Hoosier State in Jeopardy

[MrFSS]

HERE is a new article suggesting two trains a day between Indianapolis and Chicago. That would be interesting.

 

[Ryan]

The study weighs four options for ­improving Amtrak’s service, and finances, by adding trains. It also explores keeping Amtrak at one train per day and reducing service to the federally funded line that runs three days a week.

Amtrak’s current single-train service departs Indianapolis at 6 a.m. and leaves Chicago at 5:45 p.m. It draws about 37,000 riders a year and needs a state subsidy of about $2.9 million, the study found.

Adding a second daily train departing Indianapolis at 8 a.m. and leaving Chicago at 5:30 p.m., according to the study, would boost ridership to 88,000 and lower the subsidy to $2.8 million a year.

Another option, adding a second daily train leaving Indianapolis at 8 a.m. and leaving Chicago at 3:30 p.m., would boost rider­ship to 86,000 a year, the study found. The subsidy would stay at about $2.9 million a year.

Two other options call for adding two trains, for a total of three round trips daily. The study said rider­ship would increase to 152,000 or 163,000 a year, with a subsidy of $6.2 million to $6.8 million.

So there are the options, which actually come out to 6. 4 with increased service, 1 with just finding the HS as is and 1 with having just the Cardinal.

Interesting that the option of providing a second train that leaves CHI at nearly the same time as the Cardinal/Hoosier State does better than one that leaves 2 hours earlier.

 

[cirdan]

Interesting that the option of providing a second train that leaves CHI at nearly the same time as the Cardinal/Hoosier State does better than one that leaves 2 hours earlier.

It's odd isn't it?

It makes me suspect there's either a typo in that text somewhere, or a fundamental misunderstanding of what's being proposed.

If you've got two trains leaving Chicago at virtually the same time and following the same route, you might as well combine those to a single train.

 

[MrFSS]

Interesting that the option of providing a second train that leaves CHI at nearly the same time as the Cardinal/Hoosier State does better than one that leaves 2 hours earlier.

It's odd isn't it?

It makes me suspect there's either a typo in that text somewhere, or a fundamental misunderstanding of what's being proposed.

If you've got two trains leaving Chicago at virtually the same time and following the same route, you might as well combine those to a single train.

Could they mean it would leave the same time The Cardinal leaves, but only on the days The Cardinal doesn't run. Then the other train would be 7 days a week both ways. That's the only thing that makes sense to me.

 

[CHamilton]

NARP has a link to the study, and this commentary.

The rally [to save the train] came the same day as a 47-page report issued by the Indiana Department of Transportation that performed a cost-benefit analysis. The study looked at continuing the route as is, upgrading the service (with annual costs ranging from $3.8 million to $10.9 million), and discontinuing the train all together. Unfortunately, the study used a fairly narrow scope in determining the value of the line, focusing primarily on the benefits that could be assessed as a monetized value. While the study recognized other forms of benefits brought about by the service as real—including expenditure related economic impacts, economic impacts on land usage, freight improvements, quality of life, and social benefits—it concluded that continuing the train is a decision that must be made at a “policy” level, rather than an economic level.

 

[NE933]

What the heck does that mean? "Deciding on a policy level not an economic level"?

 

[Ryan]

"We can pay for it, but we don't know if we want to because the other team supports it and therefore we must reflexively oppose it."

 

[hessjm]

Here is the notice I saw posted in the Metropolitan Lounge yesterday. Rumor has it reservations for the train will be blocked after today if things are not resolved..

 

[Railroad Bill]

Here is the notice I saw posted in the Metropolitan Lounge yesterday. Rumor has it reservations for the train will be blocked after today if things are not resolved..

Looks like it is time for Indiana to put up the money or the line shuts down in a couple of weeks.

 

[Anderson]

Honestly, in some regards the Hoosier State is only useful as a placeholder for future Cardinal slots. The state is being asked to produce $3 million for a train with $900,000 in farebox revenue, no OBS, and slow travel times. That's over 75% of the total cost, which I want to say is probably by far the worst ratio in the country.

That said, the four improvement options all look pretty interesting and potentially worthwhile.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

From WLFI 10/2/13 - Amtrak continues Hoosier State line talks:

Indiana and Amtrak are making progress hammering out a short-term agreement to keep a passenger line between Indianapolis and Chicago running until a comprehensive funding deal is reached, a spokesman for Indiana's transportation agency said Wednesday

And:

Will Wingfield, a spokesman for the Indiana Department of Transportation, said the agency and Amtrak are continuing discussions with local communities on a short-term agreement that would serve as a stopgap measure for a few months until a long-term deal is reached on the line, which last year carried nearly 37,000 passengers.

"The negotiations are moving forward productively and positively on our side, and I feel that's the case with the other parties as well, so it's just a matter of coming to an agreement," he said.

Wingfield said a short-term agreement is still needed on how much Indiana and the communities using the line would chip in to keep it running. Most of the communities the line serves have said they're willing to provide financial support, and INDOT's goal is to boost ridership while aiming to minimize state support for the line, he said.

Wingfield said a state-funded analysis released last week of Amtrak's various proposed options for improving the line and increasing its ridership "would form a starting point for longer term discussions" on a comprehensive funding agreement.

 

[afigg]

Will Wingfield, a spokesman for the Indiana Department of Transportation, said the agency and Amtrak are continuing discussions with local communities on a short-term agreement that would serve as a stopgap measure for a few months until a long-term deal is reached on the line, which last year carried nearly 37,000 passengers.

"The negotiations are moving forward productively and positively on our side, and I feel that's the case with the other parties as well, so it's just a matter of coming to an agreement," he said.

Wingfield said a short-term agreement is still needed on how much Indiana and the communities using the line would chip in to keep it running. Most of the communities the line serves have said they're willing to provide financial support, and INDOT's goal is to boost ridership while aiming to minimize state support for the line, he said.

Wingfield said a state-funded analysis released last week of Amtrak's various proposed options for improving the line and increasing its ridership "would form a starting point for longer term discussions" on a comprehensive funding agreement.

That IN DOT is continuing negotiations on a short-term agreement while talking about a long term deal is a good sign. If IN DOT and the Governor wanted to kill the HS, they could have gotten to October 1 while many are distracted by the mess in DC and said, sorry, the HS is too expensive and we are ending negotiations.
The key is if a long-term agreement can be reached which has IN DOT and the local governments contributing even a small amount for capital improvements. It gets a foot in the door for IN to incrementally increase capital funds in future years for track upgrades for the HS. Then the politicians in Fort Wayne will eventually demand that they get funding to add a Chicago-Fort Wayne service. Even a minimum state subsidy deal establishes a precedent to build on.

Start small with low hanging fruit capital improvements and take it from there. Better than the arguments here that the HS loses a lot of money, so kill it and forget about a CHI-IND corridor service.

 

[Train2104]

NARP reports in its Headline that this sign has been seen in Hoosier State stations:

 

[CHamilton]

Looks familiar, doesn't it? Think they asked Joe for permission to use his photo?

 

[Ryan]

No photo credit, that's for sure.

Definitely the same picture, too.

 

[hessjm]

Ha! My very poor job of cropping did make their "lifting" of the photo pretty obvious didn't it

 

[Ryan]

That's somewhat annoying. Enough so that I'd send them a pretty pointed email asking "***" and for a photo credit at least.

 

[bretton88]

I should note Amtrak is still accepting reservations for the Hoosier State after October 17th. So they must think negotiations are going fairly well.

 

[CHamilton]

Amtrak upgrades would boost ridership, cost millions

Improvements to Amtrak’s Hoosier State service between Indianapolis and Chicago would boost ridership and revenue, but there’s no scenario under which the line would pay for itself, according to an analysis commissioned by the Indiana Department of Transportation.

That doesn’t mean the upfront investment and ongoing subsidies couldn’t be justified, though, consultant CDM Smith Inc. concluded. The cost-benefit analysis will figure into INDOT’s negotiations with Amtrak over continuation of the Hoosier State line, and it will help cities served by the line decide whether they want to pitch in on upgrades....

INDOT says that giving Amtrak $3 million a year for the Hoosier State would amount to $80 per round trip, based on the rail line’s fiscal year 2012 statistics. The Hoosier State had 36,670 riders and generated $883,000 in revenue that year.

Amtrak offered four improvement options in terms of scheduling, number of round trips and reducing all trip times by 30 minutes. All four options would boost ridership and revenue, but they would also require track improvements at an annualized cost of $18 million.

Here is a rundown on the possible improvements and expected results:

Option 1: change schedule to tie into long-distance connections, 88,270 riders a year, $2.3 million in revenue.

Option 2: change schedule to favor local ridership, 86,000 riders a year, $2.2 million in revenue.

Option 3: add second daily round trip with departures from Chicago and Indianapolis around noon, requiring three train sets, 164,000 riders and $4 million in revenue.

Option 4: add second daily round trip, departing Chicago early morning and evening and Indianapolis morning and afternoon, requiring two train sets, 153,000 riders and $3.8 million in revenue.

The improvements would cut the per-rider subsidy significantly, to $32 under the first option, or to $42 under the third option, CDM Smith noted. The subsidy doesn’t take into account the cost of capital improvements, estimated at $231.5 million, or $18 million a year....

 

[Anderson]

Those improvements are a bit expensive...but it's interesting seeing them split the charge over about 13 years. When were they hoping to finish the improvements in those plans again?

(Yes, I know it's a general project idea...it's just interesting seeing the cost accounted for over so much time)

 

[jis]

Amtrak upgrades would boost ridership, cost millions

Improvements to Amtrak’s Hoosier State service between Indianapolis and Chicago would boost ridership and revenue, but there’s no scenario under which the line would pay for itself, according to an analysis commissioned by the Indiana Department of Transportation.

That doesn’t mean the upfront investment and ongoing subsidies couldn’t be justified, though, consultant CDM Smith Inc. concluded. The cost-benefit analysis will figure into INDOT’s negotiations with Amtrak over continuation of the Hoosier State line, and it will help cities served by the line decide whether they want to pitch in on upgrades....

INDOT says that giving Amtrak $3 million a year for the Hoosier State would amount to $80 per round trip, based on the rail line’s fiscal year 2012 statistics. The Hoosier State had 36,670 riders and generated $883,000 in revenue that year.

Amtrak offered four improvement options in terms of scheduling, number of round trips and reducing all trip times by 30 minutes. All four options would boost ridership and revenue, but they would also require track improvements at an annualized cost of $18 million.

Here is a rundown on the possible improvements and expected results:

Option 1: change schedule to tie into long-distance connections, 88,270 riders a year, $2.3 million in revenue.

Option 2: change schedule to favor local ridership, 86,000 riders a year, $2.2 million in revenue.

Option 3: add second daily round trip with departures from Chicago and Indianapolis around noon, requiring three train sets, 164,000 riders and $4 million in revenue.

Option 4: add second daily round trip, departing Chicago early morning and evening and Indianapolis morning and afternoon, requiring two train sets, 153,000 riders and $3.8 million in revenue.

The improvements would cut the per-rider subsidy significantly, to $32 under the first option, or to $42 under the third option, CDM Smith noted. The subsidy doesn’t take into account the cost of capital improvements, estimated at $231.5 million, or $18 million a year....

If it takes $231.5 million capital improvement to just run two trains on a short corridor (~200 miles with two or three train sets on track at any given time) where one daily train effectively runs already, then it seems to me UP's need for a billion in capital improvement to run a daily train on a very very long corridor (~1800 miles) daily instead of thrice a week was perhaps not that much out of line?

OK, now I think I should duck while I can :help: :hi:

 

[The Davy Crockett]

Where did that number come from? Someone pull it out of a hat? :hi:

 

[jis]

Where did that number come from? Someone pull it out of a hat? :hi:

The $231.5 million came presumably from CDM Smith Inc. who did the study report. So it must have been their hat. :hi:

More seriously....

The Report alluded to I think is this one: http://www.in.gov/indot/files/Amtrak_CostBenefitAnalysis_2013.pdf

The $231.5 million comes from the last page of appendix C: http://www.in.gov/indot/files/Amtrak_AppendixC_2013.pdf

 

[The Davy Crockett]

Where did that number come from? Someone pull it out of a hat? :hi:

The $231.5 million came presumably from CDM Smith Inc. who did the study report. So it must have been their hat. :hi:

More seriously....

The Report alluded to I think is this one: http://www.in.gov/indot/files/Amtrak_CostBenefitAnalysis_2013.pdf

The $231.5 million comes from the last page of appendix C: http://www.in.gov/indot/files/Amtrak_AppendixC_2013.pdf

Thanks! Looks like some fun 'light reading' for tomorrow morning!

 

[Nathanael]

If it takes $231.5 million capital improvement to just run two trains on a short corridor (~200 miles with two or three train sets on track at any given time) where one daily train effectively runs already, then it seems to me UP's need for a billion in capital improvement to run a daily train on a very very long corridor (~1800 miles) daily instead of thrice a week was perhaps not that much out of line?

OK, now I think I should duck while I can :help: :hi:

The difference is that UP is already running fast freights on its line, meaning that the track itself has to be in fairly good condition. Nobody is running fast freights on the cobbled-together route of the Hoosier State, and the line is actually at constant risk of having segments shut down entirely. The price for the Hoosier State improvements is practically a price to rebuild the track from scratch -- if you look in the report, it's trackwork trackwork trackwork....