jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Ashphalt and Cement lobby are in a win - win situation no matter whether roads or railroads are built.
Amtrak talking about Empire Builder expansion
- Thread starter Slasharoo
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
VentureForth
Engineer
Where could they find any rolling stock?
Oh yeah...
Oh yeah...
Train Rider
Service Attendant
- Joined
- May 8, 2012
- Messages
- 150
My experience in the transportation industry is that road builders know how to design and build train tracks too. If it's infrastructure, they will design and build it.
Pork = the other guy's pet project.
:hi: Excellent Point about Pork!
But in my State, (Texas) they get more than their Fair Share while Rail sort of is a StepChild! (We miss Kay Bailey the Amtrak/Rail Friendly Senator from Texas!)
Last edited by a moderator:
A lot of mistakes were made on that project, but putting the Madison stop downtown was not one of them. Not having a downtown stop would have been the biggest mistake possible, and would have doomed the project to failure. There is absolutely nothing at or near the Madison Airport, and the airport itself doesn't have any airline service that couldn't be more easily served from Milwaukee (an existing rail stop). This basically means that everybody who wanted to go anywhere in Madison would have to find alternate transportation to get to the train. Once you throw in that connection, you've eliminated all of the speed advantage of the train vs. driving or taking the bus into Madison (meaning people going to the capitol, or to the University, would have no incentive to take the train).
There would be no need for a "backing out" movement. Just change ends on push-pull equipment, and away you go. It might take a few minutes longer to get into downtown Madison vs. those going through, but the revenue and ridership benefit for doing so would be more than worth it.
Many people don't seem to understand that location absolutely does matter when it comes to projects like this. When you're traveling long, long distances over many hours/days, not being right in the middle of downtown and having to make a connection to get to your final destination may not matter as much, but when you're talking really short distance travel, and your competition is the car or the intercity bus, it is extremely important to get people as close to where they're going as possible.
As for the suggestion that "if X state doesn't pay, then we just won't stop in that state" or "we'll just charge more for intra-state trips" or whatever...the problem with that is it's a matter of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.
Once you run the train, the vast majority of your costs are spent. The additional costs of making a stop are generally minimal. At that point, the goal is to get as much revenue as possible to offset the expense of running the train. A state subsidizing a service or not does not have any impact on the demand side of the equation, which is where your ticket revenues come from. If a second daily CHI-MSP train making all stops in Wisconsin generates more revenue than skipping stops in Wisconsin, then MN would only be losing more money (through higher subsidy) by not stopping in WI. If charging $75 instead of $50 per ticket for a given city pair causes the total revenue collected to go down, then you're only hurting yourself trying to stick it to the state of Wisconsin by charging higher fares for tickets to/from/within that state. On the other hand, if charging $75 instead of $50 results in higher total revenue collected, then really, that should be the fare regardless of whether WI pitches in or not (unless WI decides to more heavily subsidize the service specifically for the purpose of offering low fares).
The goal in this case ought to be revenue maximization through revenue management (which is something Amtrak already does), and that equation does not change with the existence/absence of a subsidy from a given state.
This is precisely why having state-subsidized service that crosses multiple state boundaries is so difficult.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
As usual, very good analysis Trog, that I agree with on the whole.
Governor Walker has no interest in any train other than the Hiawatha, which he considers a commuter line. To make the Chicago-Minneapolis link competitive with airlines, it needs to be high speed rail. I think going through Illinois is the only answer as long as Governor Walker remains in office. He turned down $800,000,000, he's not going to decide to go ahead with the project now. If he is re-elected next year, I think the corridor gets built through Illinois and eventually, the Hiawatha will be the only train line in the state.
Ispolkom
Engineer
What evidence is there of any interest in a second St. Paul-Chicago frequency in the Minnesota state house? Sure there was a study, but studies are where initiatives go to die. I could take you to the Legislative Library and show you stacks of studies that went nowhere. (My favorite: the St. Paul Peoplemover.)
I don't see much appetite for a project that would be seen as benefiting Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Wisconsin, with nothing for outstate or the suburbs. Especially since detractors will point to disappointing ridership on the Northstar commuter line as proof that Minnesotans don't ride trains. The Democratic head of the house transpo committee has said that, for instance.
I don't see much appetite for a project that would be seen as benefiting Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Wisconsin, with nothing for outstate or the suburbs. Especially since detractors will point to disappointing ridership on the Northstar commuter line as proof that Minnesotans don't ride trains. The Democratic head of the house transpo committee has said that, for instance.
Eh, the study isn't done yet. Looking over the stops on the Hiawatha aside from CHI, I get:
-Glenview: 71,827 (Builder stop)
-Sturtevant: 75,052
-Milwaukee Airport: 163,772
-Milwaukee: 632,078 (Builder stop)
Hiawatha total: 838,355
Looking this over, there might be a market for a peak-hour express of some kind at a time when the train sells out...but in all likelihod, the airport stop is a must since it involves about 20% of business. Sturtevant has about 9%, Glenview around 7-8% (some of that 71k is Builder traffic)...so the two combined are presumably a whopping 16% of business on the Hiawatha. At a peak hour, it's quite plausible that you could sell out a train skipping one or both of those stops.
My guess is that a competent study will say something like that: Sturtevant and/or Glenview may be expendable (though it might not be desirable to skip them), but Milwaukee Airport is not.
-Glenview: 71,827 (Builder stop)
-Sturtevant: 75,052
-Milwaukee Airport: 163,772
-Milwaukee: 632,078 (Builder stop)
Hiawatha total: 838,355
Looking this over, there might be a market for a peak-hour express of some kind at a time when the train sells out...but in all likelihod, the airport stop is a must since it involves about 20% of business. Sturtevant has about 9%, Glenview around 7-8% (some of that 71k is Builder traffic)...so the two combined are presumably a whopping 16% of business on the Hiawatha. At a peak hour, it's quite plausible that you could sell out a train skipping one or both of those stops.
My guess is that a competent study will say something like that: Sturtevant and/or Glenview may be expendable (though it might not be desirable to skip them), but Milwaukee Airport is not.
I would not at all be surprised if MnDOT and WisDOT perform these 2 studies and then adequate support does not materialize in either MN or WI for the expenditures necessary to add additional services.
As far as express (limited-stop) service goes, I believe the thought is to skip Sturtevant and Glenview, but to serve Milwaukee Mitchell Airport, as it serves more passengers than the other 2 stops combined. (I see Anderson just posted a similar thought.) As Paulus suggests, it is not altogether clear that skipping those stops, though, would result in a better-performing train though. Perhaps a morning peak-hour express to Chicago and an afternoon/evening peak-hour express to Milwaukee makes some sense, but I'm not aware that standees are such a major problem at those times that another train entirely is warranted (rather than just adding another coach or 2, even if that would require additional staffing). I will be curious to see what sort of infrastructure upgrades CP (and Metra) request to increase service from 7 to 10 roundtrips.
As far as express (limited-stop) service goes, I believe the thought is to skip Sturtevant and Glenview, but to serve Milwaukee Mitchell Airport, as it serves more passengers than the other 2 stops combined. (I see Anderson just posted a similar thought.) As Paulus suggests, it is not altogether clear that skipping those stops, though, would result in a better-performing train though. Perhaps a morning peak-hour express to Chicago and an afternoon/evening peak-hour express to Milwaukee makes some sense, but I'm not aware that standees are such a major problem at those times that another train entirely is warranted (rather than just adding another coach or 2, even if that would require additional staffing). I will be curious to see what sort of infrastructure upgrades CP (and Metra) request to increase service from 7 to 10 roundtrips.
G
Guest
Guest
MN's government is more interested in service to Chicago than one might think, and this is true at multiple levels.
Provided CP and BNSF are willing, they are likely to push this regardless of what Wisconsin does.
They probably would stop in Milwaukee and LaCrosse, but absent sane government in Wisconsin, I would expect the rest of the Wisconsin stops, which are low ridership, to be skipped for speed. That's one way of avoiding the cost of track upgrades in Wisconsin, you see. The connecting bus service from Madison probably isn't going to get the patronage to be worth it. If only Walker hadn't thrown away the HSR funding... I sometimes think he just did it out of hostility to Madison, which hostility is pretty well documented.
Anyway, the round trip from St. Cloud to Chicago is very roughly 22 hours. I think perhaps an early morning departure from Chicago and a late evening arrival in Chicago is most likely, operationally speaking. This would give nice midday times at St. Paul.
Provided CP and BNSF are willing, they are likely to push this regardless of what Wisconsin does.
They probably would stop in Milwaukee and LaCrosse, but absent sane government in Wisconsin, I would expect the rest of the Wisconsin stops, which are low ridership, to be skipped for speed. That's one way of avoiding the cost of track upgrades in Wisconsin, you see. The connecting bus service from Madison probably isn't going to get the patronage to be worth it. If only Walker hadn't thrown away the HSR funding... I sometimes think he just did it out of hostility to Madison, which hostility is pretty well documented.
Anyway, the round trip from St. Cloud to Chicago is very roughly 22 hours. I think perhaps an early morning departure from Chicago and a late evening arrival in Chicago is most likely, operationally speaking. This would give nice midday times at St. Paul.
N
Nathanael
Guest
Pay careful attention. The MnDOT proposal runs to St. Cloud. That gets you a long string of towns from La Crescent to St. Cloud. Duluth can be promised that "Northern Lights Express comes next, really".
I think that's enough of a coalition. The people claiming that Northstar proves anything can be shut down with the very true "But it doesn't go to St. Cloud, y'know, and that's its fatal flaw".
Amtrak ran 2 trains from Chicago to Minneapolis in the 1970s. It was the Hiawatha 4 days a week with coaches, ex GN Ranch Car dining car, and Parlor lounge observation car with one of the Burlington Observation Lounge cars with parlor seats avaialble. On the other 3 days it was the North Coast Hiawatha with through service from Chicago to Seattle via the former NP route. I remember riding this train and it was packed with lots of people getting on and off at stations in Wisconsin. Then Amtrak changed it to the North Star which ran in conjunction with the Minnesota funded Duluth - Twin Cities train. The ex Milwaukee track was in bad shape and timekeeping on both Chicago-Twin Cities trains was also bad so partronage decreased and the second train was cut. If Amtrak operates dependable ontime service between Chicago and the Twin Cities on a 7-8 hour schedule, people will ride. Most of my friends in the Twin Cities that used to take Amtrak now fly because they never know when the Empire Builder eastbound will show up.
Last edited by a moderator:
henryj
Conductor
The answer to this is so simple. Why make it so complicated. Just extend a morning and afternoon Hiawatha train to MSP. Say the 8:35am one and the 3:15pm one. They can easily make it in 7 1/2 hours. On the return leave MSP at 8:30am and it becomes the 3pm train from Milwaukee. The afternoon train can leave at 3pm and be into Chicago by 10:30. It becomes the 8pm train out of Milwaukee. Just add a food service car to these two trains. Why open up a completely different route with all the expense of setting up new stations and agents, etc. This route is already established. And when the Builder is really late Amtrak already runs a back up train from MSP or buses. If they want to extend them to St Cloud then just do it. Madison already has a bus connection at Columbus. Just enhance it with a couple more connections. If Wisconsin does not want to contribute then Mn can just pay for it. They only have to pay for beyond Milwaukee.
The Milwaukee Road ran a morning and afternoon Hiawatha between Chi and MSP for years on this route.
The Builder becomes a LD train that does not have to cater to short distance passengers. It can just continue to run late as it always has under Amtrak.
The Milwaukee Road ran a morning and afternoon Hiawatha between Chi and MSP for years on this route.
The Builder becomes a LD train that does not have to cater to short distance passengers. It can just continue to run late as it always has under Amtrak.
I don't think there is talk of a completely different route (for an additional CHI-MSP train), unless you are referring to the idea to have trains bypass WI completely. Even if that idea made it to any study, I have to imagine that it would quickly be rejected because of the greater costs than operating on the current Empire Builder route (with or without some level of WI funding).
Train Rider
Service Attendant
- Joined
- May 8, 2012
- Messages
- 150
Jim Rowen is an ardent partisan. Take his viewpoint for what it's worth, which isn't much because he leaves out how Madison was making the original project much more costly and time-consuming than the original proposal.
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't pretend to know much about WI politics, and it's been over thirty years since I lived in MN briefly. But what saddens me is how passenger rail has recently been turned into a partisan issue. Only five or ten years ago, trains had much more bipartisan support. Let's hope the partisanship about rail is an aberration, and we can get back to supporting trains where they're needed.
Unfortunately the Lunatic Fringe and Rightwing Politicians have adopted an Anti-Rail Stance as a Talking Point and Campaign Issue, its almost like there is a Playbook for Wingnut Politicians since they all sound like Parrots repeating what their Masters tell them will work!
Their Rail Plan is to sell off the NEC and let Amtrak die on the Vine! you could look it up as Casey Stengel used to say! :help:
Ryan
Court Jester
Rather than just ad hom the guy, how about you present some facts that contradict his argument?
Train Rider
Service Attendant
- Joined
- May 8, 2012
- Messages
- 150
There have been some very bad rail projects pushed in Wisconsin that have poisoned the well coupled with some other very bad policy decisions by the same politicians pushing for the rail projects. Outlandish project studies that claim in effect that eleventy gigillion people will ride and it won't cost a more than $1.50 to build and will produce gazillions of dollars of development have done more than their fair share to make people wary train projects. As discussed on other threads, I have stated that a bad rail project/proposal is worse than no rail project/proposal. Enhanced Hiawatha is the best project proposed in Wisconsin in decades and it will find a broad support because there is proven success.Unfortunately the Lunatic Fringe and Rightwing Politicians have adopted an Anti-Rail Stance as a Talking Point and Campaign Issue, its almost like there is a Playbook for Wingnut Politicians since they all sound like Parrots repeating what their Masters tell them will work!
Train Rider
Service Attendant
- Joined
- May 8, 2012
- Messages
- 150
If you type in a certain combination of Ws, Gs and Os you can find out some stuff too. But here is the partisan position from the other perspective. http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2010/10/citizens-guide-to-high-speed-rail-construction-debate-2/
I don't disagree with your points but will point out that this is True about almost ALL Political Schemes, as someone said Pork= somebody elses project! I'm talking about the anti-rail rhetoric that seems to be a staple of right wing political blather!There have been some very bad rail projects pushed in Wisconsin that have poisoned the well coupled with some other very bad policy decisions by the same politicians pushing for the rail projects. Outlandish project studies that claim in effect that eleventy gigillion people will ride and it won't cost a more than $1.50 to build and will produce gazillions of dollars of development have done more than their fair share to make people wary train projects. As discussed on other threads, I have stated that a bad rail project/proposal is worse than no rail project/proposal. Enhanced Hiawatha is the best project proposed in Wisconsin in decades and it will find a broad support because there is proven success.Unfortunately the Lunatic Fringe and Rightwing Politicians have adopted an Anti-Rail Stance as a Talking Point and Campaign Issue, its almost like there is a Playbook for Wingnut Politicians since they all sound like Parrots repeating what their Masters tell them will work!
- Status
Latest posts
-
St. Paul, Milwaukee, Chicago (TCMC) second daily service- Latest: TransitTyrant
-
-
-
-
