Columbus, OH to Chicago rail corridor proposed

Discussion in 'Amtrak Rail Discussion' started by CHamilton, Aug 26, 2013.

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

  1. Aug 26, 2013 #1

    CHamilton

    CHamilton

    CHamilton

    Conductor AU Supporter Gathering Team Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,286
    Location:
    Seattle
    Columbus, Ohio, Wants In on the Midwest Rail Renaissance

     
  2. Aug 26, 2013 #2

    The Davy Crockett

    T

    The Davy Crockett

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    Messages:
    3,313
    Location:
    ALX
    And Indiana is not exactly 'rail friendly' either, at this point in time.
     
  3. Aug 26, 2013 #3

    Railroad Bill

    Railroad Bill

    Railroad Bill

    Global Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,422
    Location:
    Northern Ohio
    But it sure would be a nice ride from Columbus :p
     
  4. Aug 26, 2013 #4

    MrFSS

    MrFSS

    MrFSS

    Conductor Honored Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,713
    Location:
    Central Kentucky
    I lived in the Columbus area and worked downtown there for many years before I retired. There was talk of rail project all the time over the years (especially 3-C). Passenger rail in Columbus to anywhere will never happen for many, many years, if at all. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it!
     
  5. Aug 26, 2013 #5

    George Harris

    G

    George Harris

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Messages:
    5,027
    Location:
    now in California
    If ONE PERCENT of the passenger rail studies made over the last 40 years were to have turned into reality we could be riding trains everywhere in this country. I don't even read them any more. The 3-C program made quite a bit of sense. It went no where.

    It appears that this scheme is crossing Indiana on the old Pennsy main. Is that track even still there? Somebbody that has more time and curiosity about tis scheme than I do read it and decide whether it has any acquaintence with reality or is a complete work of fiction.
     
  6. Aug 27, 2013 #6

    MikefromCrete

    M

    MikefromCrete

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    2,594
    Location:
    Crete, IL
    The 3-C project was about to get off the ground when the good people of Ohio elected Kaisch as governor. Years of non-partisan planning and work went down the drain when he decided to make the project one of his main campaign points.

    The map with the article says the route would use CSX, but CSX doesn't go through Fort Wayne. It would appear to be the former PRR, which is now a slow speed short line and would require millions in investment to bring it up to snuff.
     
  7. Aug 27, 2013 #7

    Anderson

    A

    Anderson

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2010
    Messages:
    9,508
    Location:
    Virginia
    True, but the cost does seem to take this into account. This is one of the more expensive non-HSR plans I've seen; it's on par with the Miami-Orlando project (which is cheaper than usual because of using existing ROW and tracks) or with what I've seen for major segments of SEHSR.
     
  8. Aug 27, 2013 #8

    D.P. Roberts

    D.P. Roberts

    D.P. Roberts

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,316
    Location:
    Guilder & Florin Scenic Railroad
    I live near Marysville, and have driven the long drive to Fort Wayne (Waterloo) in the wee hours of the night several times to catch trains to Chicago. If I could implement any rail plan anywhere, it would be this one. However, with Kasich as governor, there's as much chance of this happening as if I decided to build it myself.

    That's one flaw in the plan - why bother having two different routes from the Fort Wayne area to Chicago? I don't see Indiana being all that interested in their portion of the route.
     
  9. Aug 27, 2013 #9

    railiner

    railiner

    railiner

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    7,468
    Location:
    South Florida
    I agree that this coming to fruition has a snowball's chance in you-know-where.....

    The 3-C corridor seems like a more likely scenario, if anything ever does come from these studies.....
     
  10. Aug 27, 2013 #10

    afigg

    a

    afigg

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,896
    Location:
    Virginia
    Obviously this proposal is not going to get very far so long Kasich is Governor of Ohio. Kasich comes across to me as the most anti-transit and passenger rail of all the Governors elected in 2010.

    But Kasich won't be Governor forever. This is a project that will have to wait for: 1) return of a substantial federal funding program for intercity passenger rail, 2) new political leadership and a more balanced legislature in Ohio and less resistance in Indiana, and 3) the Chicago-St. Louis and Chicago-Detroit corridor projects to show success in ridership growth and economic growth from companies locating offices or plants near a corridor station because of the train service to Chicago.

    This is a long term play. Wait for the turning of the wheel.
     
  11. Aug 27, 2013 #11

    Anderson

    A

    Anderson

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2010
    Messages:
    9,508
    Location:
    Virginia
    Well, even though construction, etc. will have to wait for 2014/18, it seems likely that they could do the "pipe-laying" work through, for example, TIGER grants (since I think some things like that can get money from the Feds on a local application). There's no reason that everything has to wait until he leaves office...just the "heavy work" that would take 3-5 years to get to anyway.
     
  12. Sep 3, 2013 #12

    CHamilton

    CHamilton

    CHamilton

    Conductor AU Supporter Gathering Team Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,286
    Location:
    Seattle
    Sunday Train: The Proposed Chicago - Fort Wayne - Columbus Rapid Rail Service

     
  13. Sep 3, 2013 #13

    Anderson

    A

    Anderson

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2010
    Messages:
    9,508
    Location:
    Virginia
    Phase 2 and phase 4 go together, and this part of phase 3 and phase 5 go together as well. Both more or less present through CHI-NYP runs (PGH-CLE-CHI is basically a NYC-routed Broadway or...wait for it...the Cap-Penny through cars; the routing by Columbus does much the same. I've got a lot of other commentary about some of those phases being oddly ordered.
     
  14. Mar 1, 2014 #14

    CHamilton

    CHamilton

    CHamilton

    Conductor AU Supporter Gathering Team Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,286
    Location:
    Seattle
    Passenger rail service making real progress for return to Fort Wayne




     
  15. Mar 1, 2014 #15

    Railroad Bill

    Railroad Bill

    Railroad Bill

    Global Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,422
    Location:
    Northern Ohio
    Considering Indiana Governor Pence was balking on supporting the Cardinal a few months ago, I would be very surprised he would get behind what he terms "a transportation boondoggle" by giving his blessing to another passenger rail line in Indiana. And Governor Kasich and he go to the same camp meetings ;) . I would be first in line to ride this train to Chicago and so would many other Ohioans. We shall see :huh:
     
  16. Mar 1, 2014 #16

    me_little_me

    m

    me_little_me

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,951
    If it can make money then wouldn't the host RR be interested in running it? Or some third party?

    I love rail. I think transit is legitimately subsidized by federal and state government. The common good. But when I hear how rail is going to make money, my first question is why wouldn't private industry jump all over it ala FEC in Florida?

    It won't make money. That doesn't mean it isn't legitimate. And, if I am wrong, and it does, that money can be used to fund other rail projects if it is government run.
     
  17. Mar 1, 2014 #17

    7deuceman

    7

    7deuceman

    Train Attendant

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2013
    Messages:
    73
    I don't understand all of the details or the reasons why some people in Ohio are not pro-passenger train.

    However, I rode the Broadway Limited from New York to Chicago in 1985 and was absolutely floored that they did not service Columbus along the route. Instead, we went further north crossing Ohio through some smaller cities. The speed limit between Ft Wayne and Chicago was 30 mph on some really old and bumpy track.

    For what it is worth and if the numbers work:

    IMO it is just good sense to run a Chicago - Columbus - Pittsburgh - New York as perhaps a "Broadway Limited - Pennsylvanian hybrid" service. That would give everyone along the route access to/from Columbus and other services at Chicago, Pittsburgh, Philly and NYC.

    There would also be a plus if the Capitol Limited could connect at Pittsburgh with a train from NYC and PHL headed to Columbus (and then Chicago) as well as from Columbus to the Capital Limited at Pittsburgh eastbound. It's just an idea and someone has likely considered this already, because there are Columbus area passengers that need to go west, east and south to Florida.

    Edit: After fully-reading this thread I reference the "Phase 5" in the report Northeast Indiana Passenger Rail Association, A very cool report presented by CHamilton - thank you for the info.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 1, 2014
  18. Mar 1, 2014 #18

    D.P. Roberts

    D.P. Roberts

    D.P. Roberts

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,316
    Location:
    Guilder & Florin Scenic Railroad
    Again, I'd love to see this happen. But at this point, I'd be happy with a new station at Fort Wayne / Waterloo. The last time I read about it, the new station was supposed to be built in 2013, but as far as I know a shovel hasn't even turned yet.
     
  19. Mar 1, 2014 #19

    iggy

    i

    iggy

    Service Attendant

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2014
    Messages:
    193
    Location:
    Springfield Illinois
    Video discussing the vision for Ohio and other States in regards to passenger rail. Best viewed in Firefox or Chrome - updated IE should play content without a plugin - no promises. Starting at the 6:30 mark.

    NARP ( National Association of Railroad Passengers ) Board Chairman Robert Stewart’s presentation

    Midwest High Speed Rail Association 2013 Fall Meeting part 4
     
  20. Mar 1, 2014 #20

    Anderson

    A

    Anderson

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2010
    Messages:
    9,508
    Location:
    Virginia
    (1) CSX, which owns almost all the track, is unlikely to want to get involved in this sort of thing ever. They'll put up with hosting if the money is right, but remember...they just fought to get out of running MARC trains last year. I doubt CSX would want to run such a train even if they were guaranteed a subsidy to cover any losses and handed new equipment for it.

    (2) It is possible you could get Iowa Pacific (or someone like that) to run the operation, assuming you funded an equipment buy. Getting them to fund the plan, however, is highly unlikely absent an RRIF loan...

    (3) ...and if a more detailed study did back up the figures, give or take a bit, it's possible (presuming CSX was cooperative) you could get a group to invest in something that would carry an RRIF loan. Absent that, $28m/yr is a lousy return on over $1 billion in investment. Heck, $30m/yr wouldn't even cover loan interest on a mortgage of that size.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 1, 2014
  21. Mar 1, 2014 #21

    andersone

    andersone

    andersone

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,157
    Location:
    Jackson. Ohio
    If wishes were horses then beggars would ride,,, having many dealing with the honorable Mr. Kasich in the past, unfortunately he is never FOR anything except less. It would gladly trade the drive the 90 miles to get to Columbus and get to Chi in 4 hours as apposed the forty minutes to SPM at ten at night and get to CHI at ten in the morning,,, and you wonder why i drive to GSB to catch the CZ?
     
  22. Mar 1, 2014 #22

    Karl1459

    Karl1459

    Karl1459

    Lead Service Attendant

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    461
    Location:
    Oregon
    Key points which might just make this doable.

    1. The three major urban areas are within the 100-500 mile "sweet spot" for rail travel. ~325 miles CHI-Columbus ~160 CHI-FtWayne, 160 FtWayne-Columbus.

    .

    2. The city pairs are not optimally served by the interstate highway system.

    3. The (estamated) costs of construction of a state of the art highway exceeds the costs of establishing rail service.

    4. Reasonable rail service will be time competitive with existing highway.

    Getting a rail service up and running to Columbus that has a clear advantage to road/air will be a right step in changing existing travel habits to favor rail, far better than a "Triple C" service which would have to compete against a better infrastructure.
     
  23. Mar 2, 2014 #23

    NorthShore

    NorthShore

    NorthShore

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    1,008
    Location:
    Chicago
    Twelve trains a day (six each way)???????

    Does anyone really want to go to Columbus (or anywhere in between) THAT much (or in such significant numbers?) Perhaps they all want terribly to get out of those places on a daily basis?
     
  24. Mar 2, 2014 #24

    neroden

    n

    neroden

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Messages:
    7,697
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    Most of this route, ex-Pennsylvania Railroad (Gary - Lima via Ft Wayne) is shortline track (Chicago Fort Wayne & Eastern) at the moment. (Much of it leased from CSX.) The remainder (Lima to Columbus) is CSX but it's a secondary CSX route, not their mainline. Because of this, CSX will not be a significant problem.

    If funding can be found to rebuild the track as state-owned passenger track, well, basically, that's it, you're done, you have a fast passenger train. That's the hurdle.

    Please note that the route from Chicago to Ft. Wayne is same as the proposed route for HSR from Chicago to Toledo (and Columbus and beyond).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 2, 2014
  25. Mar 2, 2014 #25

    Eric S

    E

    Eric S

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,479
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    6 R/Ts (12 trains) a day Chicago-Columbus seems reasonable. It's right in line with what had been proposed and studied in the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative for other routes.
     

Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page

Group Builder
arrow_white