North Carolina NCDOT-Amtrak Carolinian Service

[Rockingham Racer]

Figure on ConnDOT forking over some $$$ if Amtrak and MN get on board with this extension.

But we keep reading that Connecticut is broke.

[Jehochman]

That has never stopped them before. Connecticut specializes in spending money we don't have.

[OrangeGrove]

Figure on ConnDOT forking over some $$$ if Amtrak and MN get on board with this extension.

Long-distance trains are appropriately and legally a federal responsibility; Why would Connecticut, or any state, be expected to contribute funds for such a service? Isn't that the whole point of the proposed extension?

I'm not sure a potential extension of the route to the south doesn't make more sense, but the only existing servicing facilities are too distant in Savannah.

[Tadman]

This is yet more evidence that the (completely arbitrary) 750-mile distinction between state funded regional and federally funded long-distance trains is a mistaken policy, not well thought out prior to its implementation. The true purpose was, of course, simply to shift funding responsibility completely onto the affected states (as opposed to the previous state-national split); This was not an attempt to develop a reasoned, purposeful transportation policy, and it shows.

Although I've never been a big fan of the rule, it makes sense in most cases. PA should pay for the Pennsylvanian. Michigan should pay for the PM. Where it doesn't work is situations in which the train originates on the NEC and loses passengers as it travels toward the sponsor state. Why does NC pay for more Richmoond-NYP passengers than CLT-NYP passengers? Why does VT pay for a Ethan Allen when most passengers get off at/before Saratoga?

We don't have this problem in the midwest as the sponsor state usually starts at the end of the commuter train out of Chicago. Nobody wants to ride Amtrak when Metra or South Shore gets you there for less with more frequency.

[Tadman]

This whole concept begs the question "what is a train" for PRIIA purposes? Is a train a route? A train number? Endpoints? Given that there has been "a train" between NOL and JAX that hasn't run for 10+ years, could the Hoosier State become part of the Builder, yet never actually interline the two? Advertise a 4 hour layover in Chicago and then a different discrete set of equipment leaves for Indy but the timetable is published as one train, one number. Isn't that basically what the Eagle/Sunset does? They trade something like 2 cars but call that "a train" when clearly it's one NOL-LAX train picking up a few cars from another CHI-SAN train.

I don't know the answer to this and it probably requires a thorough reading of PRIIA and review of precedent as well. I don't know that Amtrak knows the answer, either. Worth a discussion.

Overall I see what Carolina is trying to do and it makes sense. This is an NEC train that happens to finish in Carolina, not a Carolina corridor train, in reality. Why should Charlotte pay for it?

[OrangeGrove]

This is yet more evidence that the (completely arbitrary) 750-mile distinction between state funded regional and federally funded long-distance trains is a mistaken policy, not well thought out prior to its implementation. The true purpose was, of course, simply to shift funding responsibility completely onto the affected states (as opposed to the previous state-national split); This was not an attempt to develop a reasoned, purposeful transportation policy, and it shows.

Although I've never been a big fan of the rule, it makes sense in most cases. PA should pay for the Pennsylvanian. Michigan should pay for the PM. Where it doesn't work is situations in which the train originates on the NEC and loses passengers as it travels toward the sponsor state. Why does NC pay for more Richmoond-NYP passengers than CLT-NYP passengers? Why does VT pay for a Ethan Allen when most passengers get off at/before Saratoga?

We don't have this problem in the midwest as the sponsor state usually starts at the end of the commuter train out of Chicago. Nobody wants to ride Amtrak when Metra or South Shore gets you there for less with more frequency.

I would agree that the individual states should be financially responsible for trains which wholly or primarily serve just that one state, including routes which extend beyond the state border only to a nearby, regional, or otherwise logical terminal point. Indeed, this is exactly what happens in the midwest; Michigan is correctly and properly responsible for its trains, although they pass through portions of two other states to reach the (regional) terminus of Chicago; Certainly you would not expect such services to stop at the state border, nor expect Indiana to be interested in funding them just because they cross the state line.

But for trains which reach beyond one state and past the next significant terminal point, I'm going to argue that generally (there are always exceptions) such interstate travel should properly be a federal responsibility. The Carolinian is perhaps the best example of this. There would be nothing inherently wrong with federal-state collaboration on funding regional trains which serve multiple states (note the former 403(b) program), but the 750-mile restriction reaches much too far. Arguably, mileage should not be the criteria used; Were the Capitol Limited a mere 30 miles shorter it would technically be a state funded (regional) train rather than long-distance, which would clearly apply an unreasonable standard.

[electricron]

I would agree that the individual states should be financially responsible for trains which wholly or primarily serve just that one state, including routes which extend beyond the state border only to a nearby, regional, or otherwise logical terminal point. Indeed, this is exactly what happens in the midwest; Michigan is correctly and properly responsible for its trains, although they pass through portions of two other states to reach the (regional) terminus of Chicago; Certainly you would not expect such services to stop at the state border, nor expect Indiana to be interested in funding them just because they cross the state line.

But for trains which reach beyond one state and past the next significant terminal point, I'm going to argue that generally (there are always exceptions) such interstate travel should properly be a federal responsibility. The Carolinian is perhaps the best example of this. There would be nothing inherently wrong with federal-state collaboration on funding regional trains which serve multiple states (note the former 403(b) program), but the 750-mile restriction reaches much too far. Arguably, mileage should not be the criteria used; Were the Capitol Limited a mere 30 miles shorter it would technically be a state funded (regional) train rather than long-distance, which would clearly apply an unreasonable standard.

I don't agree that 750 miles was arbitrary set. Congress definitely looked at the lengths of the existing trains Amtrak was running to arrive at that data point. And most trains Amtrak runs in single track territory averages a speed close to 45 mph.
So, 750 miles / 45 mph = 16 hours and 40 minutes; that's about as long a "Day" train should be.

Of course, significant running time on the faster NEC will shorten the time a train travels 750 miles to a shorter elapse time, for example the Carolinian requires 13 hours and 35 minutes to travel 704 rail miles, northbound, averaging 51.8 mph. Extend the train an additional 46 miles to the south should only add about 52 minutes to the trip, assuming the same average speed. The new elapse time for this example would be around 14 hours and 27 minutes. Definitely more than 2 hours less than what a train averaging 45 mph can achieve.

[Anthony]

Instead of extending the train north to New Haven, which already has plenty of Amtrak service, this train should be extended south to Dallas-Fort Worth via the route of the Crescent south of Charlotte and the Meridian Speedway. This would allow better times in DFW than the proposal to add a DFW section to the Crescent (which would require messing up the Crescent's schedule and causing bad times at BHM and ATL), and would provide a second frequency along a significant portion of the Crescent route, all while creating a train similar to the Crescent Star proposal currently being pushed by the Southern Rail Commission and allowing NCDOT to not have to subsidize this train. A proposed schedule for the extension is below:
Note:
VKS = Vicksburg, MS
MNR = Monroe, LA
RSN = Ruston, LA
SHV = Shreveport, LA

Westbound:
Dp. CLT: 9:09P
Dp. GAS: 9:36P
Dp. SPB: 10:38P
Ar. GRV: 11:18P
Dp. GRV: 11:25P
Dp. CSN: 12:03A
Dp. TCA: 12:39A
Dp. GNS: 1:22A
Ar. ATL: 2:37A
Dp. ATL: 3:02A
Dp. ATN: 3:34A
Ar. BHM: 5:24A
Dp. BHM: 5:42A
Dp. TCL: 6:41A
Ar. MEI: 8:32A
Dp. MEI: 8:38A
Dp. JAN: 10:08A
Dp. VKS: 10:58A
Dp. MNR: 11:56A
Dp. RSN: 12:27P
Dp. SHV: 1:23P
Dp. MHL: 2:08P
Dp. LVW: 2:46P
Dp. MIN: 3:43P
Ar. DAL: 5:48P
Dp. DAL: 6:08P
Ar. FTW: 7:43P

Eastbound:
Ar. CLT: 6:35A
Dp. GAS: 5:53A
Dp. SPB: 4:53A
Dp. GRV: 4:12A
Ar. GRV: 4:07A
Dp. CSN: 3:30A
Dp. TCA: 2:54A
Dp. GNS: 2:13A
Dp. ATL: 1:18A
Ar. ATL: 12:49A
Dp. ATN: 9:13P
Dp. BHM: 7:38P
Ar. BHM: 7:29P
Dp. TCL: 5:58P
Dp. MEI: 5:21P
Ar. MEI: 5:16P
Dp. JAN: 3:46P
Dp. VKS: 2:51P
Dp. MNR: 1:47P
Dp. RSN: 1:12P
Dp. SHV: 12:17P
Dp. MHL: 11:32A
Dp. LVW: 10:16A
Dp. MIN: 9:16A
Dp. DAL: 7:41A
Ar. DAL: 7:21A
Dp. FTW: 6:21A

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

The Carolinian is 704 miles, the shortest LD train (Capitol Limited) is 780 miles. I would say it's not a coincidence. The train does connect Washington DC and Chicago so that would help Congressional support and it does pass through West Virginia and we know who controlled Amtrak back then. Also Congress probably went to North Carolina and said to them "fund it or we cancel it" and Carolina blinked. They did the same for Pennsylvania and Indiana. If Congress can blackmail a state to cover an LD train they'd do so too.

And day trains aren't necessarily excluded. The Palmetto is just a day train too.

[DutchRailnut]

I seriously point this to rumor land , the train would have no way of being serviced without causing labor conflicts .
the forces used by CtDOT for SLE do not service Amtrak trains, and few employees used for springfield line would not be capable servicing long distance trains as they simply do not have the facilities or resources, like commissary or toilet servicing.
using MN forces or yard would be out of question.

[OrangeGrove]

Exactly. Had the mileage requirement been set lower it would have made the Carolinian a long-distance train (which is ironic, given this thread...); North Carolina was already paying a portion of the trains operating subsidy. The new regulation was clearly an attempt to fully shift costs for state-supported trains onto the affected states (previously, these trains were funded only partially by the states, with the remainder covered by Amtrak).

There is no rational or reasoned criteria behind why the limit was set as it was, other than it happened to produce the desired outcome. I suppose you can call that reason enough, however, I'd still argue it is arbitrary in the lack of evidence and a defensible conclusion that 750 miles is the proper dividing line between state or regional and long-distance trains. There are relatively few places in the continental United States where you could even have a route of that length that didn't pass through multiple states and serve varied travel markets; Such interstate transportation is properly a federal responsibility.

So, 750 miles / 45 mph = 16 hours and 40 minutes; that's about as long a "Day" train should be.

A (correctly) state supported train doesn't necessarily mean a "day" train. The Spirit of California (years ago, I realize) certainly wasn't.

[east point]

Instead of extending the train north to New Haven, which already has plenty of Amtrak service, this train should be extended south to Dallas-Fort Worth via the route of the Crescent south of Charlotte and the Meridian Speedway. Dp. FTW: 6:21A

This proposal is a great idea which provides for a sort of day train NYP - ATL. However the problem of the Howell interlocking in ATL still rears its ugly head. A check of the Crescent's time keeping between ATL and Aniston has almost 75% of the trains taking more than 20 extra minutes to travel that segment. With CSX getting longer and longer trains every CSX train to <> from Waycross, Montgomery, Birmingham, Augusta that travel from or thru the CSX ATL yard ( Tilford ) fouls Howell. As well NS can foul Howell with freights to /from Macon south.

[mtuandrew]

The CT plan is cute, but if I were at NCDOT, I'd be asking around Spartanburg or Columbia to gauge interest in funding a little (or a lot) longer extension south.

[jstolberg]

OK, here's a crazy idea. The Palmetto has had good success picking up a second consist between New York and Washington. Why not run the Carolinian as a double consist and service it out of Ivy City?

One consist joins the Carolinian in Washington and runs north to New Haven, then south to Charlotte for a total of 1079 miles. Then it runs north from Charlotte to New Haven and back to Washington, another 1079 miles. Finally, it joins the northbound Carolinian for a round trip to New Haven and back for 600 miles. Each car returns to Ivy City twice every 2,758 miles.

This enables the train to carry twice as many passengers between New Haven and Washington as between Washington and Charlotte.

*Edit: That 4:29 pm northbound departure out of Washington is sweet indeed. I bet they could fill that second consist in a heartbeat.

[SouthernRailway]

The CT plan is cute, but if I were at NCDOT, I'd be asking around Spartanburg or Columbia to gauge interest in funding a little (or a lot) longer extension south.

Unfortunately SC is a lost cause for passenger rail. The state subsidized its own airline, Air South, back in the '90s, but rail is not even considered in current discussions about how to improve the state's transportation network. The state's highways are falling apart and the governor accepted a gas tax increase, but never once have I seen passenger rail mentioned as a solution. There is a Carolinas Association for Passenger Trains, and perhaps it could come a louder voice in the discussion and have some impact.

As a former Republican, I know that a lot of conservatives just loathe passenger rail (as we see in FL and TX, even privately-funded passenger rail), and SC is full of conservatives, so I have no hope. I've long said that giving a tax credit to Norfolk Southern to run its own passenger trains is probably the only palatable solution in SC. Sorry.