I got this in an email from Amtrak, but don't see it on their site, or here. No time frame given.
Unless Phoenix to LA is the existing Sunset Limited, but going through Phoenix instead of skirting it to the South (Maricopa)
It's on the Amtrak website as part of
Amtrak ConnectsUS Specifically, look at pages 37-41
here. While it's not the most detailed plan ever issued (and doesn't purport to be, it's a "vision"), it does answer
some of these questions:
*Phoenix-Los Angeles would be a day train in addition to the Sunset Limited.
*Amtrak acknowledges it would have to negotiate with Union Pacific to restore tracks west of Phoenix, so clearly LA service is a more long-term goal after [Buckeye-]Phoenix-Tucson.
*While Amtrak doesn't include specific numbers in the vision document, the fact that it gives ranges for each project for new passengers, infrastructure cost per new passenger, and operating expenses per new passenger implies Amtrak has studies with numbers somewhere, possibly cribbed from existing state rail plans and other pre-existing sources.
So has Arizona come out and said they'll cover the operating costs? Will California pay for the train that continues to LA?
The projects that aren't already approved or being considered by a state (California, Vermont, etc.) or for the Northeast fall under the Corridor Development Plan, whereby with additional funding from Congress (knock on wood!) Amtrak would start service "on spec", hoping after a few years that the relevant state(s) will step up and fund service its citizens would have been using for a couple of years by then. It's touched on briefly on page 72 of the vision document linked above.
IMHO, the vagueness of the vision time-wise (lots of "where" and "how many trains", very little "when") arises because the corridor development plan depends on (1) how much Congress funds it, (2) how much capital is required for each project, and (3) how much host railroads cooperate. Since it seems like Amtrak's goal with this vision and the corridor development plan is to make itself more relevant in more places, I presume Amtrak will go for the low-hanging fruit (relatively little capital spending needed, cooperative hosts) first to get services running, and wants the flexibility to walk away from negotiations with an intransigent or greedy host and put its resources elsewhere.
