Oklahoma Passenger Rail Updates(non-HSR)

[baralheia]

It takes too long. I’ve done it several times. It’s almost worth hitting up the orange line and going all the way to Dallas then hitting up the TRE.

The new TEXRail commuter line that opens January 5th goes directly from where the Heartland Flyer ends at the Fort Worth ITC, straight to the airport. It's Fort Worth's copy of the DART Orange Line, but over heavy rail instead of light rail.

[Plutonic Panda]

The new TEXRail commuter line that opens January 5th goes directly from where the Heartland Flyer ends at the Fort Worth ITC, straight to the airport. It's Fort Worth's copy of the DART Orange Line, but over heavy rail instead of light rail.

Yeah okay I thought that was in the works but wasn’t 100 percent sure.

[soonerheart]

The new TEXRail commuter line that opens January 5th goes directly from where the Heartland Flyer ends at the Fort Worth ITC, straight to the airport. It's Fort Worth's copy of the DART Orange Line, but over heavy rail instead of light rail.

Thank you very much for that Information….However speed is still a major concern IMHO.
It seems driving would ordinarily be much faster.
This is why I suggested creating a new train / bus stop near HY 114 which takes you directly to the DFW airport. I would guess this would save well over an hour over taking the new train.

I believe the new train will eventually be expanded to the SW to near the TCU campus but I’m unclear when that might occur?

[Plutonic Panda]

Thank you very much for that Information….However speed is still a major concern IMHO.
It seems driving would ordinarily be much faster.
This is why I suggested creating a new train / bus stop near HY 114 which takes you directly to the DFW airport. I would guess this would save well over an hour over taking the new train.

I believe the new train will eventually be expanded to the SW to near the TCU campus but I’m unclear when that might occur?

The long range plan for the Fort Worth to DFW rail line could include electrification.

[baralheia]

Thank you very much for that Information….However speed is still a major concern IMHO.
It seems driving would ordinarily be much faster.
This is why I suggested creating a new train / bus stop near HY 114 which takes you directly to the DFW airport. I would guess this would save well over an hour over taking the new train.

I believe the new train will eventually be expanded to the SW to near the TCU campus but I’m unclear when that might occur?

Honestly, a quick airport connection from the Heartland Flyer is an almost nonexistent priority for TxDOT, ODOT, and Amtrak, given that an airport connection is already available (well, will be within a month) from the Fort Worth ITC. It makes little financial sense to funnel travelers down to DFW and away from OKC. It's far more important to grow our own airport, as well as push resources into expanding the Heartland Flyer's route to Newton and/or Tulsa.

[Plutonic Panda]

Honestly, a quick airport connection from the Heartland Flyer is an almost nonexistent priority for TxDOT, ODOT, and Amtrak, given that an airport connection is already available (well, will be within a month) from the Fort Worth ITC. It makes little financial sense to funnel travelers down to DFW and away from OKC. It's far more important to grow our own airport, as well as push resources into expanding the Heartland Flyer's route to Newton and/or Tulsa.

Newton is a must! That will open so many feasible routes for OKC travelers

The most ideal track to Tulsa would run straight along I-44 on its own dedicated tracks. Would likely be billions. Wouldn’t have to be 200+ MPH but 120MPH or so would be workable. The proposed eastern flyer is a joke as is.

The Heartland Flyer to Dallas should be 5-6x each way, per day to make it more convenient. 3-4 at the least. They also need newer trains and perhaps include a bar and better eating area inside of the train.

[amocore]

Newton is a must! That will open so many feasible routes for OKC travelers

The most ideal track to Tulsa would run straight along I-44 on its own dedicated tracks. Would likely be billions. Wouldn’t have to be 200+ MPH but 120MPH or so would be workable. The proposed eastern flyer is a joke as is.

The Heartland Flyer to Dallas should be 5-6x each way, per day to make it more convenient. 3-4 at the least. They also need newer trains and perhaps include a bar and better eating area inside of the train.

I can only agree to that.

The train to the Metroplex should be around 100mph. It is pretty standard for an express intercity train.
Now it is still over 4 hours to do the trip. It s very third world like !

[baralheia]

Newton is a must! That will open so many feasible routes for OKC travelers

The most ideal track to Tulsa would run straight along I-44 on its own dedicated tracks. Would likely be billions. Wouldn’t have to be 200+ MPH but 120MPH or so would be workable. The proposed eastern flyer is a joke as is.

The Heartland Flyer to Dallas should be 5-6x each way, per day to make it more convenient. 3-4 at the least. They also need newer trains and perhaps include a bar and better eating area inside of the train.

An extension to Newton for the Heartland Flyer will be nothing short of transformational for that service. Not only will it give us in OKC more options in our connections to the national passenger rail network, but overhead traffic will increase as well; on it's current schedule, a single train shuttling back and forth between Fort Worth and Newton, via OKC, perfectly interfaces with the schedules for the Texas Eagle and the Southwest Chief. Given that both Newton and Fort Worth offer checked baggage service, sufficient overhead traffic could enable us to have checked baggage service here in OKC as well (and I know that's in the long-range plan for Santa Fe Station, assuming funding is available). Such an extension would serve to strengthen the national passenger rail network as well, giving passengers flexibility and options they wouldn't have before, even if their destination wasn't in Oklahoma.

As for the Eastern Flyer, you're right - studies have already identified that the ideal option is to build a railway along most of I-44. Even at normal US passenger speeds of 80mph, it's a superior route than the ex-Frisco route to Tulsa (the Sooner Sub). But that's going to cost a LOT of money, as you noted. The Sooner Sub is still a viable route, and would still be adequate to get service going; Frisco ran that route for decades (both the Meteor and the Will Rogers trains), making the trip in as little as 2 hours and 20 minutes. With the right amenities, the right departure times, and sufficient frequency, a new service over this same line would still work, and work well. Trains aren't about getting to your destination as quickly as possible; if you want that, take a flight. Trains are about getting to your destination unburdened by the travel experience.

As for increased frequency of service... I just don't think there's enough demand now or in the near future to warrant that level of service, even though I'd love to see it. That would be a higher frequency of service than OKC enjoyed even during the peak of the passenger rail era. Personally, I'd be more than happy with 2x-day service in each direction (so each stop sees 4 trains daily); have one train in Newton start south, and one train in Fort Worth start north, at the same time. This would give each community along the line 2 trains a day in each direction, approximately 12 hours apart.

I can only agree to that.

The train to the Metroplex should be around 100mph. It is pretty standard for an express intercity train.
Now it is still over 4 hours to do the trip. It s very third world like !

Just FYI, the current maximum speed of the Heartland Flyer is 80mph, and it does every bit of that for a majority of the 206-mile route. When you take into account in station stops at the intermediate cities, the train averages about 52mph. Part of the problem with making it go faster is that Amtrak doesn't own the rails that the Heartland Flyer uses - that's owned by BNSF. They maintain their trackage through Oklahoma City at Class 4 standards, which allows freight to travel at up to 60mph and passenger trains to travel at up to 80mph. When you start going beyond Class 4, infrastructure costs get much, much higher as tighter tolerances are required, and additional safety mechanisms are needed - stuff that really isn't necessary for freight. As a result, freight operators like BNSF are extremely reluctant to put significant sums of money into upgrading lines to standards that only passenger trains will really take advantage of. The only real way to get around this would be for the passenger operators to own their own rails - either by Amtrak buying lines, or having the railroad companies take back operation of passenger trains like they used to do back in the day. Unfortunately, I just don't really see either happening.

[Mott]

An extension to Newton for the Heartland Flyer will be nothing short of transformational for that service. Not only will it give us in OKC more options in our connections to the national passenger rail network, but overhead traffic will increase as well; on it's current schedule, a single train shuttling back and forth between Fort Worth and Newton, via OKC, perfectly interfaces with the schedules for the Texas Eagle and the Southwest Chief. Given that both Newton and Fort Worth offer checked baggage service, sufficient overhead traffic could enable us to have checked baggage service here in OKC as well (and I know that's in the long-range plan for Santa Fe Station, assuming funding is available). Such an extension would serve to strengthen the national passenger rail network as well, giving passengers flexibility and options they wouldn't have before, even if their destination wasn't in Oklahoma.

As for the Eastern Flyer, you're right - studies have already identified that the ideal option is to build a railway along most of I-44. Even at normal US passenger speeds of 80mph, it's a superior route than the ex-Frisco route to Tulsa (the Sooner Sub). But that's going to cost a LOT of money, as you noted. The Sooner Sub is still a viable route, and would still be adequate to get service going; Frisco ran that route for decades (both the Meteor and the Will Rogers trains), making the trip in as little as 2 hours and 20 minutes. With the right amenities, the right departure times, and sufficient frequency, a new service over this same line would still work, and work well. Trains aren't about getting to your destination as quickly as possible; if you want that, take a flight. Trains are about getting to your destination unburdened by the travel experience.

As for increased frequency of service... I just don't think there's enough demand now or in the near future to warrant that level of service, even though I'd love to see it. That would be a higher frequency of service than OKC enjoyed even during the peak of the passenger rail era. Personally, I'd be more than happy with 2x-day service in each direction (so each stop sees 4 trains daily); have one train in Newton start south, and one train in Fort Worth start north, at the same time. This would give each community along the line 2 trains a day in each direction, approximately 12 hours apart.



Just FYI, the current maximum speed of the Heartland Flyer is 80mph, and it does every bit of that for a majority of the 206-mile route. When you take into account in station stops at the intermediate cities, the train averages about 52mph. Part of the problem with making it go faster is that Amtrak doesn't own the rails that the Heartland Flyer uses - that's owned by BNSF. They maintain their trackage through Oklahoma City at Class 4 standards, which allows freight to travel at up to 60mph and passenger trains to travel at up to 80mph. When you start going beyond Class 4, infrastructure costs get much, much higher as tighter tolerances are required, and additional safety mechanisms are needed - stuff that really isn't necessary for freight. As a result, freight operators like BNSF are extremely reluctant to put significant sums of money into upgrading lines to standards that only passenger trains will really take advantage of. The only real way to get around this would be for the passenger operators to own their own rails - either by Amtrak buying lines, or having the railroad companies take back operation of passenger trains like they used to do back in the day. Unfortunately, I just don't really see either happening.

The Frisco had a whole passenger dept to support their trains as well as budgeting for the track department to keep the track up. That doesn’t exist on the SLWC. The BNSF has it’s own interests in freight, and Amtrak is paying for the 79 mph. And with all the speed restrictions on curves, switches, cities, plus meeting the freight trains, it’s still 1979 schedules. I remember we had ATS, automatic train stop on the ATSF 40 years ago.