Amtrak cutting the Hoosier State?

[tadman]

I hate to say it, but this train is a dog. It isn't competitive with road (not even remotely), it has really erratic timekeeping (especially given that it is a coach section of the Cardinal some days), it has a horrible schedule, and 1x/day frequency. Compare that to STL Lincoln Service: 3x/day plus TX Eagle, reasonable time keeping, somewhat drive-competitive. That's huge.

If the Hoosier State were 3x/day and somewhat drive competitive, it'd be worth supporting. It'd also be a useful economic development tool. The Michigan trains all serve university towns, which are moneymakers for the state (both local derivative business and out-of-state tuition). They also serve all the beach towns, and beach towns create a huge tax base and employment base. Try getting space on a Friday outbound to Michigan from May to August.

But a lot of the problem is the serious lack of infrastructure between Chicago and Indy. There's a lot of ripped up track in Indiana and a lot congestion in Chicago.

[railroadchoad]

Unfortunately, I am afraid that the best route between Chicago and Indy is gone. Sure, the Monon was the most direct but the route the NYC used via the Illinois Central and the Peoria and Western was a pretty good route in terms of speed. In the IC days with the double track and ATS system intact, IC passenger trains would allegedly hit 100 mph between Chicago and Champaign.

[justalurker66]

But a lot of the problem is the serious lack of infrastructure between Chicago and Indy. There's a lot of ripped up track in Indiana and a lot congestion in Chicago.

The push for the new Midwest Regional Rail system includes a better link between Chicago and Indy. Perhaps in another lifetime our descendents might see something built.

Unfortunately, I am afraid that the best route between Chicago and Indy is gone. Sure, the Monon was the most direct but the route the NYC used via the Illinois Central and the Peoria and Western was a pretty good route in terms of speed. In the IC days with the double track and ATS system intact, IC passenger trains would allegedly hit 100 mph between Chicago and Champaign.

Champaign Illinois? Seems more than a little out of the way for a run between Chicago and Indy. Can you give waypoints for the NYC route you mentioned?

[railohio]

NYC passenger trains used the IC north of Kankakee to reach Chicago. The route from Lafayette west to Kankakee is still in place and used by KB&S.

[railroadchoad]

I am sorry if I made it sound as though the NYC trains ran all the way down the IC to Champaign. If you carefully re-read what I wrote I said that the IC trains used to reach speeds of up to 100 mph at least as far south of Champaign. I never said that the New York Central trains went that far south on the Illinois Central!

The NYC trains took the IC south as far as Kankakee and veered Southwesterly from that city on the former Big Four main currently operated by the KB&S. Lafayette was the only city of any consequence between Kankakee and Indianapolis, which may have something to do with why this route fell out of favor in the post-Penn Central era.

[CSX_CO]

The NYC trains took the IC south as far as Kankakee and veered Southwesterly from that city on the former Big Four main currently operated by the KB&S. Lafayette was the only city of any consequence between Kankakee and Indianapolis, which may have something to do with why this route fell out of favor in the post-Penn Central era.

Well, that and the Danville line went north out of Sheff to Indiana Harbor and a connections in Chicago.

Actually, the line east of Zionsville fell out of favor with the opening of Avon Yard in hte early 60's. NYC negotiated trackage rights on the PRR between Lebanon and Hunt to access Avon. Even by PC days the NYC east of Lebanon was greatly reduced. With Conrail traffic could be routed Indianapolis to Logansport and into Chicago via the I&F, negating the need for duplicate routes to Chicago on the NYC.

Practice Safe CSX

[AMTRAK55]

Seems like a pointless route to me.....why ride the train from Indy to Chicago when the interstate follows a b-line right for CHI?

If we're going to use your logic MQT, lets axe the Pere Marquette and all the Michigan service trains, after all I-94 and then US 31/I96 follow those routes too. Those seem like pointless routes to me. Better axe the Haiwatha trains too, I-94 follows that between downtown Chicago and Milwaukee. Ditto for the St. Louis service stuff, I-55 parallels those too.

Hoosier State is popular because it serves Lafayette and also serves as a good connector to the rest of the network at Chicago. My last trip had several sets of people leaving Indy to get on other long distance trains for vacations. We picked up probably 30 to 40 people at Lafayette. Most of them college students from Purdue. They filled pretty much filled the other coaches by the time we made it to Chicago. The train is very heavily used on Fridays and Sundays with college students to/from Purdue at Lafayette. Inbound and outbound as family and friends come to visit also.

At $23 one way, I can't even begin to drive to Chicago from Indy for that price. My hotel charged $35 a DAY for parking too. So, for $92 I purchased two round trip tickets for the price of what it would have been to park for the 3 days I was in Chicago. Left Indy at 0600 sharp, and into Chicago by 0930 to 1000. We were ahead of schedule because of a painless trip up the UP. If they could get the speeds up, you'd have a good competitor to driving for people going from Indy to downtown Chicago. Plus, I absolutely HATE driving I-65 between Indianapolis and Lafayette and from about Crown Point into Chicago. Congestion, 'left lane loiters', and people going 90 miles an hour. No wonder there are so many wrecks on this stretch of highway.

Bonus to AMTRAK to use it as a daily shuttle to/from "The Grove" for repaired equipment. Part of the reason for the 'extended' consist is because of CN's moronic theory that AMTRAK doesn't shunt the crossings when its less than a couple of cars. The train isn't due to be cut until October 2013, so AMTRAK is getting the bell ringers out there to make sure the state of Indiana re-up's the train's subsidy.

Practice Safe CSX

Not the Pere Marquette, they're doing way better than Hoosier State. And I don't see Amtrak cutting either route based on the fact they use that route to shuttle engines and equipment in and out of Beech Grove frequently.

[justalurker66]

The value of the service comes down to convenience.

That convenience comes from service that is relatively fast, on time, operates on a usable schedule and takes people from where they are to where they want to be. When people do the math and figure out that the would be better off using another form of transportation the value is weakened. When people do the math and figure out that they are better off using the train the value is strengthened.

The Michigan trains meet these goals. The 110 MPH service to Kalamazoo serves the university there plus Notre Dame via the Niles station. The ongoing plans to enhance the service to Detroit will continue to expand the convenience of the service. With several trips per day, finding a train is not difficult. The Grand Rapids train does not have the service frequency of the other Michigan trains but it is still a decent reliable service.

The Hoosier State is, in the best way I can put it, "there". It exists. It is not on the best schedule for a train connecting Indianapolis with Chicago and as a one-a-day over slow rails it certainly is in a category where people can do the math and find a better alternative. This limits its value to those who do not have an alternative.

Getting the speeds up and creating an on time train with a usable schedule is something for the future. Right now we need to protect what is there. Taking a step back and reducing service is not the right direction.

[Saturnalia]

Thing is, Indianapolis is a car city. Both Detroit and Chicago have train-based mass transit. Weather or not a mid-range train like the PM or Hoosier depends a lot about the local mindset towards mass transit. That's not to say things can change if your service is far better. The FEC is a situation that seems to be an overnight game-changer if they do what they say they're going to do.

[bctrainfan]

Well, Detroit is certainly car-based. No train based mass transit there! (People Mover doesn't really count!) The real strength of the Amtrak Michigan service is that the destination is Chicago, which is much less car-friendly for tourists or business visitors (ie, the traffic congestion, and high cost of parking), but is much more pedestrian and mass transit friendly. People can take the train to Chicago in a similar time to driving when traffic slowdowns are factored in, at a similar cost when you consider fuel and ridiculous parking fees, and relax while they ride. You also end up downtown where most visitors want to be, walking distance or cheap mass transit options to get to their final destiation. Not so many of these advantages apply to other routes/destinations, except maybe the East coast trains. The Michigan service might even expand enough to be close to breaking even someday, if they are successful with higher speeds and can do better being on schedule!

[amtrak1007]

Thing is, Indianapolis is a car city. Both Detroit and Chicago have train-based mass transit. Weather or not a mid-range train like the PM or Hoosier depends a lot about the local mindset towards mass transit. That's not to say things can change if your service is far better. The FEC is a situation that seems to be an overnight game-changer if they do what they say they're going to do.

Alex take a chill ill man, you're getting a bit ahead of yourself again. Check your facts and take a breath before posting. Det is a car city... All transport methods are subsidized... Airports are paid by "national defense" as are highways. Fuel costs for cars are subsidized... It's all in how you look at it...

[Saturnalia]

Thing is, Indianapolis is a car city. Both Detroit and Chicago have train-based mass transit. Weather or not a mid-range train like the PM or Hoosier depends a lot about the local mindset towards mass transit. That's not to say things can change if your service is far better. The FEC is a situation that seems to be an overnight game-changer if they do what they say they're going to do.

Alex take a chill ill man, you're getting a bit ahead of yourself again. Check your facts and take a breath before posting. Det is a car city... All transport methods are subsidized... Airports are paid by "national defense" as are highways. Fuel costs for cars are subsidized... It's all in how you look at it...

Okay, but I'm not quite sure where you've been the last 2 months

[GP30M4216]

Back on topic......

From the Indianapolis Star:

Indiana has until October to decide on Amtrak service

Apr. 14, 2013

INDIANAPOLIS — State leaders have five months to decide whether investing in passenger rail service is a priority.

Effective Oct. 1, Congress will no longer fund Amtrak routes shorter than 750 miles.

In Indiana, the change affects the Hoosier State, which runs between Indianapolis and Chicago with stops in Lafayette, Rensselaer and Crawfordsville, four days and four nights a week.

“The time has come now when we formally need a partner to expand service,” said Charlie Monte Verde, Amtrak government affairs and corporate communications specialist.

“The time is essentially now if you want to have passenger rail as part of your transportation system.”

Monte Verde provided information about the change and answered questions during a Wednesday meeting with state legislators and leaders from affected communities.

As the deadline approaches, the gravity of the decision is settling in. The impact will reach beyond the eight Indiana counties in the rail corridor and affects the long-term future of railroad service, including freight.

“It’s important if we ever want to expand the rail corridor out of Indianapolis,” said Rep. Tim Brown, R-Crawfordsville, chairman of the House Ways and Means committee. “Beyond October 2013, there’s going to have to be some funding from state government factored in with all the other funding priorities.”

“If we take that corridor out of the mix,” said Rep. Randy Truitt, R-West Lafayette, “Indiana falls off the map of rail service.”

“Once you suspend a service, it’s difficult to restart,” said Max Johnson of Amtrak’s policy and development office.

The Hoosier State is valuable to specific stakeholders.

Mayors and business leaders along the corridor say rail service helps attract new employers, serves college campuses at every stop and improves overall quality of life.

Also, the Hoosier State transports rail cars to Amtrak’s largest maintenance facility in Beech Grove, south of Indianapolis. The annual payroll is $49 million for 550 employees, and there’s the prospect of more jobs, if the cars can get there.

Ridership and revenues continue to grow, but not fast enough to make the Hoosier State pay for itself. Most everyone involved is focused on that key problem.

The route carried nearly 37,000 passengers in fiscal year 2012 but was subsidized at a cost of roughly $4 million.

“I’m hearing that Amtrak has to stop and wait for freight trains,” said Rep. Sheila Klinker, D-Lafayette. “Riders can’t plan anything specific if their trip is delayed.”

“Technically,” Monte Verde said, “Amtrak is supposed to have the right of way. But CSX owns the tracks and dispatches the trains.”

Asked if increased Amtrak ridership would spur CSX to improve the tracks and give passenger cars more priority, Monte Verde said, “CSX and all the communities on the line would have a better route, better capacity and service.”

Conversely, if passenger service stops, there may be less incentive for freight track owners to upgrade their lines in Indiana.

The corridor remains a possibility only after Sen. Brandt Hershman won Indiana Senate approval of an amendment that authorizes the Indiana Department of Transportation to appropriate money for passenger rail service.

The Buck Creek Republican said he’s not interested in funding a service that is losing money, but is interested in an opportunity to grow the rail service by providing a friendlier schedule.

By improving the schedule, adding more trips and possibly increasing train speeds, the thinking is the service will attract more riders and increase revenue to cover the cost of operations.

Amtrak points to success stories in other states that have seen significant ridership and revenue increases after investing in passenger rail upgrades.

“The first big step is stabilizing the service, and then improving the route we run on,” Monte Verde said.

“When the federal government sees a state is willing to invest in passenger rail service, that’s where you see the big federal dollars coming in.”

To date, that “build it and they will come” strategy hasn’t been enough to win support from the Indiana Department of Transportation.

INDOT hired an engineering consultant to evaluate what types of schedule changes might make the Hoosier State self-supporting.

“We’re really interested in seeing if more reliable service makes the route viable,” said Joe Seaman, Greater Lafayette Commerce president and CEO.

“I’m not in favor of subsidizing rail service,” Truitt said. “But with proper investment we can chart our own course and get a business model that makes sense for Indiana.”

The study just got underway. Truitt expects the INDOT study to be released in late summer.

Seaman is concerned about getting the information before the window of opportunity closes in October.

“We’d like to see the study completed on a timely basis...so we can put everything on the table to see what makes sense for Indiana,” Seaman said.

[GP30M4216]

Back on topic......

From the Indianapolis Star:

Indiana has until October to decide on Amtrak service

Apr. 14, 2013

INDIANAPOLIS — State leaders have five months to decide whether investing in passenger rail service is a priority.

Effective Oct. 1, Congress will no longer fund Amtrak routes shorter than 750 miles.

In Indiana, the change affects the Hoosier State, which runs between Indianapolis and Chicago with stops in Lafayette, Rensselaer and Crawfordsville, four days and four nights a week.

“The time has come now when we formally need a partner to expand service,” said Charlie Monte Verde, Amtrak government affairs and corporate communications specialist.

“The time is essentially now if you want to have passenger rail as part of your transportation system.”

Monte Verde provided information about the change and answered questions during a Wednesday meeting with state legislators and leaders from affected communities.

As the deadline approaches, the gravity of the decision is settling in. The impact will reach beyond the eight Indiana counties in the rail corridor and affects the long-term future of railroad service, including freight.

“It’s important if we ever want to expand the rail corridor out of Indianapolis,” said Rep. Tim Brown, R-Crawfordsville, chairman of the House Ways and Means committee. “Beyond October 2013, there’s going to have to be some funding from state government factored in with all the other funding priorities.”

“If we take that corridor out of the mix,” said Rep. Randy Truitt, R-West Lafayette, “Indiana falls off the map of rail service.”

“Once you suspend a service, it’s difficult to restart,” said Max Johnson of Amtrak’s policy and development office.

The Hoosier State is valuable to specific stakeholders.

Mayors and business leaders along the corridor say rail service helps attract new employers, serves college campuses at every stop and improves overall quality of life.

Also, the Hoosier State transports rail cars to Amtrak’s largest maintenance facility in Beech Grove, south of Indianapolis. The annual payroll is $49 million for 550 employees, and there’s the prospect of more jobs, if the cars can get there.

Ridership and revenues continue to grow, but not fast enough to make the Hoosier State pay for itself. Most everyone involved is focused on that key problem.

The route carried nearly 37,000 passengers in fiscal year 2012 but was subsidized at a cost of roughly $4 million.

“I’m hearing that Amtrak has to stop and wait for freight trains,” said Rep. Sheila Klinker, D-Lafayette. “Riders can’t plan anything specific if their trip is delayed.”

“Technically,” Monte Verde said, “Amtrak is supposed to have the right of way. But CSX owns the tracks and dispatches the trains.”

Asked if increased Amtrak ridership would spur CSX to improve the tracks and give passenger cars more priority, Monte Verde said, “CSX and all the communities on the line would have a better route, better capacity and service.”

Conversely, if passenger service stops, there may be less incentive for freight track owners to upgrade their lines in Indiana.

The corridor remains a possibility only after Sen. Brandt Hershman won Indiana Senate approval of an amendment that authorizes the Indiana Department of Transportation to appropriate money for passenger rail service.

The Buck Creek Republican said he’s not interested in funding a service that is losing money, but is interested in an opportunity to grow the rail service by providing a friendlier schedule.

By improving the schedule, adding more trips and possibly increasing train speeds, the thinking is the service will attract more riders and increase revenue to cover the cost of operations.

Amtrak points to success stories in other states that have seen significant ridership and revenue increases after investing in passenger rail upgrades.

“The first big step is stabilizing the service, and then improving the route we run on,” Monte Verde said.

“When the federal government sees a state is willing to invest in passenger rail service, that’s where you see the big federal dollars coming in.”

To date, that “build it and they will come” strategy hasn’t been enough to win support from the Indiana Department of Transportation.

INDOT hired an engineering consultant to evaluate what types of schedule changes might make the Hoosier State self-supporting.

“We’re really interested in seeing if more reliable service makes the route viable,” said Joe Seaman, Greater Lafayette Commerce president and CEO.

“I’m not in favor of subsidizing rail service,” Truitt said. “But with proper investment we can chart our own course and get a business model that makes sense for Indiana.”

The study just got underway. Truitt expects the INDOT study to be released in late summer.

Seaman is concerned about getting the information before the window of opportunity closes in October.

“We’d like to see the study completed on a timely basis...so we can put everything on the table to see what makes sense for Indiana,” Seaman said.

[justalurker66]

A bit of doublespeak ... the passenger service is there now (and will likely continue with the Cardinal) and it does not seem to be encouraging CSX to maintain their tracks. Yet somehow if The Hoosier State ends CSX will decide that it is not worth maintaining their tracks for the Cardinal?

I suppose the more trains on the track the more money the host railroad would get and (if they did not spend it elsewhere) the more they could spend on the track. But even with all the money that Michigan poured into the Michigan trains and more daily runs than Indy to Chicago the host railroad let the rails deteriorate to the point where the only salvation for the line was the state buying the line.

It tends to prove that state subsidy of the trains is not enough. Multiple daily runs is not enough. Getting the host railroad to put the money into the infrastructure is not going to happen unless the railroad sees the benefit. For NS in Michigan their line was good enough for the freight trains and that was all they cared about. Why should CSX in Indiana be any different?

[CSX_CO]

A bit of doublespeak ... the passenger service is there now (and will likely continue with the Cardinal) and it does not seem to be encouraging CSX to maintain their tracks. Yet somehow if The Hoosier State ends CSX will decide that it is not worth maintaining their tracks for the Cardinal?

I suppose the more trains on the track the more money the host railroad would get and (if they did not spend it elsewhere) the more they could spend on the track. But even with all the money that Michigan poured into the Michigan trains and more daily runs than Indy to Chicago the host railroad let the rails deteriorate to the point where the only salvation for the line was the state buying the line.

It tends to prove that state subsidy of the trains is not enough. Multiple daily runs is not enough. Getting the host railroad to put the money into the infrastructure is not going to happen unless the railroad sees the benefit. For NS in Michigan their line was good enough for the freight trains and that was all they cared about. Why should CSX in Indiana be any different?

That is precisely the problem with the Monon. AMTRAK expects 80mph running, and CSX just doesn't see the need for it. 40 mph track for freight operations works just fine. CSX is running Indy-Chicago on freights with 1 crew at 40mph, proving they don't need 50 mph track.

Upgrades will probably be coming with the development of the pellet plant in Reynolds. I'm sure that will bring welded rail on the north end, etc.

There's more to it than just 'increasing' the speeds. Crossing protection needs to be timed for those higher speeds, more inspections have to be done, etc. It may shock some, but the AMTRAK payments don't cover the expense of 'upgrading' a line.

Practice Safe CSX

[Jochs]

INDOT has begun contract negotiations with Amtrak.

http://www.nuvo.net/indianapolis/indot- ... kJTO3_AEVc

[railohio]

With only a week to go. Good job, Hoosiers.

[MagnumForce]

Seems like Indiana simply blinked first

[railohio]

Seems like Indiana simply blinked first

Because Amtrak was going to disregard a federal law and run it anyway if Indiana didn't?