Jim200I don't see how TxDOT is limited by the current schedule. The Heartland Flyer arrives in Fort Worth at 12:27 PM, and even with a stop at DFW airport, would arrive at Dallas Union Station probably before 1:27 PM. An evening departure from Dallas at 5:30 PM would result in an arrival in Oklahoma City around 10:30 PM, which is still a reasonable hour. In between there is four hours to get the trainset ready for the evening departure.
I don't see how the current schedule limits it either but the TxDOT statement on the subject implied that running over TRE tracks to Dallas was only considered an option if the equipment was owned in part by TxDOT or a party other than Amtrak and I think they were also calculating in reduction in maintenence costs because running to Dallas would allow them to maintain at the TRE maintenence facility as well.
So if I had to guess.......Amtrak has a restriction on the use of the Heartland Flyer equipment that makes extension to Dallas on the current schedule impossible or something to do with Amtrak ownership impacts the liability insurance premium.......Just a guess.
Herzog operates the TRE and also coincidently was going to be an active bidder on the Heartland Flyer run when they considered opening the route to bidding by third parties...........not sure if they ever did that. Obviously TxDOT would like to maintain the trainset as it thinks it can do a better job with cheaper costs than Amtrak can. Interesting that Seattle just signed an agreement with Amtrak to use a non-Amtrak facility to maintain Amtrak equipment and become another maintenence base for Amtrak. Perhaps that is in the future for the TRE shops in Irving as well.
BTW, Oklahoma does not like the current Heartland flyer schedule and says it is structured entirely for visits to Dallas-Fort Worth. So there might be a future compromise with it at some point or maybe a second round trip frequency?
I have only read Oklahoma interested in the short Oklahoma City to Tulsa route and it ending there. I think it was originally an Ed Ellis proposal that would require the state to bring the tracks up to par. So it probably will not happen.
Running the Texas Eagle over the Trinity Railway Express (TRE) tracks between Dallas and Fort Worth is costing the "T" $1.07 million per year in additional insurance premiums. Whether adding the Heartland Flyer to the mix would increase the premium is unknown, but it is a possibility.
One suggestion is to sell through tickets on the TRE to or from Dallas with an across the platform transfer to or from the Heartland Flyer in Fort Worth. The TRE has frequent service between Dallas and Fort Worth. The schedule for the southbound Heartland Flyer could be tweaked to better coordinate the transfer in Fort Worth.
There is no TRE service on Sunday. Amtrak could charter a bus to provide the connecting service on Sunday. It has a frequently used arrangement with a good charter bus company in Fort Worth.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
CMStPnP Jim200 Personally I think that Dallas should be the end point of what amounts to two corridors. The Brookings Institute did a study of about 20 years of Amtrak's history and found that most of Amtrak's growth came in corridors similar to Oklahoma City -Dallas, Oklahoma City - Kansas City with at least a morning and evening train from each endpoint. TxDOT is trying to find a way to extend the Heartland Flyer to Dallas. Right now they are limited by the current schedule and that they do not own the trainset. I believe they want KS-OK to form a compact or seek Federal money for purchasing a trainset to lower the operating costs of the train. TxDOT could then do trainset and locomotive maintenance at it's TRE Facility and save the Amtrak pass through. Additionally at one point and I am not certain if they still are but OK was also looking at OKC to Tulsa Rail service.
Jim200 Personally I think that Dallas should be the end point of what amounts to two corridors. The Brookings Institute did a study of about 20 years of Amtrak's history and found that most of Amtrak's growth came in corridors similar to Oklahoma City -Dallas, Oklahoma City - Kansas City with at least a morning and evening train from each endpoint.
TxDOT is trying to find a way to extend the Heartland Flyer to Dallas. Right now they are limited by the current schedule and that they do not own the trainset. I believe they want KS-OK to form a compact or seek Federal money for purchasing a trainset to lower the operating costs of the train.
TxDOT could then do trainset and locomotive maintenance at it's TRE Facility and save the Amtrak pass through.
Additionally at one point and I am not certain if they still are but OK was also looking at OKC to Tulsa Rail service.
Having an Oklahoma City - Tulsa - Kansas City corridor with a Branson stop/bus would be interesting. One problem is that the track is in worse condition and there isn't a federal agency that is devoted to fixing track for passenger rail. Instead we have something like $9 billion buckaroos in rail infrastructure improvements that are asked of limited TIGER and other funds.
JOHN L CLARK I'd like to see the state of Texas consider taking the Flyer south to Houston with cars from Chicago to Houston included. The Longview Thruway bus is doing a decent business. The Houston section of the Eagle has been a politcal tennis ball for quite a number of years.
I'd like to see the state of Texas consider taking the Flyer south to Houston with cars from Chicago to Houston included. The Longview Thruway bus is doing a decent business. The Houston section of the Eagle has been a politcal tennis ball for quite a number of years.
I don't think that will ever happen as long as there is a HSR proposal on the table for the same Dallas to Houston route.
Jim200Personally I think that Dallas should be the end point of what amounts to two corridors. The Brookings Institute did a study of about 20 years of Amtrak's history and found that most of Amtrak's growth came in corridors similar to Oklahoma City -Dallas, Oklahoma City - Kansas City with at least a morning and evening train from each endpoint.
Here is the link for the 2010 KSdot feasibility report
https://www.ksdot.org/PDF_Files/FINAL-Amtrak-Study.pdf
In November 2011 Parsons Brinckerhoff made a "Kansas City-Wichita-Oklahoma City-Fort Worth Corridor Passenger Rail Service Development Plan" for KSdot. BNSF had already spent time on the feasibility report and was too busy for this plan, but gave them a stringline chart on freight movement. From this they were able to reduce costs by reducing the amount of double track and passing sidings. There is a lot of info in this plan, but different timing of a passenger train could give different results, not to mention changes in the stringline chart today.
http://www.ksdot.org/Assets/wwwksdotorg/PDF_Files/PDF-Passenger-Rail-SDP.pdf
Personally I think that Dallas should be the end point of what amounts to two corridors. The Brookings Institute did a study of about 20 years of Amtrak's history and found that most of Amtrak's growth came in corridors similar to Oklahoma City -Dallas, Oklahoma City - Kansas City with at least a morning and evening train from each endpoint.
Tad critical of an inspection train?
Amtrak's direction has not been what you are seeking for decades now. Quite a few trains have disappeared from the timetables, but few have been added, and by that I mean long distance trains of any consequence. Not much on the planning boards for adding trains either.
The problem with the Newton/Wichita area is that they are in an area where the Transcon splits into two single tracks in a paired trackage arrangement. It sounds like BNSF would like ATK to build one of the lines into double track.
MidlandMike Did the study say they would need 40 miles of new track from Newton to KC? The Chief already runs along that route.
Did the study say they would need 40 miles of new track from Newton to KC? The Chief already runs along that route.
Newton to Walton - 6.5 miles of double track - and Peabody to Strong City - 33.6 miles of double track.
The study was predicated on Amtrak's requirement that the train have a high percent of on-time arrival at its end points. If Amtrak or the sponsoring states are willing to have a lower on-time performance objective, presumably that could have an impact on what infrastructure work would be required.
These are just the numbers for the track work. Approximately $8 million would be required for grade crossing improvements. More monies would be required for additional equipment, crew employment and training, etc.
JPS1 ... According to Feasibility Report of Proposed Amtrak Service Kansas City, Missouri – Oklahoma City, Oklahoma to Fort Worth, Texas, KDOT, 2010, a team from BNSF and KDOT estimated that extending the Heartland Flyer from Oklahoma City to Newton would require 26.6 miles of new track and cost $106 million. Extending the train on to Kansas City would require an additional 40.1 miles of new track and would cost an additional $160 million. Adjusted for inflation the amounts would be roughly $118.5 million and $178 million in 2016 dollars. There may be a more recent study, but I have not been able to find it.
...
There may be a more recent study, but I have not been able to find it.
[quote user="CMStPnP"]
.......In one of the videos above it a DOT official stated that it looked like Amtraks or BNSF's estimates were overblown and that they might be able to get the train running for a lot cheaper than what was stated............also interesting. /quote]
CMStPnP JPS1 Not so good from the looks of things. There is no direct track from Austin to Houston. The Austin and Western owns the line as far east as Giddings, but it only operates it to Elgin, where it interchanges with the UP. The line from Elgin to Giddings has been quarantined. There is no direct line from Giddings to Hempstead. There is a line from Hempstead to Houston, and there is a line from Houston to Galveston. Getting from Austin to Houston on the current rails would be a roundabout exercise. TXDOT has identified Austin to Houston as a potential passenger rail corridor, but developing it probably would require a large sum of money. Turning the corridor into a viable passenger train corridor appears to be a long way off.
JPS1
Not so good from the looks of things. There is no direct track from Austin to Houston. The Austin and Western owns the line as far east as Giddings, but it only operates it to Elgin, where it interchanges with the UP. The line from Elgin to Giddings has been quarantined. There is no direct line from Giddings to Hempstead. There is a line from Hempstead to Houston, and there is a line from Houston to Galveston. Getting from Austin to Houston on the current rails would be a roundabout exercise. TXDOT has identified Austin to Houston as a potential passenger rail corridor, but developing it probably would require a large sum of money. Turning the corridor into a viable passenger train corridor appears to be a long way off.
Just found this out.
Hate to throw cold water on Kansas putting up funds but --------
In the last two years Kansas has had over 1M acres burned due to wildfires. But they only have 4 full time state fire fighters. Result fires run out of control for lack of co-ordination. So how can we expect any help from Kansas for an extension of the Heartland Flyer ?
EDIT: Source PBS radio "Wildfires"
ATSFGuy What is this test train for? Was Amtrak restoring service to a certain area?
What is this test train for? Was Amtrak restoring service to a certain area?
Yes, they wanted to restore service along the OKC to Kansas City or OKC to Newton, KS route of the former Lone Star passenger train. The main reason for the test train was to assess the condition of the track and review locations that BNSF stated they would need signals upgraded or a rail siding added. Secondary reason was to assess current traffic levels. Third reason was to gauge and build public support along the route.
In one of the videos above it a DOT official stated that it looked like Amtraks or BNSF's estimates were overblown and that they might be able to get the train running for a lot cheaper than what was stated............also interesting.
Personally, I don't care if they restore the train or not. I find it interesting they are even still considering it given the poor shape OK and KS are in budget wise.
JPS1Does wrong motivation mean that Amtrak's as well as its supporter's motivation is wrong regarding how to configure and extend the Heartland Flyer, or does it mean that the interpretation of Amtrak's motivation - strategic planning - is wrong?
Both, in fact I would say your analysis is problematic because your looking at the train in isolation of everything else not part of a larger plan. First lets look at why the costs are increasing..........which had you reviewed your own states DOT notes on the train you would have spotted.....why you didn't do that with a State supported train is a mystery to me, the state is paying for the costs of the train, why ignore it's rationale?:
"effective with FY 2014 (October 2013), there were changes in cost methodology. PRIIA mandated that states bear a higher percentage of operating costs for passenger rail routes of less than 750 miles. This resulted in a substantial increase in costs for operating the Heartland Flyer"
As for the decreasing ridership........it's one frequency, with a currently crappy schedule between Fort Worth and OKC, the schedule would make more sense if the train was converted to an overnight train to KC Union Station. However looking at declining ridership just for the past few years neglects the increasing ridership trend before. In fact the ridership only declined 4.2% between 2015 and 2016.........which is hardly a crises and when you look at the declines in other Amtrak short distance routes..........is probably related to falling gas prices. Further the ridership was steadily increasing before gas prices declined. So your analysis presumes gas prices will continue to fall or remain low. Not sure I agree with that presumption. Not just the Heartland Flyer with a small decline in ridership.........check out the stats for the entire country. Yup declines in the price of gas have this effect.
https://media.amtrak.com/2016/11/amtrak-delivers-strong-fy-2016-financial-results/
From the TxDOT 2016 Rail Plan which you probably never read or included in your comments and this is just TX, highly encourage you to check out OK and KS as well both of which add a lot more color to the train and why they are enthusiastic about it. They are paying large sums of money for the train (most of which you excluded from your analysis), which indicates perhaps they have better vision or are better at analysis? What about station upgrades? Rail upgrades? and don't those benefits.....benefit the community well beyond Amtrak service?
"While the requirements of the freight railroads over which the train operates limit the operating crew to Amtrak, several other states have reduced their operating costs by purchasing their own equipment. A capital grant would be required, but there is often more flexibility in obtaining one-time capital grants compared to yearly operating grants. California and Washington purchased new equipment, while North Carolina has had great success with used equipment rebuilt to its specifications. Indiana leases equipment from a private rail operator who also maintains the equipment. Equipment owned by Washington State and North Carolina are maintained by private-sector contractors. Maine and Indiana have reduced costs for on-board food and beverage service by contracting with the private sector for on-board service. Equipment owned by Oklahoma and Texas could also create some potential synergy between the Heartland Flyer and TRE. With another set of rebuilt or new equipment the Heartland Flyer could be extended to Dallas and maintained at the TRE maintenance facility. Between Fort Worth and Dallas the Heartland Flyer would be operated with TRE crews, honor TRE tickets and operate as a limited stop TRE Express between the two cities."
Another item mentioned is the Heartland Flyer is on a year by year contract with Amtrak which is also more costly than a multi-year contract.
San Antonio - Monterrey, MX service (this actually surprised me it was still being looked at):
"This segment is proposed to serve the growing market between Texas and Mexico. This leg is part of the overall Oklahoma City to San Antonio I-35 study. Currently, TxDOT is considering the possibility of coordinating with the Mexican government to provide passenger rail service between the two countries. Two Oklahoma City – San Antonio route alternatives (S4 and S6) have the option of being extended to Monterrey. One of the challenges is the lack of protocols for trans- border rail passenger service. "
Texas-Oklahoma Rail Study:
http://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/projects/studies/statewide/texas-oklahoma-rail.html
So bottom line, your analysis is too narrow and misses reasons for both the increased costs and declining ridership. I don't think either issue is a permanent upward or downward trend and it would be very shortsighted to forecast or plan presumming they are a permanent trend.
JPS1TEMPO was created by Amtrak at the request of the Texas Eagle Mayors’ Coalition, to establish a mechanism for local input to Amtrak on issues affecting the Eagle.”
Poor choice of words since the core of the group existed before the group was formed. All Amtrak did was provide a meeting place and issue invites and attend the meeting. Very loosely that is organizing. I would give more credit to the Mayors Coalition that pushed the issue than I would to Amtrak. Further no real active recruitment of new members by Amtrak.
CMStPnP Wrong motivation entirely ..... likewise the TEMPO organization got started. Amtrak cooperates with that organization but in no shape or form did Amtrak organize it
Wrong motivation entirely ..... likewise the TEMPO organization got started. Amtrak cooperates with that organization but in no shape or form did Amtrak organize it
Does wrong motivation mean that Amtrak's as well as its supporter's motivation is wrong regarding how to configure and extend the Heartland Flyer, or does it mean that the interpretation of Amtrak's motivation - strategic planning - is wrong?
The main point of the post is ridership on the Heartland Flyer has been declining since 2012, and the costs to Oklahoma and Texas have been increasing steadily. Whether the trend, especially the subsidy per passenger, could be reversed by extending the train to Kansas is problematic.
The following statement is from TEMPO's webpage. Presumably they know how they came into existence.
“TEMPO was created by Amtrak at the request of the Texas Eagle Mayors’ Coalition, to establish a mechanism for local input to Amtrak on issues affecting the Eagle.”
JPS1Amtrak, NARP, etc. cannot shake their 1950s mindset. They usually want to run a train every day, even when there is little demand for it, just because it is the way that it was always done. The service should be fit to the likely demand!
Wrong motivation entirely and NARP has not played anything but a bit player role here. Look at the proposed DOT HSR Corridors in this country, they are trying to get on that list of future federal funds.....thats the main underlying driving factor. That and there is some Economic Benefits to the small towns along the route with limited other options.
The train to OKC was created from Fort Worth because the public demanded it via personally lobbying George Bush in the Texas Governors mansion. Amtrak was initially ruluctant but then when they saw the grass roots support jumped on the initiative. I still remember in part the complex agreement that was struck to get the Heartland Flyer running. Initially they either had to rehab or hoc a set of ex-Santa Fe Hi-Level passenger equipment. Then there was a loan or something. Mostly Superliner now so not sure what happened to the first set of Santa Fe equipment they had to put up. George Bush was pushed into supporting start-up of the train via grass roots political pressure though. Can't blame it on Amtrak nor was it largely a NARP initiative.
The first or second time they threatened a cut against the Texas Eagle, likewise the TEMPO organization got started. Amtrak cooperates with that organization but in no shape or form did Amtrak organize it. Again another largely Texas based grass roots effort, IMHO. Can't really blame Amtrak when the public activates in support of it's passenger trains.
Amtrak did have something to do with the extension of the Heartland Flyer though, when it saw the moderate patronage on it's new bus connection to Newton it did approach the states and tap them on the shoulder because they had just got funding for the SWC track upgrades from one of them. So Amtrak saw money it might be able to pull in to support another train.
JPS1 Jim200 Extending the Heartland Flyer north to Newton KS is a no brainer and should have been done long ago. The cost is low....... The number of Heartland Flyer passengers declined from 87,873 in 2012 to 69,006 in 2016, and the average load factor declined from 45.6 to 40.7 percent. Whether extending the Flyer to Kansas would change the load factors is unknown. From 2012 through 2016 total revenues for the Flyer increased from $5.4 to $6.6 million, and the operating loss declined from $3.8 million to approximately $1 million. The reduction in the operating losses was due primarily to a significant drop in operating expenses. Ticket revenues declined from $2.1 million in 2012 to $1.8 million in 2016, which is partially reflected in the ridership decline. Operating costs were $7.6 million in 2016, which left Oklahoma, Texas, and Amtrak on the hook to make up the $5.8 million difference between ticket revenues and operating costs, which do not include depreciation and interest. The average subsidy per passenger – ticket revenues - before depreciation, interest, etc. increased from $81 in 2012 to $84 in 2016. Presumably similar subsidies would be required to extend the train to Kansas points. Maybe the best outcome would be a weekend train instead of a daily operation. Run it when people are likely to use it, which in the case of the Flyer appears to be the weekends. Amtrak, NARP, etc. cannot shake their 1950s mindset. They usually want to run a train every day, even when there is little demand for it, just because it is the way that it was always done. The service should be fit to the likely demand!
Jim200 Extending the Heartland Flyer north to Newton KS is a no brainer and should have been done long ago. The cost is low.......
Extending the Heartland Flyer north to Newton KS is a no brainer and should have been done long ago. The cost is low.......
Amtrak, NARP, etc. cannot shake their 1950s mindset. They usually want to run a train every day, even when there is little demand for it, just because it is the way that it was always done. The service should be fit to the likely demand!
Very true, as don oltmann has pointed out many times about Amtrak's mindset.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
longhorn1969 ....I never understood why Amtrak did not reroute the Eagle, and run it like they did the Lonestar back in the 70s.
....I never understood why Amtrak did not reroute the Eagle, and run it like they did the Lonestar back in the 70s.
Prior to 1955, when the Gainesville to Dallas cutoff was completed, Dallas passengers had to take a connecting bus from Fort Worth to Big D. After the cutoff was completed, a Dallas section (Nos. 115 and 116) was added to the Texas Chief. Cars for Dallas were cutoff or added to the Chief at Gainesville. Stations served were Denton, White Rock (North Dallas), and Dallas Union Station. The Dallas section had a through sleeper and at least one through coach. Whether it had any food service is not clear. The southbound section left Gainesville at 12:44 p.m. and arrived in Dallas at 2:35 p.m. The northbound section left Dallas at 12:10 p.m. and arrived in Gainesville at 1:4 p.m.
Were you prepared to drive him all the way to the KC airport if the SWC was late?
With long distance trains under the scrutiny, I never understood why Amtrak did not reroute the Eagle, and run it like they did the Lonestar back in the 70s. Yes Ark. would loose service but it must be cheaper running a combined SWC/Eagle spliting at Newton replacing the Heartland too in the process than running the route it does now.
If there is a large college crowd potential here is one thought. By traveling at night on a train the students can sleep both before class or after. That would actually save them time.
Deggestry didn't you do that ?
runnerdude48 The videos are interesting. Overweight people taking pictures of other overweight people taking pictures. This is probably the end we'll see of this proposed train. Not enough population to support the service and once grandpa and grandma take junior for a train ride a couple of stops down the line they'll be back in their cars because the highway will be both cheaper and faster. Plus they can travel on their own schedule and carry all their "stuff" alot easier. OKC to KCUS RIP.
The videos are interesting. Overweight people taking pictures of other overweight people taking pictures. This is probably the end we'll see of this proposed train. Not enough population to support the service and once grandpa and grandma take junior for a train ride a couple of stops down the line they'll be back in their cars because the highway will be both cheaper and faster. Plus they can travel on their own schedule and carry all their "stuff" alot easier. OKC to KCUS RIP.
Amtrak's Lone Star which previously used the route was the 7th most popular Long Distance Train in popularity when it was cut and it's primary customer was out of state college students attending large State universities along the route. Not necessarily old people or obeese people. Amtrak beats the Bus and most of those college students do not have their own cars because they are attending the schools in the first place due to their dirt cheap tuition. Not saying I disagree that adding the train might be a financial disappointment but your assertion that there is no market is not true either. If you listened to all the videos one of the State DOT reps mentioned the colleges along the route as a target market which tells me they did their homework before the test train.
You presume far too much on the roads being faster. I've driven Dallas to Joplin, MO then had to cut across the state on the way to Chicago.......the roads are *** in a lot of places (also prone to flooding) and as you near Tulsa you have to drive West like 100 miles to get on the road heading East into MO (lol). It says 5 hours on Mapquest to get to Joplin, Mo from my home........actually took 8 hours due to traffic and the roads. It says 8 hours to KC from my house, I can tell you looking at the distance and the routing......no way. So don't believe what the Internet tells you it's not always right. Eastern OK the roads are crap. Driven to OKC from my house taking I-35, usually always under construction in large sections........good luck making the mapquest driving estimate on that freeway epecially when the two lane freeway reduces to one lane and your stuck behind Joe Lunch pail and his 30 year old Peterbuilt that no longer has the HP to pull a 45 foot trailer. Also back to Eastern OK, lots of Indian Reservations hemming you in on alternative routinges when the roads flood and where there are no Indian Reservations there are large reservoirs of water on both sides of the freeway. So a Detour if you have to take one is going to take you at least 75-100 miles more than likely out of your way. They just do not have a lot of alternate routes in Eastern OK. BTW, detouring across an Indian Reservation.....your braver than I am, tribal law applies and a lot of the tribes are kind of disgruntled still from past history. So be my guest, I'll stay off of them for now.
11 hours min KC to Dallas on a Greyhound and I think that is an Express.........in most cases 12-13 hours. OK border is just 45 min North of my House which is 24 miles from downtown Dallas.
CMStPnP ... Since this new train if it ever runs will be state supported my guess is they will run it independently of the Heartland Flyer as a daylight run to Newton from OKC vs. attempting to combine with the Heartland Flyer. We will see though. Niether KS or OK is what you would call cash rich when it comes to state budget so niether has a lot of money to contribute for this.
Since this new train if it ever runs will be state supported my guess is they will run it independently of the Heartland Flyer as a daylight run to Newton from OKC vs. attempting to combine with the Heartland Flyer. We will see though. Niether KS or OK is what you would call cash rich when it comes to state budget so niether has a lot of money to contribute for this.
A daylight run from OKC would preclude a connection to the SWC, so I would guess they would need it to run all the way to KC. However, since Kansas is so anti subsidy, I would imagine they would prefer a shorter run to Newton to connect with the SWC. i.e., a night run.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.