As anyone who reads my posts knows, I believe that the highest priority for intercity passenger rail is serving the most people who are going to ride less than 500 miles, and most of them are probably going to riding about 200 miles or less. Thus, frequent corridor trains serving large population concentrations, or perhaps feeding people in from outlying areas into major metropolitan centers. Nonetheless, there's also an important role for the less frequent national network trains that travel longer distances and serve rural populations that don't have alternative public transportation. The main point of these trains to to serve rural areas, serve people who can't fly (say, for medical reasons), who can't (or won't) drive, and finally, to allow those of us who just like taking long train rides to continue to be able to do so.
Given that Amtrak is funded by the taxpayers, most of the attention of management and rail passenger advocates should be focused on expanding corridor services, as that provides most of the potential for increasing the importance of passenger rail as part of the overall transportation system. However, there is definitely a need to fill in some of the gaps in the long-distance national network. Here are a few of my ideas about what I think are the higher priority needs for expanded long distance service. These aren't in a particular order of priority, but it might be find to order them so in the discussion.
Given that Amtrak is funded by the taxpayers, most of the attention of management and rail passenger advocates should be focused on expanding corridor services, as that provides most of the potential for increasing the importance of passenger rail as part of the overall transportation system. However, there is definitely a need to fill in some of the gaps in the long-distance national network. Here are a few of my ideas about what I think are the higher priority needs for expanded long distance service. These aren't in a particular order of priority, but it might be find to order them so in the discussion.
- Second frequencies. A few of the long distance corridors are already heavily used, but under current schedules, many large intermediate cities are served at inconvenient hours by the single daily train. Thus, a second frequency would allow such service. This has the advantage of requiring fewer capital improvements, but additional equipment and the concurrence of the host railroads would still be necessary. The main corridors where this would work best are for the Lake Shore Limited and Capitol (to allow service to Ohio and Pittsburgh at reasonable hours) and the Silver Services (to allow service to points in North and South Carolina at reasonable hours.) Also, perhaps a second train over the California Zephyr route that connects Emeryville with Salt Lake City, leaving and arriving Salt Lake City at a reasonable hour. Also, a day train between Washington and Atlanta, running through Raleigh and Charlotte.
- Kentucky and Tennessee. There is an empty zone not served by passenger rail in the trans-Appalachian southeast, and area that contains two very large cities, Nashville and Louisville. It certainly makes sense to connect this region to the national passenger rail network. If only one train is possible, I'm not sure whether it would be best to connect the area with the Northeast (NEC), the midwest (Chicago), or to New Orleans, Atlanta and Florida. I am also not very familiar with the configuration of the existing rail network in terms of what routing sis possible for different services.
- Phoenix. And a daily Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle. It's sort of silly that one of the larger metropolitan areas in the country only has train service at the far fringe of its urban sprawl. This would require restoring some trackage and such.
- Northeast - St. Louis/Kansas City. This would connect to the Southwest Chief in Kansas City, allowing an alternate cross-county routing avoiding Chicago. Unfortunately, the rails between Pittsburgh and Columbus are long gone, so it seems like the best way to route this one would be via Pittsburgh, Akron, and Indianapolis. It could also follow the route of the Cardinal to Indianapolis, but this would exclude the Pittsburgh and Akron intermediate markets, which are probably larger than the Charleston, WV and Charlottesville, VA markets. On the other hand, it would be a very scenic ride.
