East-West service out of Memphis has never been anything more than marginal, even prior to 1965.
Historically, the first connection between the Atlantic Ocean and the MIssissippi River was from Savannah to Memphis.
CSSHEGEWISCH East-West service out of Memphis has never been anything more than marginal, even prior to 1965.
Had a thru pullman late 40 -50s. Now when NS GETS the Crescent corridor from Knoxville - Harrisburg complete ( 2030 ?) then that may become a high traffic intermodal.
Good News! Amtrak and Pennsylvania Gov. Corbett have reached a deal on the Pennsylvanianian west onf Harrisburg. Amtrak has agreed to pick up 3.8 million of the expense and Corbett says the rest can fit in the states transportation budget. I've taken this train numerous times, and I'm glad it remains an option in the mid and western part of the Keystone State. The info was on the Market Watch web site. It seems very creditable.
There is also an article in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. Western Pennsylvania passenger rail advocates seem not to have totally failed in their efforts to keep the Pennsylvanian.
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/transportation/corbett-announces-plan-to-maintain-amtrak-service-680308/
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/governor-corbett-announces-steps-to-save-amtrak-service-to-pittsburgh-2013-03-21
Link to Market Watch blurb.
This plus the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette leads me to the following conclusions:
1. PA pays 3.8M. Original "cost" was 6.5M. Nobody knows where the difference comes from. Efficiencies? Fares? Federal subsidy? My guess is "all three", although I don't know if Amtrak is even allowed to help fund this train per PRIIA of 2008.
2. Bill Shuster was involved (surprise!). Perhaps Bill found a way to supply some "bacon" (thin strips of pork).
3. This is another example of Amtrak not finding a way to improve without being pushed from the outside. In this case, PRIIA of 2008.
4. I am glad this train will continue to operate.
Little known Pennsylvanian fact: When the train first started operating, the max speed for passenger trains between Pittsburgh and Harrisburg was 70 mph. In the late Conrail era into NS, there are now stretches of 79 mph. (Why 79 and not 80 mph? I don't know. It's all cab signalled.)
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Reading both articles also reveals a pretty inaccurate summary by skull as to the source of the $3.8M.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Rather than having "not totally failed", Western PA passenger rail advocates would prefer to look at yesterday's announcement as much closer to having "totally succeeded". Trains.com readers are welcome to visit our website, www.wpprrail.org, to view more articles and information about the Pennsylvanian funding agreement and other issues.
Mark Spada , Western Pennsylvanians for Passenger Rail (WPPR)
oltmanndalthough I don't know if Amtrak is even allowed to help fund this train per PRIIA of 2008.
Don,
My sense of the situation is that Amtrak will contribute funds on the order of $3 million. I can't say how that fits into PRIIA. I would expect that at most there might be modest growth in the number of people who ride the Pennsylvanian.
John
Mark,
I'm the guy who say Western PA passenger rail advocates have "not totally failed" in your efforts to preserve the Pennsylvanian. I intended it as an oxymoron, stating something by saying the opposite. I agree you have been very successful.
oltmannd Bill Shuster was involved (surprise!). Perhaps Bill found a way to supply some "bacon" (thin strips of pork).
PS. Don, What is perhaps a surprise for Amtrak supporters is that there must have been some log rolling by Shuster's same-side-of-the-aisle colleagues. I've been pessimistic about Amtrak's future but this latest turn of events makes me wonder if I have been mistaken.
My daughter rode The Pennsylvanian for a year from Harrisburg to Johnstown where she attended a technical school. Never once was she the only person to board at Harrisburg, it was always a line waiting to board.
I would have to purchase her ticket two weeks to a month+ ahead of time to assure she had a seat (holiday travel was 6 weeks ahead.) The ridership is there, just that the politics has it down to only one run per day. I say politics as a former recent Governor who was Mayor of a very large city some East of Harrisburg spend $$$ to upgrade rails and trains going East of Harrisburg which exploded in ridership.
Is there a market for trains West? Yes, I would say for one additional western run. Right now there is completion Westward from Grayhound, MegaBus, and a limo service out of Harrisburg. My fellow workers who need to travel to Pittsburgh would gladly take a train vs. a bus, driving or limo if there was better service like what goes Eastward.
Would like to add a little personal story with My daughter rode The Pennsylvanian for a year from Harrisburg to Johnstown where she attended a technical school. Never once was she the only person to board at Harrisburg, it was always a long line waiting to board (20+.).
I would have to add a little person story of The Pennsylvanian. When the above daughter was 5 years old, my company had me working in Pittsburgh on a financial software project for a year (1996/97). My corporate apartment was in The Pennsylvanian, the old Pennsylvania Railroad passenger station/corporate offices on Grant Street. Once a month my wife and daughter would take The Pennsylvanian to Pittsburgh, get off and go to “Daddy’s train station house” for a long weekend of the sights, sounds, trolleys and theater of Pittsburgh. It was coming full circle when she started riding The Pennsylvanian as a young lady. So much so, that now school is behind her, she asked Santa for her own Pennsylvanian train set for under the Christmas tree. Santa was very happy to drop off a package wrapped in Amtrak colors.
I wonder if Amtrak could operate a little faster west of Harrisburg. Harrisburg to Pittsburgh is 249 miles on Amtrak's schedule. The trip takes 5 1/2 hours and the train averages about 45 mph. Of course there are several stops in between the two places.
Megabus and Greyhound average about 55 mph for the same trip which takes an hour off of the total time. I used Amtrak's mileage to estimate the distance although I don't know that the mileage is really the same
John WR I wonder if Amtrak could operate a little faster west of Harrisburg. Harrisburg to Pittsburgh is 249 miles on Amtrak's schedule. The trip takes 5 1/2 hours and the train averages about 45 mph. Of course there are several stops in between the two places. Megabus and Greyhound average about 55 mph for the same trip which takes an hour off of the total time. I used Amtrak's mileage to estimate the distance although I don't know that the mileage is really the same
The alignment of the railroad west of Huntingdon pretty much precludes going any faster. You might get a bit more speed if you jacked the superelevation up to 6" on curves, but that would cost a bundle. It's expensive to try to maintain that much superelevation - NS is perfectly happy with 4".
East of there, you the alignment would support some stretches of 90-110, but you'd have to fund a third track. (there is room for it. PRR used to have four tracks where there are now two).
There has been talk over the years of doing an all new alignment from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh via State College. Just add money....
The biggest probleme with the Pennsylvanian is the lack of population and disposable income between Pittsburgh and Harrisburg. Knocking 20 or 30 minutes off the schedule doesn't fix that.
One aspect, albeit a minor one, that has been ignored in this Pennsylvanian discussion, has been that of the railroad stations affected. Johnstown and Altoona have new or refurbished stations that were improved by taxpayer money. Lewistown, through the noble efforts of volunteers, looks terrific, and is light years ahead of what it was in the early 80's. I know that the Greenburg station has been improved. Even Huntingdon has added flower beds and a porta potty to improve things. I never understood the bus comparison with regards to this market. The train serves various towns and cities, that are often ignored by the mega bus. There is civic pride, in the stations, and in the fact that there is a connection to a national rail network. To snub these communities, so that a few more miles of 4 lane highway can be resurfaced, would have been woefully short sited. With regard to what John WR mentioned, yes, I think the 5 and 1/2 hour timing could be trimmed by 15 or 20 minutes. The Pennsylvanian has a solid record in terms of time keeping, so there's hope. Weather it's an over night train beyond Pittsburgh or a duplicate of the Pennsylvanian, I concur with those who believe the route should see two trains a day.
Greyhound operates 6 buses a day from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh. The fastest take a little over 4 hours. The slowest, and there are 2 of them, take over 6 hours. These slow buses the the ones that make all of the stops that Amtrak makes; the 2 fast buses I checked buses make none of the intermediate stops.
This suggest to me that there are two routes to take, a slow route and a fast route.
You point out that both altering the current tracks to allow higher speeds and building a new, faster track are too expensive for a railroad. That suggest a somewhat difference standard was used when paved roads were built (notably I-99). But I guess that is the way it is.
I did some shopping around for traveling between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh. This is what I learned:
Amtrak runs one train a day. Travel time is about 5 and a half hours. Cost to travel tomorrow is $40. Cost to travel anytime up to June 25 is $40.
Greyhound runs 6 buses a day. Shortest travel time is 4 hours and 5 minutes. Longest is a little over 6 hours. The two 6 hour buses make the same stops Amtrak does; the fast buses do not. Cost is $21 if you buy your ticket on line and $48 if you don't.
Megabus runs 3 buses a day which take 4 hours and 15 minutes. None make Amtrak stops. Cost to travel tomorrow is $16. Cost to travel May 25 is $1.00 or $3.50, depending on the bus you take.
Clearly, to go from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh Megabus offers the best deal on the whole, the lowest cost and only a slightly longer trip than Greyhound.
However, Greyhound makes more trips. The price is more than Megabus, a lot more than Megabus 2 months out but not much more if you need to travel now or in the next few days. I am comparing price only for on line ticketing; I doubt very many would pay the extra for walk up ticketing.
Scheduling: Amtrak leaves Harrisburg at 2:25 pm. Greyhound leaves at 2:00 pm so Amtrak does not offer a scheduling alternative. Megabus has no departure between 1:30 and 2:30 pm. Of course both Greyhound and Megabus have other departures which no doubt many would find more convenient.
Given all of buses available between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh including Greyhound's two that make all Amtrak stops I wonder why preservation of Amtrak is so important to those who live in the area.
John WR Given all of buses available between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh including Greyhound's two that make all Amtrak stops I wonder why preservation of Amtrak is so important to those who live in the area.
Because Amtrak isn't a bus...
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
John WRGiven all of buses available between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh including Greyhound's two that make all Amtrak stops I wonder why preservation of Amtrak is so important to those who live in the area.
If it was really important, wouldn't it have more riders? (That's just as a bad a question as yours...)
Is the train more comfortable than the bus? Yup. Is the train highly subsidized? Yup. Is the bus directly subsidized? Nope. What would the ridership be if the Harrisburg - Pittsburgh fare was $80?
It's likely it's important to a some number of folk who bothered to let Bill Shuster know...
oltmannd The alignment of the railroad west of Huntingdon pretty much precludes going any faster. You might get a bit more speed if you jacked the superelevation up to 6" on curves, but that would cost a bundle. It's expensive to try to maintain that much superelevation - NS is perfectly happy with 4". East of there, you the alignment would support some stretches of 90-110, but you'd have to fund a third track. (there is room for it. PRR used to have four tracks where there are now two).
Yes a third track east of Huntingdon will cost a bundle of money that will require someday a matching federal grant to get it built??
Two items
1. we need is the allowed passenger train from Altoona - Galitzin & Johnstown - Galitzin on the up grade segments. ?
2. What are the actual speeds that AMTRAK is able to climb those grades with the present consists ? Further if a PHL - PITTSBURG - sleeper is ever added what would be the speeds?
It may be the a second locomotive is now needed or will be if a sleeper is added. Of course as of now the cronic locomotive shortage precludes a second loco.
The question is how much time can be saved around horseshoe if a second loco were to be added ??
zugmannBecause Amtrak isn't a bus...
Maybe so. Maybe there are other reasons. I did not look into the thinking of the people who want to keep the Pennsylvanian.
oltmannd Is the train highly subsidized? Yup. Is the bus directly subsidized? Nope.
Well Don, you are right about subsidy. The Pittsburgh Post Gazette reports the Pennsylvanian subsidy is $5.7 million per year. And yes, the bus is not "directly subsidized."
But the final 18 miles of I-99 cost $389 million, almost $39 million dollars a mile. And it gets worse. The route excavations cut into pyrite, acidic rock. How acidic? The pH is similar to that of battery acid. Dealing with that alone cost $83 million. But sportsmen and environmentalists were pretty outraged. An alternative route could have been chosen that would not have resulted in environmental damage. So while the buses and cars that use I-99 are not directly subsidized the tax payers still had to come up with $389 million.
$389 million dollars would pay the Pennsylvanian's 5.7 million dollar subsidy for 68 years. And it would do so without adding to the environment the equivalent of battery acid.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/us/28highway.html
PS. Because dumping the equivalent of battery acid on the environment sounds so outrageous at first glance I want to add this seems to be a massive stroke of bad luck that is no one's fault. Some how the environmental impact statement missed the deposits of pyrite that caused it. On the other hand, we do have to live with the problems that were caused and that continue.
John WR But the final 18 miles of I-99 cost $389 million, almost $39 million dollars a mile. And it gets worse. The route excavations cut into pyrite, acidic rock. How acidic? The pH is similar to that of battery acid. Dealing with that alone cost $83 million. But sportsmen and environmentalists were pretty outraged. An alternative route could have been chosen that would not have resulted in environmental damage. So while the buses and cars that use I-99 are not directly subsidized the tax payers still had to come up with $389 million. $389 million dollars would pay the Pennsylvanian's 5.7 million dollar subsidy for 68 years. And it would do so without adding to the environment the equivalent of battery acid. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/us/28highway.html
I-99 was PORK, pure and simple. The worst (best?) example of what you can do if you chair the right committee. Never should have been built. US 220 was more than adequate. But, that's water over the dam, now - 20 years over the dam.
I-99 was far worse than all the money spent on the Pennsylvanian.
So, my pork is leaner than your pork? It's still pork, no?
The train serves riders in central-west Pennsylvania. The state thinks the service is worth $3+M per year but not $7+M per year. I'm okay with them making that judgement.
But, the problem is bigger than this. The high per-rider Federal subsidies for some Amtrak routes are driving the passenger rail debate. There won't be much forward progress until the debate shifts. Getting the Pennsylvanian's Federal subsidy reduced (eliminated? who knows? nobody's telling) is a good step.
blue streak 12. What are the actual speeds that AMTRAK is able to climb those grades with the present consists ? Further if a PHL - PITTSBURG - sleeper is ever added what would be the speeds?
blue streak 1The question is how much time can be saved around horseshoe if a second loco were to be added ??
One P42 and 6 Amfleet can make about 55 mph up the west slope. Track speed is 44 mph by timetable, with lots of 35 mph curves. Power is not a problem. You could add another 3 cars and still make track speed up the hill.
One P42 and 9 cars would be able to hold track speed up the minor grades west of Johnstown, too.
It seems there are at least three POV's in the discussions about passenger rail service, with some overlapping..
One group is those opposed to any federal or state passenger rail service, mostly because of opposition to subsidies (small government, libertarian and TP types?), irritation with the advocacy groups' diffuse messages (comparing subsidy levels, environmental benefits, serving handicapped, etc.) or not wanting passenger trains interfering with operations on freight line hosts.
A second group wants Amtrak to expand conventional passenger rail services, including LD trains, perhaps a restoration to 1950's service levels, with sleepers, diners, baggage cars (lounges, observation cars, parlor cars, etc.?). They seem rather lukewarm or dubious about the benefits of "modern" (40 year history) HSR.
A third group favors modern passenger rail services, including HSR in a mix of complementary services. Amtrak is seen as an institution encumbered with political pork, high-cost labor contracts and outmoded concepts, such as the continued purchase of baggage cars rather than coaches.
oltmannd I-99 was PORK, pure and simple. The worst (best?) example of what you can do if you chair the right committee. Never should have been built. US 220 was more than adequate. But, that's water over the dam, now - 20 years over the dam.
Water over the dam perhaps. But not water coming down the mountain. There are still deposits of pyrite which cause rain to be extremely acidic. So much so that PennDOT had to build detention basins at the bottom to collect the acid and pump it into tanks. When the tanks get full the acid is hauled away by truck. I assume it is hauled over I-99. Also, while the pyrite that had not already been put under the road was picked up and trucked away not all of it could be found. So between pyrite under the road and just dispersed by the blasting acid is still being released into the soil. The problems continue.
Ordinarily, pork barrel legislation had a redeeming feature. Some people do benefit by it. In this case the people who were supposed to benefit have had their ground water (including drinking water in many cases) poisoned. It certainly gives new meaning to pork barrel legislation.
oltmanndThe high per-rider Federal subsidies for some Amtrak routes are driving the passenger rail debate.
I think what you say is true on this forum, Don. But there are a lot of people in the country who are involved in the debate and whose views are not represented here. For them I think the issue is maintaining Amtrak vs abandoning Amtrak.
If High Speed Rail should take hold it may make Amtrak irrelevant.
John WRBut there are a lot of people in the country who are involved in the debate and whose views are not represented here.
Sure, but that's not the debate that counts. It's the one between Congress, the admin and Amtrak. The one that determines what happens.
There has always been a "kill Amtrak" faction. Their "go to" talking point is "subsidy per rider on the worst routes". The deficit is so large that there is danger that Amtrak could be sacrificed on the altar of compromise - more so now and the next few years than ever before.
If Amtrak can make that "talking point" go away, then they may live. I don't know if they care enough. $15 hamburgers were just fine - until Mica embarrassed them in public.
oltmanndThere has always been a "kill Amtrak" faction. Their "go to" talking point is "subsidy per rider on the worst routes". The deficit is so large that there is danger that Amtrak could be sacrificed on the altar of compromise - more so now and the next few years than ever before.
Yes, there has always been a "kill Amtrak" faction. But Amtrak is not dead yet. Up until a couple of days ago I myself was pretty pessimistic about the survival of Amtrak. Then in the middle of the sequester someone somewhere got agreement from the House to continue Federal support of the Pennsylvanian at a lower amount than before. But if Amtrak's enemies cannot even zero out the Pennsylvanian there seems to be reason to hope Amtrak will survive this.
As far as John MIca's statements about Amtrak I read Joe Boardman's testimony (power point) to the Congress on March 5. I couldn't find any embarrassment in it.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.