All things Pennsylvanian AND Keystone West

STrRedWolf wrote:Bringing it back to trains, I know off hand (because I know of another Amtrak fur who was employed by the Cape May Short Line) that you cannot be in costume ("fursuit") and operating the engine due to FRA regulations concerning limiting one's vision.

Probably get pulled out of service pending a psych evaluation, too. Honestly, I have nothing against fursuiters (to each his own), but when working for a place like the railroad - you keep quiet about hobbies unless they're the mainstream typical blue-collared ones (fishing,shooting,hunting,drinking,golf, sports, etc).

- gp80
(who has hobbies some would consider strange, as well. )

Alright, aside from the fact that this furry-con is happening in Pittsburgh and has potentially led to a couple of sell-out days on the Pennsylvanian...Anthrocon has absolutely ZERO to do with trains...so stick a sock in it please.

Carry on.

With the usual caution given about socks in some furry maws (get mind out of the gutter)...

The NEC FUTURE document pushed out by the FRA mentions a study done in 2014 by the FRA and PennDOT about increasing Amtrak service between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh. Was this linked earlier in this thread? I don't remember off hand.

Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership releases it's committee testimony for more service between Pittsburgh and Harrisburg.

They point to a 2014 study which estimated a $10-14 million cost to run trains three times a day up and back, including procuring the equipment.

If and that's a big "IF" Siemens foes not stmble with its chargers and can produce a dual mode ( diesel over head CAT } based on the chargers and ACS-64s then the dual mode could provide for no power change in PHL and speed up the schedule. As well layover trains could have a short section of CAT at the Pittsburgh station so no idling of the dual modes during layovers. Dual modes would allow for non CAT switching there.

Of course if there are cut off cars at PHL any schedule would only gain from faster accelerations PHL <> HAR>

Speed it up by how much? 25 minutes? The only cars cut off at PHL is the diesel engine, when they swap to an electric. They delay 10 minutes at HAR to switch out crew.

No, the real mess is PGH to HAR, which is the longest portion of the trip at 6+ hours, and it's up-mountain both ways. Trace the route, but this is NS's line we're talking about for that section.

It's the former PRR mainline to P-burg,and yes,you "play" mtn goat in both directions via Horse shoe curve.
and the grades are not as bad as the PA Turnpike's grades(I-76).

5.5 hours, which is 34 minutes longer than before they ripped out track in the 80s. There is plenty of right of way of we were to restore capacity and perhaps even reopen far side platforms

Suburban Station wrote:There is plenty of right of way of we were to restore capacity and perhaps even reopen far side platforms

This is an important point. A lot of the capacity of a double-track line is lost if you can only use one track because that's where the one in-service platform is. I think the real trick is making sure that far-side platforms are ADA compliant, and that there's a safe way to get people from one platform to another. All of which, of course, costs $$$.

Agreed. Expansion is needed. It's all low level, one platform PGH to (but not including) HAR (which I think only uses one high-level for this train). I think I expounded on things earlier in the thread, so I'll be short in describing going three track wide and two-platformed at those stations (links to Wikimapia locations):

• Lewistown: New station south of old station is cheaper due to current location.
• Huntington: Build new raised platform away from at-grade crossing, put in a bridge.
• Tyrone: Flag stop. Outside platform only. Probably won't be ADA complaint unless it gets more traffic.
• Altoona: Raise the existing platform, build a new one on other side, bridge exists already.
• Johnstown: Raise the existing island platform, and make sure there's switches around ether ends. 4 track wide already.
• Latrobe: Flag stop... but I think it has the traffic. Needs a new platform on other side, and possibly a tunnel to the old PRR station.
• Greensburg: Extend tunnel and rebuild the platforms.
• Pittsburgh: Rebuild the platforms and canopy to accommodate three parked trains, high level, bridge between tracks.

The only issue on right of way size is between PGH and Greensburg.

Speaking of Altoona: Altoona Mirror

Fair-use SNIPS:

Amtrak might ‘de-staff’ Altoona station

The national carrier recently disclosed its plans to the Altoona Redevelopment Authority.

Notice of the intention to "de-staff" Altoona came in the form of a phone call Tuesday to city Planning Director Lee Slusser, Slusser told the authority board on Friday.

The disclosure set in motion a flurry of communications among municipal, development and passenger-rail advocacy officials this week - including an apology from an Amtrak government affairs manager, who said the idea is "on hold until it can be discussed," because de-staffing Altoona is subject to PennDOT approval.

That was followed by an emailed response from an Amtrak spokesman, who said, "Amtrak does not intend to change staffing in Altoona at this time."
...

Of course, nevermind what I recall from my college years living in New York and attending UofIll:

https://goo.gl/images/fZ31c6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

By the start of the Amtrak era, that had been reduced to a house trailer.

Jeff Smith wrote:Speaking of Altoona: Altoona Mirror

The quote you did is all I can get; they fully paywalled that site.

Buried at the end of a story on redevelopment near the Harrisburg Station is this tidbit:

A separate study led by PennDOT and Amtrak is looking into improvements for the train station itself, that would potentially cost around $12 million . . . .

Anyone know what this is referring to?

Mr. Red Wolf, it appears that, in addition to the Altoona Mirror, all the papers owned by this outfit, Ogden Newspapers, Inc., are equally paywalled:

http://www.oweb.com/home.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There appears no way around such as through Google News