Which route outside the NEC will be electrified first?

[zkr123]

With all of the upgrades towards faster train travel, when will we see routes become electrified?

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Electrification has been an idea that has been bandied about for the better part of a century.  The pages of TRAINS are full of proposals for electrifications that never came to pass so I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for catenary to be strung.  The only proposal of which I'm aware that may even get off the drawing board is the proposed electrification of the Peninsula (SF-San Jose) suburban service.

[henry6]

I agree with Paul on this.  Many proposals have gone away over the years and there is always talk of new proposals.  There are many plans on tables and in back files but somebody could come up with a new one this afternoon that will be adopted by Thursday and built by 2020 if everything is seen to be good.

[BaltACD]

zkr123

With all of the upgrades towards faster train travel, when will we see routes become electrified?

When a new HSR route is actually built. 

[daveklepper]

SF - San Josay or Gilroy   and    Go Transit Lake Shore line

Denver  - Airport

[blue streak 1]

daveklepper

SF - San Josay or Gilroy   and    Go Transit Lake Shore line

Denver  - Airport

 

Dave wins first prize.

1.  Actual support poles being installed on Denver line and previous post showed a machine that Denver is getting to install all the wire  Delivery time unknown. Anyone know what voltage?; suspect 25 KV because that is actually cheaper.  Note: Denver is already building another rail line that will be electrified. 

2. -  3.  CalTrain San Jose or Go -- Lake Shore are tied right now.

4.  California HSR  depending on how much track is built before wires are strung and used

 

  Wires must energized or copper thieves ??

5.   Depending on how soon re double tracking the Amtrak New Haven - Springfield ( may be to Vermont ),   Note:  Both DT and Electrification depend on Connecticut getting funds ?

 

All others are WAG WAGS   DC - Richmond  ( probably not until  4 tracked ), NYP - Albany, MBTA - any, Harrisburg -  Pittsburg,  Way out southern California & METRA  +  electric extension

[rcdrye]

blue streak 1

  Wires must energized or copper thieves ??

5.   Depending on how soon re double tracking the Amtrak New Haven - Springfield ( may be to Vermont ),   Note:  Both DT and Electrification depend on Connecticut getting funds ?

Double track is funded for part of the route (was 100% double until 1991).  Not even a target date for wires.

[narig01]

My bet would be San Francisco -San Jose. Part of the build there is the new downtown railterminal under what used to be Transbay Terminal (I still can't believe TransBay is gone) . The electrification is already funded. Just needs to be built.

Thx IGN

[daveklepper]

But Denver-Airport is already under construction with a set opening day!

[henry6]

If we are talking transit or commuter SF might be a good call.  But  longer distances, inter city would be quite differetnt.  I would look at D.C. to Richmond, VA.  A Chicago-Detroit or Chicago-downstate or St. Louis or LA-San Diego or Seattle-Vancouver.  But that's only  passenger services.  How 'bout freight?   WOuld any of the Rocky Mountain routes be game?  

[MidlandMike]

I think the most likely LD/corridor electrification will be on a busy line already owned by a passenger RR.  I think NYP-Albany would be a likely candidate, since it is connected to the NEC, and already partly electrified.

The problems with DC-Richmond are freight RR owned, mostly freight traffic, would need to be triple-tracked, and at least 3 non-electrified extensions that would require train changing or in-efficient dual power.

[narig01]

Freight routes. 1. A route with a lot of traffic that is a corridor with specific end points. Electrification is still expensive. It would need to be a route without a lot of branches.
A possibility BNSF 's Transcon. Los Angeles - Chicago. Major engine terminals Barstow and Kansas City. The start would be Barstow - Kansas City or (if California was funding) Barstow - Los Angeles / Barstow - Richmond. I would hate to think of the current costs of stringing wires across Tehachapi Pass. All I could say is not cheap as it involves a lot of tunnel cutting. The alternative is after California HSR is built using that line. It would make sense for the short section from Tehachapi down to Edison to use the HSR line as one could bulk up on the power up and down to maintain minimum speed.

Another possibility CSX Baltimore - Jacksonville(not sure about exact endpoints). CSX is trying to build this line up. Lots of potential business(look at all the trucks on I-95) Currently not a lot of capacity.
Another thought Norfolk Southern Harrisburg (Enola) - Memphis. Very hilly route with lots of business. The problem with this corrisdor too many branches. The branches on the north end Washington /Baltimore, New York metro, Boston, Montreal, Philadelphia. On the south end Atlanta, Greeneville /Spartanburg, Birmingham, New Orleans, Florida, Texas.

Next corridor Atlanta - Chicago via Cincinnati and Indianapolis. Branches Detroit and Cleveland. Possibly starting in Birmingham instead of Atlanta. Either CSX or NS.

One possible short run Minneapolis /St Paul - Chicago.

Another Albany /Selkirk to Chicago.

Mostly I'm thinking of corridors where I drove a truck that has lots of truck and rail traffic.

Just some random thoughts on the subject.

Thx IGN

[schlimm]

Surely the UP Overland Route would be one with the highest freight miles.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

UP went so far as to string up about a mile's worth of test catenary in the late 1970's.  I don't know what they learned from the experiment.

[narig01]

The reason I didn't include the Overland Route in my list, too many branches. On the East end thru trains continue outside of UP 's territory. In addition many branches to Chicago, Kansas City, St Louis, south to Texas.
The branch to the Powder River coalfield. Then from Ogden North to Missoula, north and west to Portland and Seattle. West to Northern California. Southwest to Los Angeles.

Try to think about where either trains terminate, say a major yard like Bailey in North Platte. The problem with North Platte for electrification is it's in the middle of the corridor. And too many run throughs.

One thought that I did not think about is W Colton and the Los Angeles basin north to Seattle. A mix of terrain from the hills(mountains actually) of Southern California and Southern Oregon/Northern California and the long flat stretches of the Central Valley the Rouge River valley of Oregon.
It is a corridor without a lot of branches.And the most trafficked branches are relatively short around the Los Angeles basin.
Try to remember that railroads try not to swap power as it can be time consuming. And a train sitting in a yard is preventing another train from entering that yard. So you have to have think about the end points. And then have a lot of traffic between those end points.

Thx IGN

[blue streak 1]

How about a short segment over a helper district ?  An ideal location would be NS' Altoona - Cresson. Helpers are often needed on the climb to Gallitzin- from both directions.  The helpers can push up the hill and come down in full regeneration with locos idling.  The tunnels at Gallizin are close to having enough clearance using an overhead  rail system for power.  Only a couple bridges on that segment may have clearance problems ?

Some high priority trains that now need its DPU for just that segment might be able to just use electric motors to get over the hill ?. 

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

That sounds like an awfully expensive method of operating a helper district.  If manned helpers are going to be operated anyway, why go through the expense of stringing wire?