cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,666
I don't know about the US, but i have it from a guy who organizes railfan spacials in the UK that the higher and more expensive categories are generally the first to sell out.
Hoosier State Going from IPH Back to Amtrak
- Thread starter jis
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,666
But does INDOT really belioeve that. Or has IP talked them into believing that?
If you're a contractor or consultant and you say you can save costs, you'll find lots of open doors and people willing to listen, including people who are maybe not qualified to ask the right questions but wihose eyes will go glassy when you mention the magical words "cost reduction".
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
AFAIK INDOT believes mostly in discontinuing all funding if they can get the few pesky complainers off their backs. 
The history of this episode is that initially INDOT said it was going to discontinue the service and then much belly-aching happened resulting finally in the IPH solution after one or two other possibilities fell apart. As for how that sausage was made I don't know. At the end INDOT basically paid Amtrak what it was getting before and then some, and IPH found that they had no clue what they had signed onto. Very peculiar to say the least.
The history of this episode is that initially INDOT said it was going to discontinue the service and then much belly-aching happened resulting finally in the IPH solution after one or two other possibilities fell apart. As for how that sausage was made I don't know. At the end INDOT basically paid Amtrak what it was getting before and then some, and IPH found that they had no clue what they had signed onto. Very peculiar to say the least.
SubwayNut
Conductor
Even in Indiana public transit circles the Hoosier State is controversial because the funding isn't from general transportion funding but the small amount of state funding that is used to help public transit (from the major bus systems and South Shore Line to small dial-a-rides in rural areas) throughout the state.
west point
Engineer
Yes tell your VP ! !
CoachSlumber
Lead Service Attendant
- Joined
- May 9, 2013
- Messages
- 266
That in a nutshell is why I, a person who would be inclined to use it mostly for the train part, never did. In terms of planning a hotel weekend in Indy, I'd have to book three nights to have a full weekend of activity. With a better schedule, I would have gladly paid for the BC.
Amtrak full dome 10031 is confirmed as in Chicago, and there was a report it was there for axle-count service (seems an odd choice, but I digress). However, does the fact the car is there give some hope that it may actually be intended for the Hoosier State?
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Since Hoosier State can be operated with a single consist, and IP has been operating a dome on it with virtually no fallback replacement car, Amtrak doing the same would be par for the course I suppose.
tommylicious
OBS Chief
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2013
- Messages
- 599
I gotta say that Summit View dome is incredible. Nicest dome I've been on. Even better than the ones on The Canadian.
Last edited by a moderator:
This came up elsewhere, but my read is that Indiana had an issue not unlike New York's objection about "black box" accounting on Amtrak's end. There was also a history of Amtrak, frankly, treating the Hoosier State like garbage (I believe it was the second or third longest passenger train run in North America without food service, behind the Sudbury-White River and The Pas-Pukatawagan services up in Canada).
I'd also point out that after the HS got handed over to IP, hallelujah, wouldn't you know it? Amtrak suddenly started cross-listing a ton of Greyhound buses between IND and CHI to compete.
Finally, I do have to suggest that the 2015/16 numbers may have been sandbagged by the string of "bad faith" disruptions where Amtrak was doing everything they could to "bad order" IP equipment.
I'd also point out that after the HS got handed over to IP, hallelujah, wouldn't you know it? Amtrak suddenly started cross-listing a ton of Greyhound buses between IND and CHI to compete.
Finally, I do have to suggest that the 2015/16 numbers may have been sandbagged by the string of "bad faith" disruptions where Amtrak was doing everything they could to "bad order" IP equipment.
Last edited by a moderator:
Seaboard92
Engineer
IPH actually has several extra domes laying over in Chicago on a regular basis that could protect the summit view. Prairie View of it isn't on a run is in the 22nd Street yard in Chicago.
Scenic View also should be there as well if it isn't on a run. And Sky View is also Amtrak Certified and should be in Bensenville IL at IPHs "shop". They might also have a vista dome up there as well in Bensenville.
Personally I prefer a vista dome it gives a better view and is slightly taller.
Scenic View also should be there as well if it isn't on a run. And Sky View is also Amtrak Certified and should be in Bensenville IL at IPHs "shop". They might also have a vista dome up there as well in Bensenville.
Personally I prefer a vista dome it gives a better view and is slightly taller.
Amtrak also listed a fair amount of other codeshare bus schedules around the same timeframe. I know CHI - MSP (Greyhound,) CHI - Toronto (Greyhound,) the ND/MT service with Jefferson Lines, and at least one or two services in the Southeast also happened around that timeframe. Considering people had to book at least one train segment with it, I think any desire to spite IP with bus tickets was secondary to a simple ability to add more one-stop options/connections with Greyhound.
Plus, given similar timeframes, who is going to choose a Greyhound bus over an Amtrak or IP train, especially after booking Amtrak or IP on at least one segment? I'm guessing very few people.
That's the thing...the Greyhound times were arguably more convenient at Indianapolis. I don't know how much traffic they pulled off of the HS, but the timing struck me as particularly suspect alongside the other issues.
While I'd like to ride in a vista dome for at least part of a trip, especially if there was interesting scenery, as a regular traveler, I think I'd prefer a standard coach that includes and overhead luggage rack to park by bags, a nice overhead reading light, not to mention reclining seats. (The last vista dome I rode, on the Capitol Limited in 1988, did not have reclining seats in the dome section.)
Now why would Amtrak want to sabotage the IP "Hoosier State?" Amtrak was still running the train (and getting paid for it), it was still listed as part of Amtrak's national system, IP was providing the cars and locomotives, thus freeing up Amtrak equipment for other uses. All IP seemed to be doing, if I understand the discussion correctly, was providing some financially non-sustainable on-board service (in addition to the equipment.) Was the IP Hoosier State really that much different from the Piedmont service in North Carolina, or even the Downeasters, in which the cafe car is apparently not run by Amtrak?
As to the lack of food service, first everyone complains about how horrible the food is, now they're complaining that there isn't enough of it!
Last edited by a moderator:
The buses referenced above are alternate frequencies only bookable with a train trip. This offers alternate return times and Chicago connection options (including a red eye connection introduced). Most of the buses continue beyond Indy to Louisville and Nashville, which are not currently served by rail. Travelers can choose to ride a train in one direction and return by bus or vice versa.
Last edited by a moderator:
grover5995
Train Attendant
If the Talgo trainsets are already spoken for, the next best option for equipment might be the former ATSF El Capitan bi-levels. A short corridor like this ought to have at least 2 round trips per day. A faster route would also help since most of the trip time involves getting to and from CUS. Would a private operator like Virgin Rail be interested?
Why would any private operator want it? It can only lose money under Indiana's format.
MikefromCrete
Engineer
Nobody will want to run it under current conditions. The route needs to be faster with more convenient service which won't happen until Indiana ponies up some hard cash. Which will never happen.
Seaboard92
Engineer
And to add to IPHs woes. Texas wants to pull the Texas State Railroad from them. And North Carolina has pulled the Piedmont and Northern from them. Not related as much to the HS. But shows the state of IPH so I think it's admissible to this forum
Yes but why would Texas, and North Carolina pull the contract. Government need a reason. Not a "well there having issues" and they were not sure about next season.
Up here in NY they have paid the X-mas train crews, and have canceled the new winter sleeper service. However the winter sleeper service was not the best idea, and late to start marketing.
Does not mean there going to fail and shutdown. IPH might be in trouble, but too early to call them dead.
Up here in NY they have paid the X-mas train crews, and have canceled the new winter sleeper service. However the winter sleeper service was not the best idea, and late to start marketing.
Does not mean there going to fail and shutdown. IPH might be in trouble, but too early to call them dead.
rtabern
Conductor
As much as I love passenger rail... maybe the Indiana Department of Transportation should seriously just kill off the Hoosier State on March 1st instead of let Amtrak take the service back.
Let's do a little math... There are 4 round-trips per week of the Hoosier State per week... or 8 one-way trips. Multiply by that by 52 weeks and you basically have 416 one-way trips per year of the Hoosier State. Right?
Revenue passengers per year for the last year Amtrak operated the train appear to be 27,937. (Source: Indystar.com)
Divide 27,937 by 416 trips --- and you come out to each one-way averaging 67 riders. Correct?
Now, Amtrak will be getting $4,000,000 per year to run the train. That comes out to $9,615.38 for each of the 416 one-way trips. Divide that by 67 riders -- and basically the state is paying $143.51 per rider.
Sure, maybe they re-coop $30-40 in fares... but that is still the state losing basically $100 per rider to keep the thing going.
It's just NOT sustainable... when there are good alternatives to get from Indy to Chicago that are much faster... and is way too much for the one or two coaches or whatever Amtrak is going to be bringing to that route.
With that said -- there are plenty of state routes that should continue to be subsidized IMO. Having train service from Chicago to Milwaukee makes a lot of sense -- it takes only 89 minutes and you can almost never drive between those two cities in that amount of time. So, rail makes sense. Even between Chicago and St. Louis it makes sense with traffic on I-55. Or even out to Quincy where there are no real direct interstates. Also, LD trains that provide service to remote areas also justify the subsidy.
Just saying $100 per person for a 190-mile rail trip that takes almost twice as long as driving doesn't cut it.
Let's do a little math... There are 4 round-trips per week of the Hoosier State per week... or 8 one-way trips. Multiply by that by 52 weeks and you basically have 416 one-way trips per year of the Hoosier State. Right?
Revenue passengers per year for the last year Amtrak operated the train appear to be 27,937. (Source: Indystar.com)
Divide 27,937 by 416 trips --- and you come out to each one-way averaging 67 riders. Correct?
Now, Amtrak will be getting $4,000,000 per year to run the train. That comes out to $9,615.38 for each of the 416 one-way trips. Divide that by 67 riders -- and basically the state is paying $143.51 per rider.
Sure, maybe they re-coop $30-40 in fares... but that is still the state losing basically $100 per rider to keep the thing going.
It's just NOT sustainable... when there are good alternatives to get from Indy to Chicago that are much faster... and is way too much for the one or two coaches or whatever Amtrak is going to be bringing to that route.
With that said -- there are plenty of state routes that should continue to be subsidized IMO. Having train service from Chicago to Milwaukee makes a lot of sense -- it takes only 89 minutes and you can almost never drive between those two cities in that amount of time. So, rail makes sense. Even between Chicago and St. Louis it makes sense with traffic on I-55. Or even out to Quincy where there are no real direct interstates. Also, LD trains that provide service to remote areas also justify the subsidy.
Just saying $100 per person for a 190-mile rail trip that takes almost twice as long as driving doesn't cut it.
Last edited by a moderator:
While most of us don't usually advocate for train offs, this makes financial sense rob.
IMO the funding that IDOT is basically pouring down a rat hole could better be spent on track improvements between Chicago and Indy and applied to a Daily Cardinal with a better schedule.
IMO the funding that IDOT is basically pouring down a rat hole could better be spent on track improvements between Chicago and Indy and applied to a Daily Cardinal with a better schedule.
It's not a race. I'd love to see a source which shows that prospective passengers choose a given mode of transportation (other than air, perhaps) based primarily on trip time; Driving will typically be faster (even many times in the Northeast Corridor) as its door-to-door. The purpose of regional passenger rail is not to "beat" the automobile by getting there faster, and such is not a valid metric for evaluating the effectiveness of a train service.
That said, there are indeed multiple disadvantages to the current Chicago to Indianapolis passenger route. A improved, faster route and more convenient schedule (let alone increased frequencies) are all things which would create a more viable corridor operation here, and arguably a more efficient use of state funds. However, you cannot just assume the ridership gains(*) made under Iowa Pacific will magically go away, especially since Indiana has stated certain of the amenities are to be retained. Further, we don't yet know the longer term plans for the train, as Amtrak supposedly is intended only as an interim operator. Certainly there are problems with the route (and Indiana's budget plans just sufficient to maintain the status quo), but throwing in the towel is not the solution.
* - The 27,937 passenger number differs from the annual ridership figures Jis posted earlier. That doesn't mean the passenger count isn't low for what Indiana is paying (because it is), but don't get caught in the "loss per passenger" numbers trap used by many Amtrak critics to unfairly malign its passenger trains (particularly long distance). Those numbers are at best patently misleading; A completely meaningless statistic chosen mostly because it paints the finances in the worst possible light.
Strictly speaking, when evaluated solely by financial statistics, no intercity passenger trains really make financial sense (none are truly profitable). That doesn't mean they do not serve a valuable purpose and are not worthy of continued (and expanded) investment.
The Cardinal is a federally funded long-distance train. With no vested interest in the service, Indiana is not going to spend state funds to improve the route and schedule for that train. If the Hoosier State, however, can be operated more effectively and efficiently, there is at least some potential in the Chicago to Indianapolis route.
It is important to also remember that not everyone is just traveling between these two city pairs. How many are making connections to/from other trains in Chicago?
