Running "test trains"

[IronTiger]

While I don't think that running trains from Cypress and/or Sugar Land is a waterproof idea (especially considering where you would place stations), but what if, to see if the idea would work, if we built temporary platforms, rented train cars, and take people from the suburbs to downtown on a limited basis (once a week, at best), to see if the idea is at all feasible?

 

Sure, it would take some money, but the tracks are in place, and some of the cost could be recouped with tickets (not enough to cover it by any means).

[Slick Vik]

While I don't think that running trains from Cypress and/or Sugar Land is a waterproof idea (especially considering where you would place stations), but what if, to see if the idea would work, if we built temporary platforms, rented train cars, and take people from the suburbs to downtown on a limited basis (once a week, at best), to see if the idea is at all feasible?

Sure, it would take some money, but the tracks are in place, and some of the cost could be recouped with tickets (not enough to cover it by any means).

Texas Limited had this idea in the 90's, a train ran from Houston to Galveston for a few years, but once the ballpark was put on union station instead of by it, its future was toast.

[IronTiger]

As much as I hate to admit to it, Houston-Galveston rail doesn't seem like a winning proposition. You know, from 1988-1995, Amtrak went from Houston to Dallas, but it didn't work out, and they scaled back the timetable before canning the entire operation.

 

 

[kylejack]

While I don't think that running trains from Cypress and/or Sugar Land is a waterproof idea (especially considering where you would place stations), but what if, to see if the idea would work, if we built temporary platforms, rented train cars, and take people from the suburbs to downtown on a limited basis (once a week, at best), to see if the idea is at all feasible?

 

Sure, it would take some money, but the tracks are in place, and some of the cost could be recouped with tickets (not enough to cover it by any means).

 

Sounds expensive. While City of Houston would benefit from improving transit in the region, I doubt they want to foot the whole bill to connect Cypress and etc. to Downtown.

[Slick Vik]

As much as I hate to admit to it, Houston-Galveston rail doesn't seem like a winning proposition. You know, from 1988-1995, Amtrak went from Houston to Dallas, but it didn't work out, and they scaled back the timetable before canning the entire operation.

Gas was also much cheaper then too, less than $1 a gallon as opposed to $3 or more.

[Slick Vik]

As much as I hate to admit to it, Houston-Galveston rail doesn't seem like a winning proposition. You know, from 1988-1995, Amtrak went from Houston to Dallas, but it didn't work out, and they scaled back the timetable before canning the entire operation.

From amtrak unlimited forum

There are two routes between Houston and Dallas. The fastest one is the old B-RI route which was 249 miles and at one time was covered in four hours flat. That route had service into the 60's. The other route was the T&NO(SP) route that was somewhat longer, 264 miles, but went through College Station, considered a major traffic generator. When the SP ran the Sunbeam on this route it covered the 264 miles in 264 minutes. Amtrak decided to split the Eagle at Dallas and run a section to Houston using the SP route because they had discontinued the Lone Star(former Texas Chief) which was a very popular train and followed it with a split of the Inter-American at Temple which they then discontinued after only a short time. Unfortunately, in the 30+ years since the SP route had seen passenger service the track conditions had deteriorate to the point that they would not accomodate passenger service. So Amtrak ponied up something like 6 million dollars for track and signal improvements so they could use the route. However, even that only accomodated a schedule of something like 6 hours Dallas to Houston. Not a very satisfactory timing. In spite of this ridership held up for the first few years. But, the SP did not continue to maintain the track at a sufficient level to accomodate the train and it often ran late. The track began to accumulate numerous slow orders. Ridership, which was never huge began to decline further and soon the train was chopped off. Even worse, Amtrak service on the Eagle continued to deteriorate also to the point that it was slated for discontinuance in it's entirety. In fact I believe it had sunk to a three times a week service. Only the efforts of the TEMPO organization saved it so that at least we still have the Eagle as it is now configured. As for service between Houston and Dallas, it is still possible as both route still exist but it would take a commitment from the TXDOT to ever get anything moving and that looks impossible for the forseable future considering the states current budget restraints. The only thing going on now is the possibility of bringing the Sunset Limited up to daily service from the current three times a week. Any kind of California or Illinois type corridor service in this state is way far into the future.

[mfastx]

Running test trains would be an interesting idea, but it wouldn't accurately reflect demand.  For instance, the majority will not consider the option unless it is reliable and frequent. 

[IronTiger]

The reverse problem works too: remember how DART was losing riders? There would be a better chance that more folks show up to ride the train--and within a few years, the numbers plummet as novelty wears off.

[editor]

IMO, it's all a big speed vs. convenience balance.

 

If you could get the time between Houston and Dallas down to around two hours, then it will start to make sense to take the train instead of driving or flying. 

 

Between Houston and Galveston? Houston's decentralized nature makes virtually any train trip into Galveston inconvenient for the majority of people.  Even if it picked up in downtown Houston and let people out in downtown Galveston, most people would have to commute to downtown Houston to even start the journey.  

 

The only way I can see it working is if it's the loss-leader end of a larger train route, like OKC-Dallas-Houston-Galveston, and the portion between Houston and Galveston is just gravy because all the money has already been made on the other segments.  Similar to Amtrak's Wolverine service, which runs between Chicago and Detroit, but actually terminates at Pontiac, Michigan.

And before anyone flames me for being anti-rail, people who know me know I'm a big passenger rail backer.  I have more Amtrak miles than you can shake a golden spike at, and take more train trips in a month than most people will take in their entire lives.

[Slick Vik]

IMO, it's all a big speed vs. convenience balance.

If you could get the time between Houston and Dallas down to around two hours, then it will start to make sense to take the train instead of driving or flying.

Between Houston and Galveston? Houston's decentralized nature makes virtually any train trip into Galveston inconvenient for the majority of people. Even if it picked up in downtown Houston and let people out in downtown Galveston, most people would have to commute to downtown Houston to even start the journey.

The only way I can see it working is if it's the loss-leader end of a larger train route, like OKC-Dallas-Houston-Galveston, and the portion between Houston and Galveston is just gravy because all the money has already been made on the other segments. Similar to Amtrak's Wolverine service, which runs between Chicago and Detroit, but actually terminates at Pontiac, Michigan.

And before anyone flames me for being anti-rail, people who know me know I'm a big passenger rail backer. I have more Amtrak miles than you can shake a golden spike at, and take more train trips in a month than most people will take in their entire lives.

Making it easier to get to downtown on a frequent basis would help on that front, but your idea is a good one.

[rsb320]

They were running a train this morning that was "Not In Service".  Maybe it was going to continue north from UHD.

[cloud713]

IMO, it's all a big speed vs. convenience balance.

 

If you could get the time between Houston and Dallas down to around two hours, then it will start to make sense to take the train instead of driving or flying. 

 

Between Houston and Galveston? Houston's decentralized nature makes virtually any train trip into Galveston inconvenient for the majority of people.  Even if it picked up in downtown Houston and let people out in downtown Galveston, most people would have to commute to downtown Houston to even start the journey.  

 

The only way I can see it working is if it's the loss-leader end of a larger train route, like OKC-Dallas-Houston-Galveston, and the portion between Houston and Galveston is just gravy because all the money has already been made on the other segments.  Similar to Amtrak's Wolverine service, which runs between Chicago and Detroit, but actually terminates at Pontiac, Michigan.

And before anyone flames me for being anti-rail, people who know me know I'm a big passenger rail backer.  I have more Amtrak miles than you can shake a golden spike at, and take more train trips in a month than most people will take in their entire lives.

i really like your idea of it being an extension of the Houston-Dallas high-speed rail line they are working on.. i could definitely see it getting more ridership with people from Dallas wanting to take a quick trip to the beach. as for it serving Houstonians, well.. eventually one would like to think that this city will start implementing commuter rail (there is hope on the 90A line, which is the Sugar Land tracks i presume the OP figured the test train would take), and once the light rail system is built out and we have commuter rail connecting the suburbs to the light rail/inner city, the whole idea that you have to drive to downtown to catch the train is toast.

 

They were running a train this morning that was "Not In Service".  Maybe it was going to continue north from UHD.

read the thread, this is about testing markets for commuter rail in different suburbs, not testing the light rail trains on the new tracks. but your probably right that one was a test train for the north line.

as to the OP.. i really dig the idea, even though like people pointed out, it could go both ways at not being popular due to it being one random trip, or it being overly popular due to the novelty, and not giving proper results. either way i think metro would be pleased with the ridership and would realize the viability in commuter rail in Houston, which is sort of the point for these theoretical tests. so thats why im on board with the idea even though it will probably never happen.

what happened to the trenched (through the Heights at least) Hempstead commuter rail idea back in 2010 or so, connecting downtown with the north end of the uptown rail line, and going on into the north west suburbs?

or the westpark commuter rail plans?

90A is a start (but not happening fast enough!), but i guess the University and Uptown light rail lines probably need to be built first for the other west side commuter rail lines to connect into (unless they take a route like the Hempstead line going towards the Hardy Rail Yards site, bringing commuters all the way into the city instead of dumping them off at the furthest light rail transit centers). the east end line ends and has a transit center right next to the Houston-Galveston line that runs along road 3, that would be perfect for building a commuter rail station next to. or they could bring it further down that rail line into the East End, or all the way through and up to the Hardy Rail Yards site (they would have to add a turn at the rail road intersection near West St to divert it towards the HRY site, but its a drop in the bucket, as im sure new tracks would have to be laid for much of, if not all of the new commuter rail tracks to Galveston because i doubt they could ever get the approval to use the railroads tracks that frequently) for a new/cheaper/revised intramodal transit center/grand central station type thing.. lets face it, the Houston-Dallas high speed rail line is most likely coming down the rail along the Hardy Toll Road, which goes right through the Hardy Yards site, so it makes perfect sense for it to be an intramodal transit station like they had planned. even the lines from the west like the Hempstead line (another possibility for the HSR i believe, up through the HWY 6 corridor) go through the Hardy Yards site, so it would work for both potential HSR lines.

[cloud713]

As much as I hate to admit to it, Houston-Galveston rail doesn't seem like a winning proposition. You know, from 1988-1995, Amtrak went from Houston to Dallas, but it didn't work out, and they scaled back the timetable before canning the entire operation.

actually.. you should read this... quite an interesting, yet depressing read for the rail enthusiast in me.

http://www.chron.com/opinion/article/Houston-deserves-better-rail-service-4337295.php

"In 1996, I ceased operating the Texas Limited in spite of its popularity with the public and closed down the little depot we had built in Houston off of T.C. Jester. Its original purpose was to evolve and expand into a larger publicly owned and operated commuter rail system. After repeated failed efforts to interest Metro, the city and the county to get involved, we decided its continued private operation was pointless."

[kylejack]

Edit wrong thread

[Slick Vik]

actually.. you should read this... quite an interesting, yet depressing read for the rail enthusiast in me.

http://www.chron.com/opinion/article/Houston-deserves-better-rail-service-4337295.php

"In 1996, I ceased operating the Texas Limited in spite of its popularity with the public and closed down the little depot we had built in Houston off of T.C. Jester. Its original purpose was to evolve and expand into a larger publicly owned and operated commuter rail system. After repeated failed efforts to interest Metro, the city and the county to get involved, we decided its continued private operation was pointless."

 

The main reason is because Union Station would have been the hub of this line, but when Bob Lanier and others decided to make that the site of the stadium, any hope of this line going forward was history. Initially the stadium was supposed to be built near union station not on the site itself, and cynics say this was done to destroy any chance of having a rail hub downtown. Union Station could have been similar to the Union Station in LA. What a shame.