be the clumsy connections in Sacramento between the Zephyr and Starlight, in Los Angeles between the Sunset and Starlight, or in New York between the Adirondack/Maple Leaf and 66/67 (this last one being a hellish connection I've steadfastly refused to even consider).

(4) The Heartland Flyer does have a bus connection to Newton right now...and I'm sure that we're all chomping at the bit to spend the middle of the night on a bus in the middle of nowhere.

The bottom line to all of this is that I would like to see service restored here...but I'm scared that we're going to get a real turkey of a schedule out of this due to Amtrak trying to be too slick with equipment utilization. If Amtrak is dead set on trying to push a transfer, they'd be better off running the trains through to KCY and having it be an early-morning/late-evening transfer at KCY (with a direct connection to both the SWC and the River Runner) for folks heading east (leaving the messy transfer to only folks connecting to/from the west). Granted, this runs into a separate issue (such a train would need a sleeper and those are not exactly in plentiful supply these days)...but I'm going to refer back to some of the discussion elsewhere about buying some more single-level sleepers and converting the CONO to single-level service.

Source: http://www.ksdot.org/PDF_Files/PDF-Passenger-Rail-SDP.pdf

Regarding point 3, I think you can look to the make-up break-up of the Empire Builder at oh-dark-thirty in Spokane as a example. If the ridership numbers were to justify running the Heartland Flyer cars to Chicago this could be handled similar to the EB. Yes there would have to be complex deals between the State supported service and Amtrak services, though these would also needed if there was to be a through sleeper. There also might be some significant operational advantages to be able to routinely get equipment to the maintenance base in Chicago.

 

[the_traveler]

But the EB has an option to not have to change cars in SPK. If going between Pasco and Shelby, you do have the option to book 27 or 28 and stay on the train. In Newton, unless there were run-thru cars, that would not be an option.

 

[jis]

Remember, both the Pioneer and the Desert Wind ran as separate self standing trains with no through cars for several years before through cars were introduced. The cross platform connection was basically at some odd time for both at Ogden.

The Heartland Flyer runs as a self standing train with no through cars today.

So such is not unheard of either.

 

[west point]

There has been several good proposals for route extensions / new routes. However we are putting the cart before the horse. We must first know that there is a supply of new cars being built to fill out present trains and add new routes / trains. Then serious planning for additional service will be able to go forward.

Realize that additional equipment is not as sexy as routes / service. Lets get our priorities in proper order.

 

[railiner]

I want the Lone Star (aka Texas Chief!) back!

I still have no idea why they haven't even considered extending the HF to Houston. I don't know why Texas would spend money for a train almost entirely for Oklahoma residents (who in the DFW area wants to go to Oklahoma on a regular basis?) If I'm Texas I tell Oklahoma to chip in to extend the HF to HOS or we will pull out of funding it as it is worthless to Texas residents.

If you think about it, who really benefits if folks from Oklahoma ride the train to Fort Worth/Dallas to spend their money?

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

I want the Lone Star (aka Texas Chief!) back!

I still have no idea why they haven't even considered extending the HF to Houston. I don't know why Texas would spend money for a train almost entirely for Oklahoma residents (who in the DFW area wants to go to Oklahoma on a regular basis?) If I'm Texas I tell Oklahoma to chip in to extend the HF to HOS or we will pull out of funding it as it is worthless to Texas residents.

If you think about it, who really benefits if folks from Oklahoma ride the train to Fort Worth/Dallas to spend their money?

Then by that logic Illinois benefits far more from the Hoosier State and Hiawatha than Indiana/Wisconsin and New York benefits far more from the Pennsylvanian than Pennsylvania.

 

[keelhauled]

I want the Lone Star (aka Texas Chief!) back!

I still have no idea why they haven't even considered extending the HF to Houston. I don't know why Texas would spend money for a train almost entirely for Oklahoma residents (who in the DFW area wants to go to Oklahoma on a regular basis?) If I'm Texas I tell Oklahoma to chip in to extend the HF to HOS or we will pull out of funding it as it is worthless to Texas residents.

If you think about it, who really benefits if folks from Oklahoma ride the train to Fort Worth/Dallas to spend their money?

Then by that logic Illinois benefits far more from the Hoosier State and Hiawatha than Indiana/Wisconsin and New York benefits far more from the Pennsylvanian than Pennsylvania.

Or...wait for it...wait for it...both states benefit! Texas gets visitors spending money, and Oklahoma gets a connection to a major metropolitan area, making it a more desirable place to live.

 

[jis]

Yeah. A version of the eternal argument between NY and NJ. Fortunately they have decided that the cost of the tunnels should be shared 50-50 between the two for the balance that is not covered by the Feds. Separately, there appears to be an understanding that the split between the Feds and the States would be 50-50 too9, thought that may be a bit up in the air.

A similar argument exists between PA and NJ I suppose around Philadelphia too.

 

[west point]

Yeah. A version of the eternal argument between NY and NJ. Fortunately they have decided that the cost of the tunnels should be shared 50-50 between the two for the balance that is not covered by the Feds. Separately, there appears to be an understanding that the split between the Feds and the States would be 50-50 too9, thought that may be a bit up in the air.

If we really look at the money going to Gateway tunnel bores you will find the states are going to be funneling US funds to the project. Now NJ, NY, & NYC will kick in some funds but no way 50%.

 

[jis]

But money that is allocated to the state from other accounts for whatever purpose are really state money. Going one step further back, that is where the Feds collected the money from in the first place. And both NJ and NY are net donor states by quiet a margin.

 

[XHRTSP]

Dumb question but who's funding this trip? I mean did Oklahoma and/or Kansas appropriate money for a study, or is Amtrak doing this unilaterally? Or is there some third option that I as a transit policy newbie would not be aware of?