ryanwc wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 8:05 am
Today I learned that a 300-mile, 1 million rider train line runs from Oakland to a relatively small city 100 miles north of Los Angeles. Where if you want to go to the largest city west of the Hudson River, you can transfer to a bus.
It's a geography thing as much as a contract/legal thing. Would be like riding an NE Regional Washington to Newark, then going up to Newburgh to cross the river and back down the Metro North. The timing related to the mountains is rough.
RandallW wrote:Amtrak didn't run a train down the San Joaquin valley when it started, and ultimately began running that train at the behest of a Congressman in 1974, but since the route was "new", couldn't compel SP to allow it to use the line over the Tehachapi Pass.
Keeping in mind that SP was in rough shape in terms of money from 1980-on, you could easily incentivize them to allow the trains to run by paying market rate trackage rights. Neither the shareholders nor the ballast and rails know that's a passenger train paying to use the rails if the rates are in line with the market.
As much as the map visuals seem frustrating on this route, it's important to keep it in perspective. It is a huge success in terms of ridership. It does not require special equipment, and at one time just ran with a GP40 variant (the F40) and Comet coaches. Until recently the train ran with a GP60 variant and quasi-superliners, a 1950 design. It does not require higher speeds or amtrak-owned rails.
It works due to multiple frequencies and local management.
The new Acela: It's not Aveliable.