Hoosier State goes from Amtrak to Corridor Capital

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
There seems to be some slow progress on the long-delayed West Lake Corridor (South Shore Line to Dyer and later Lowell) as well, with a lot of local monetary commitments. (Representative Pete Visclosky has been pushing it hard for a long time.) The interesting thing about this for the Hoosier State is, of course, the route it follows.
The Hoosier State could use the South Shore's West Lake Corridor to reach Union Station via Grand Crossing or the St. Charles Air Line and would be the best choice of any alternate routes. I imagine the HS could run Chicago to Dyer in 40 minutes or less and any interference would be minimal.
 
So then, why can't we get other state owned, non-Amtrak systems to get on board with Amtrak reservations? Like commuter trains?
Because they are commuter trains run by local transit agencies with their own ticketing and price systems?
I have heard that even if there was a desire, the cost would be enormous to achieve that, because it will take complete replacement of the Amtrak reservation system to have a single system that could issue tickets uniformly. Apparently when all the Amtrak California stations, Thruway and all, were added to the Amtrak system, it pretty much brought it to its limit. Adding something like an LIRR or even an NJT to it will cause it to pretty much crash and burn apparently. Of course, someone like Anthony may be able to give a more informed verification or refutation of it if he is able to without getting into trouble himself.
 
Ok, not having the Chicago-area tracks memorized...

Other than catenary, are there any obstacles to using the SSL? The lines are close enough to one another that a connecting track would seem to be simple (and probably easier than the Porter mess).

Edit: As to ticketing, without getting into utterly random codes, throwing in a few hundred commuter stations might be more than a three-letter code system can take.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Having a unified national booking system would be convenient, but it doesn't really seem all that necessary. The point of Amtrak's booking system, just like the airlines, is to allow people to book reservations months in advance, in order to ensure that they get a ticket for a limited commodity (seats, rooms, etc). How often do you feel the need to purchase a 20 minute commuter rail ticket that far in advance? Most commuter rail systems have kiosks at every station that you can use to buy tickets on the spot. It's not like the commuter train is going to be completely sold out by the day of departure.

It's a matter of the cost way exceeding any benefit that might be gleaned from such a system. ARROW is already teetering on the brink these days; I don't think that it can take much more than it already has.
 
Having a unified national booking system would be convenient, but it doesn't really seem all that necessary. The point of Amtrak's booking system, just like the airlines, is to allow people to book reservations months in advance, in order to ensure that they get a ticket for a limited commodity (seats, rooms, etc). How often do you feel the need to purchase a 20 minute commuter rail ticket that far in advance? Most commuter rail systems have kiosks at every station that you can use to buy tickets on the spot. It's not like the commuter train is going to be completely sold out by the day of departure.

It's a matter of the cost way exceeding any benefit that might be gleaned from such a system. ARROW is already teetering on the brink these days; I don't think that it can take much more than it already has.
(Bolding mine) any time I've booked the rail trip months in advance and need to get to my final destination via commuter rail.
 
Again though, when you go to take the commuter train, it doesn't seem that hard to stop at a kiosk to buy a ticket. I use VRE all the time to connect from Amtrak trains, and it isn't a huge burden. The point I was trying to make is that it would be more convenient, but the overall gain from the amount of resources needed to accomplish such a goal would be minor. It certainly wouldn't result in enough of a revenue gain to justify the millions spent in creating a new booking system.
 
Having a unified national booking system would be convenient, but it doesn't really seem all that necessary. The point of Amtrak's booking system, just like the airlines, is to allow people to book reservations months in advance, in order to ensure that they get a ticket for a limited commodity (seats, rooms, etc). How often do you feel the need to purchase a 20 minute commuter rail ticket that far in advance? Most commuter rail systems have kiosks at every station that you can use to buy tickets on the spot. It's not like the commuter train is going to be completely sold out by the day of departure.

It's a matter of the cost way exceeding any benefit that might be gleaned from such a system. ARROW is already teetering on the brink these days; I don't think that it can take much more than it already has.
(Bolding mine) any time I've booked the rail trip months in advance and need to get to my final destination via commuter rail.
And on the NEC, you want to book at least 15 days out to get the discounted price, and I believe there is a limited # sold at the discounted price, so you want to book even earlier if you know your plans.
 
Well, they're able to sell MARC (but not VRE) tickets from the quick-trak machines, though I don't think you can buy a MARC ticket from the quick-trak machine in, say, NYP, or RVR, which would be a nice convenience. And while buying a separate commuter ticket isn't that difficult, it is an extra step and an inconvenience, and could be confusing to infrequent travelers not familiar with the layout of the station.

In any event, I have always thought that a business enterprise should be about making it easy as possible for the customer to spend his/her money on the business's products, not be some sort of aptitude test of the customer's skills at figuring our the business's arcane practices. If we want more people to use interconnected rail systems, it's probably a good idea to make them as easy as possible to use. Otherwise they ight say, the hell with it and go back to their cars.
 
(Bolding mine) any time I've booked the rail trip months in advance and need to get to my final destination via commuter rail.
Ok, let's say you book LIRR tickets through the Amtrak reservation system. Do you get rush hour tickets or off-peak tickets for LIRR? Is the LIRR conductor supposed to have a scanner than can read your Amtrak eTicket?
Also, what do you mean by commuter rail? LIRR, MNRR, NJT, yea, ok. But what about PATH or the NYC subway? People use those to commute. Or the CTA L? What about DC Metro which is a transit/commuter system hybrid? In the east, SEPTA doesn't even have ticket vending machines for the Regional rail system, but zone tickets. SEPTA is upgrading to a NPT, but their Regional rail is probably a couple of years away for NPT and smartcards.

Is Amtrak supposed to have a reservation system that works with CalTrain, BART?, Metrolink, Metra, DART, SEPTA, MTA, etc? All of which are at different points in fare payment technology upgrade cycles with different fare systems. Some are in the process of upgrading to systems that will accept direct payments from smartphones or RFID equipped credit cards. Regular users of the commuter or transit system will mostly get system smartcards for preloaded amounts or multi-day/monthly passes. But visitors will be able to pay directly with their credit card with the correct fare.

Why bother seriously complicating the Amtrak reservation system to even attempt to work with the many different commuter and transit agencies in the US? When I was connecting to LIRR at NYP for periodic business trips a few years ago, I went to a LIRR ticket vending machine at NYP and brought the ticket I needed. To take SEPTA, MNRR, the T, the CTA, for example, I have either brought tickets or a card at the station. Not that difficult.
 
(Bolding mine) any time I've booked the rail trip months in advance and need to get to my final destination via commuter rail.
Ok, let's say you book LIRR tickets through the Amtrak reservation system. Do you get rush hour tickets or off-peak tickets for LIRR? Is the LIRR conductor supposed to have a scanner than can read your Amtrak eTicket?
I guess that depends on the train you select. While ideally in the future we'll have unified ticketing media across all transit systems, for now, if you're far enough out, the proper fare media could be mailed to you, or possibly picked up at the station. Just give your name or reservation number, and it's handed over, or printed out. Perhaps for now it would only speed things by <15 seconds per transaction, but that number could grow in the future.
Also, what do you mean by commuter rail? LIRR, MNRR, NJT, yea, ok. But what about PATH or the NYC subway? People use those to commute. Or the CTA L? What about DC Metro which is a transit/commuter system hybrid? In the east, SEPTA doesn't even have ticket vending machines for the Regional rail system, but zone tickets. SEPTA is upgrading to a NPT, but their Regional rail is probably a couple of years away for NPT and smartcards.

Is Amtrak supposed to have a reservation system that works with CalTrain, BART?, Metrolink, Metra, DART, SEPTA, MTA, etc? All of which are at different points in fare payment technology upgrade cycles with different fare systems. Some are in the process of upgrading to systems that will accept direct payments from smartphones or RFID equipped credit cards. Regular users of the commuter or transit system will mostly get system smartcards for preloaded amounts or multi-day/monthly passes. But visitors will be able to pay directly with their credit card with the correct fare.
Again, ideally, all public transit systems, bus, ferry, commuter rail, Amtrak, etc. would share the same fare media. I could even see value bringing the airlines in on it actually so one ticket puts you on the bus to the train station, then the train to the airport, then the plane to the arrival airport, then the train from it, then the bus to your final destination.
Why bother seriously complicating the Amtrak reservation system to even attempt to work with the many different commuter and transit agencies in the US? When I was connecting to LIRR at NYP for periodic business trips a few years ago, I went to a LIRR ticket vending machine at NYP and brought the ticket I needed. To take SEPTA, MNRR, the T, the CTA, for example, I have either brought tickets or a card at the station. Not that difficult.
It's not so much complicating Amtrak's reservation system, as creating a national ticketing system across all modes and systems. I'm afraid though, SEPTA, Metro North, Metrolink, Metra or anyone else has no reason to initiate this, except for the Northeastern systems, they're isolated domains, and even SEPTA and NJT cleanly interface in exactly two locations. So it would have to be Amtrak's doing, or from higher up in the DOT, as no one else has any reason to initiate any project of this scope.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As with everyone else, the reason I've heard is that ARROW is antiquated. When Amtrak replaces its reservations system, the new one may be able to handle the complicated problem of selling MBTA, Metro-North, LIRR, NYC Subway, NJT, SEPTA, MARC, Baltimore MetroRail, WMATA, VRE, SunRail, Tampa TECO, TriRail, Miami Metro, Metra, CTA, South Shore Line, Twin Cities Metro, Denver RTD, UTA Trax & Frontrunner, DART, St Louis Metrolink, TRE, NM RailRunner, Tucson SunLink, Sound Transit Sounder & Link, TriMet, Sacramento LRT, BART, SF Muni, VTA, LA Metro, LA Metrolink, Coaster, Sprinter, and San Diego Trolley tickets.

Or at least more of them than it currently handles.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They cleanly (at least by NJT standards) interface at Trenton. They occupy the same vague location at 30th street. I wouldn't call that interfacing.
 
Yes. The IN DOT RFP covered the subject of freight railroad access. But freight access agreements were: "INDOT, along with the contractor, will discuss track access arrangements with host freight railroad right of way owners after the notice to proceed is sent to the successful contractor."

If CSX and CN ask for large access fees, this deal could fall apart. Or IN DOT has already reached an informal agreement with the freight railroads. Doubt it though.
Lest we forget, the current route of the Hoosier State requires agreement from CSX, CN, UP, (possibly) the Belt Railway of Chicago, (possibly) NS, Metra, and Amtrak. That's a LOT of railroads to get agreement from.

If CN gets friendly, this could be reduced to CSX, CN, and Amtrak by rerouting up the IC route to the St Charles Air Line, but that's the minimum.
Once the dedicated passenger tracks are in place between CUS and IN, these trains could be routed over the former PA line through Valparaiso and Wanatah. That would speed up the schedule quite a bit.
 
Dedicated tracks - I assume this refers to the South of the Lake Route currently being studied, right? Keep in mind this project is largely unfunded at this point, so any reroute is a long, long time from taking place.
 
Dedicated tracks - I assume this refers to the South of the Lake Route currently being studied, right? Keep in mind this project is largely unfunded at this point, so any reroute is a long, long time from taking place.

Dedicated tracks - I assume this refers to the South of the Lake Route currently being studied, right? Keep in mind this project is largely unfunded at this point, so any reroute is a long, long time from taking place.
South of the Lake reroute has nothing to do with the Cardinal/Hoosier State. It would affect the CL, LSL and Michigan trains. The former PRR mainline though Valpo and Fort Wayne is now a 20 mph short line. It would be very expensive to put it back into shape for passenger trains.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So then, why can't we get other state owned, non-Amtrak systems to get on board with Amtrak reservations? Like commuter trains?
Because they are commuter trains run by local transit agencies with their own ticketing and price systems?
I have heard that even if there was a desire, the cost would be enormous to achieve that, because it will take complete replacement of the Amtrak reservation system to have a single system that could issue tickets uniformly. Apparently when all the Amtrak California stations, Thruway and all, were added to the Amtrak system, it pretty much brought it to its limit. Adding something like an LIRR or even an NJT to it will cause it to pretty much crash and burn apparently. Of course, someone like Anthony may be able to give a more informed verification or refutation of it if he is able to without getting into trouble himself.
I can believe that.

But the question is, is that a good enough reason. Software doesn't tend to have a very long lifetime. So next time it comes up for replacement, would it be worthwhile building something that has the power and capability to integrate commuter systems, rather than just replacing like for like.

I can see there might be certain limitations, for example on the commuter systems that require machine-readable tickets, and different incompatible standards presently being in use. But shouldn't in the long term all systems be interested in a unified and across the board offering able to sell any station to any station journeys? It may be a long journey of many intermediate steps to get there. But as they say, it's the job that's never begun that takes the longest to complete.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Again though, when you go to take the commuter train, it doesn't seem that hard to stop at a kiosk to buy a ticket. I use VRE all the time to connect from Amtrak trains, and it isn't a huge burden. The point I was trying to make is that it would be more convenient, but the overall gain from the amount of resources needed to accomplish such a goal would be minor. It certainly wouldn't result in enough of a revenue gain to justify the millions spent in creating a new booking system.

This is because you understand the topology and geography of the system. You know where amtrak connects to the commuter system and how best to interchange.

In the NEC for example, the commuter rail system and Amtrak do not connect at a single location (as as is the case for example in Dallas) but connect in multiple locations. If you are local or know the geography, you know which of those makes sense for you and which doesn't. If you aren't local, it's a lot of bother to work it out and a door to door journey planner would make things simpler for you without forcing you to study the geography and schedules.

And then the ticket sales system should be integrated with the journey planner as forcing the cutomer to punch all that information in a second time is not user friendly.

I can even see an argument for there being a small surcharge for a seamless ticket versus having to buy tickets separately. The reason being that if Amtrak is late (or the commter line is late) and you miss your connection, that is no longer only your problem and your fault.
 
Ok, not having the Chicago-area tracks memorized...

Other than catenary, are there any obstacles to using the SSL? The lines are close enough to one another that a connecting track would seem to be simple (and probably easier than the Porter mess).

Edit: As to ticketing, without getting into utterly random codes, throwing in a few hundred commuter stations might be more than a three-letter code system can take.
Aren't the three letter codes in reailty just a throwback to the old times when booking agents had to punch cryptic strings into command line interfaces on arcane terminals?

With today's IT systems that really isn't necessary as you can start typing the place and the computer will fill in the rest or offer you a choice if could be ambiguous.

Having things spelt out is always more user friendly than having a code.

I guess the codes do have a real value for the handling of checked baggage as the handler needs to see where the bag is going at a glance and without stopping to think. But commuter rail systems are not going to start handling baggage any time sonn, so they wouldn't need those codes.

But if the codes really do matter, how about a system where Amtrak gets to keep all the three letter codes and commuter systems get, say, five or six letter codes consisting of the Amtrak code plus a location identifier?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top