Amtrak California San Joaquin

(Admin note: split thread) I know this isnt the right thread, but something posted recently reminded me:

I recall at the same time the stimulus money was handed out to this project, some went to California to increase speeds on the San Joaquin and Pacific Surfliner from 79 to 90 or 110.

Does anyone know if there ever was a thread discussing that? I cannot find it using the search feature. I wanted to know what happened to that project.

The closest thing to that I can think of is that at some point in between now and when the new mountain passes are completed, the San Joaquins are supposed to transfer from the BNSF to the new high speed line.

jamesinclair wrote:...
I recall at the same time the stimulus money was handed out to this project, some went to California to increase speeds on the San Joaquin and Pacific Surfliner from 79 to 90 or 110.
...

I don't remember that at all. Rather, I recall reading that Gov Schwarzenegger ordered California to bet the house on HSR. So the state made no conventional rail project applications to detract from the big ask for CAHSR.

Maybe once California got what they asked for from the Stimulus for CAHSR, there could have been applications for the FY2010 year funds. But I don't recall it, if so. And I don't recall seeing them on lists of on-going projects.

I'd say that even the orders for new bi-level cars and the new "fast-accelerating" Charger locomotives are being paid for by California's own money. The Midwestern states' share of the equipment is being paid for all or mostly by the feds.

Improving speeds on the Surfliner and San Joaquin would be good, so maybe cap-n-trade funds will pay for it.

bdawe wrote:The closest thing to that I can think of is that at some point in between now and when the new mountain passes are completed, the San Joaquins are supposed to transfer from the BNSF to the new high speed line.

No I am referring to money specifically set aside for existing corridors.

Here is one reference I found:

January 28th, 2010
Roughly one hundred million more would go to improvements on existing Amtrak corridors throughout the state, including a large expansion of San Jose’s Diridon Station and 110 mph trains on the Pacific Surfliner between San Diego and Los Angeles.

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010 ... ecipients/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

jamesinclair wrote: ...

January 28th, 2010
Roughly one hundred million more ... to improvements ... including ... 110 mph trains on the Pacific Surfliner between San Diego and Los Angeles.

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010 ... ecipients/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A nice find.

But looking at the table at the bottom of that article:

California $2.34 b
» $2.25 b - ROW, construction on CAHSR
» $51 m - Surfliner service improvements
» $23 m - Capitol service improvements
» $20 m - Train improvements

Have to say, no wonder nobody noticed any effects, LOL, because $51 million just ain't enuff, spread over a 128-mile route, to get close to 110 mph. Or 100 mph. Or even 90 mph.

California can be proud of its on-going, and often bi-partisan, support of passenger rail. Incremental improvements to the Pacific Surfliner have been upgrading infrastructure -- a few new culverts along here, and maybe straightening a curve there -- but no one of them makes a big bang. They just help make a corridor where ridership continues to grow. I'd expect that the next little speed improvement could be after the bi-levels and "fast accelerating" new locomotives arrive out west, probably in early 2018 or so. And maybe another frequency, to get closer to an hourly clock-face schedule, using the added equipment.

I'm hoping to see serious upgrades begin soon to the L.A.-Santa Barbara-San Luis Obispo segment, with perhaps another Surfliner frequency added soon after more equipment arrives. Then the big thing to help Amtrak's national system will be upgrading the track L.A.-San Francisco Bay Area and starting the Coast Daylight. Adding a second train, and taking an hour or more out of that route to help tweak the times on the Coast Starlight, could reduce the Starlight's costs a bit while adding a lot more riders. Of course, with the crazies in Congress, there won't be any federal money for upgrades like this. It will all be carbon-tax dollars.

I couldn't find a general San Joaquin news thread. Apologies if it does exist somewhere.

The route is getting a seventh daily round-trip. That would make five Bakersfield-Oakland trains and two Bakersfield-Sacramento trains.

”We are shooting to be operational by June 6,” says Dan Leavitt, manager of the JPA. The organization had promised to begin service this fiscal year.

The early morning train is scheduled to leave Hanford on the way to the Bay Area at 5:18 a.m., about an hour earlier than existing service. It gets to Oakland by 10 a.m.

There's already talk of an eighth:

On tap for the JPA is the addition of an eighth train that will likely launch every early morning from Fresno and is to be funded by state Cap and Trade monies.

That's what I'm here for...

Something isn't right, here. There's already a train arriving in Hanford at 8:43 PM. They claim the new 8:40 PM arrival would allow a full day in San Francisco. I would think the current 10:43 PM arrival already does that, and more.

Balerion wrote: The route is getting a seventh daily round-trip to make five Bakersfield-Oakland trains and two Bakersfield-Sacramento trains.

”We are shooting to be operational by June 6,” says Dan Leavitt, manager of the Joint Powers Authority.
. . . an eighth train will likely launch early morning from Fresno . . . funded by state Cap and Trade monies.

The good news posting of the week!

The informative Hanford Sentinel article notes this is the first train added to the corridor since 2002.

I like the proposal to start an early morning train midpoint, at Fresno, instead of waiting 2 hours for the first train out of Bakersfield to reach there. The earlier arrival to Oakland, 9ish instead of 11ish, should make the 8th train popular with business passengers.

"Leavitt says they have ordered new equipment including new double-decker cars as well as single-level cars and new locomotives."

That mention of single-level cars ? ! ? ! ? But whatever. And faster running will shave 12 minutes from the average scheduled time.

An effort to offer more family-friendly fares:
". . . a major priority for the JPA is to build ridership by encouraging more use of the service by small groups. Over 70 percent of the ridership is single riders. Beginning in May, Amtrak will offer discount fares called Friends and Family. When one person buys a full price ticket, an additional five tickets come at half price."

Sounds good to me. Kids and spouse in the SUV is cheaper than 3 or 4 on the train. If they want to cut pollution and greenhouse gases, got to do something to compete.

O.K. The San Joaquins carried 1,200,000 riders on six trains last year, roughly 200,000 per run. Add another run, how long to get another 100,000? To get 200,000 more? As quickly as possible, please, to shore up Amtrak's deteriorating total pax numbers.

"For FY 2016/17 the San Joaquin operating subsidy is estimated to be $48.3 million (which includes $7.4 million for the seventh daily round trip)."

Good value for money.

The "comarrows",horizen food service car,and NPCU are the "new" single level cars,the 2nd gen Surfliners are in a
design redo after some test shells failed big time at the factory.

This route is largely a single-track-with-passing-sidings operation. What, if anything, has or will be done to add capacity to the Stockton and Bakersfield Subdivisions to make this happen? This all assumes the BNSF is okay with the extra passenger trains, as well.

Rockingham Racer wrote:This route is largely a single-track-with-passing-sidings operation. What, if anything, has or will be done to add capacity to the Stockton and Bakersfield Subdivisions to make this happen? This all assumes the BNSF is okay with the extra passenger trains, as well.

Yes, this all assumes the JPA has made the deal with BSNF for the 7th train starting in June, or they wouldn't have put out a press release. LOL. Seems like they probably already have a deal with BNSF to add the 8th train that Mr Leavitt said will "likely" launch.

More from that nice story in the Hanford Sentinel:

Leavitt said they were able to shave 12 minutes off the average travel time for this new train because of less conflict with freight trains that travel on the same BNSF track.
. . .
In addition to increasing the frequency of the San Joaquin service, the train is planned to run at 90 mph maximum speed operations (instead of 79 mph) in key locations and other projects which can reduce travel times, according to the JPA's business plan.

Sorry that last sentence seems to have lost a word or a few. And it doesn't tell us whether the other 6 current trains will also start to go 90 mph "in key locations" or any details about the "other projects which can reduce travel times".

At the northern end of the route, don't the San Joaquins use the same tracks as the Capitol Corridor trains? Seems that corridor has some upgrade project underway all the time. Just a guess.

At Martinez,there's a connection to the BNSF from UP's main to SAC from Oakland(Jack London Square).

Sorry for this re-post (now cut down). I wanted to put the sentences from the Hanford Sentinel in a quote box, that's all. Guess my allowable time to Edit had expired, and I was editing a new post. Maybe I should go back to bed.

Woody wrote:

Rockingham Racer wrote:What ... done to add capacity . . .? This all assumes the BNSF is okay with [it].

Assumes a deal with BSNF for the 7th train starting in June, or they wouldn't have put out a press release.

More from that nice story in the Hanford Sentinel:

Leavitt said ... able to shave 12 minutes off the travel time because of less conflict with freight trains ...
. . .
In addition to increasing the frequency of the San Joaquin service, the train is planned to run at 90 mph maximum speed (instead of 79 mph) in key locations and other projects . . .

Sorry that ... doesn't tell us whether the 6 current trains will also start to go 90 mph "in key locations" or any details about the "other projects which can reduce travel times".

At the northern end of the route, don't the San Joaquins use the same tracks as the Capitol Corridor trains? . . . [It has] upgrade projects underway all the time.

Backshophoss wrote:At Martinez,there's a connection to the BNSF from UP's main to SAC from Oakland(Jack London Square).

Yes, thanks.

Studying the Schedules, it looks like the new train will give a second option for a connection to the EB Zephyr. Now San Joaquin riders take one of the trains to Sacramento. Starting in June, the added train will get them to Martinez, on the Oakland route, an hour or so earlier. Boarding earlier should give them a better choice of seats than waiting until Sacramento. Not a big deal, but as discussed, the Zephyr needs every extra dollar it can get.

Pondering this, I realize the Zephyr hardly has to pay for stations Emeryville-Sacramento. The six San Joaquins pay some, and the Capitol Corridors pay most. The divided-up share left for the Zephyr is small already, and adding two more San Joaquins will make it even smaller. Not a big deal, but . . .