# Secondary Midwest connection point



## bms (Feb 26, 2021)

In decades past, St. Louis was considered a much more important city than it is now. Many transcontinental travelers connected between East-West trains at St. Louis.

Today, all these connections are made in Chicago. That works well considering the populations of Chicago and St. Louis, but St. Louis still would work well for a connection point in so many cases. For example, a trip from Cincinnati to Kansas City could be a lot shorter if the connection were made in St. Louis rather than overnight in Chicago.

Do you guys think a train from the East Coast through St. Louis, connecting to the Southwest Chief to the West Coast would work today, or is there just not enough demand?


----------



## Cal (Feb 26, 2021)

bms said:


> Do you guys think a train from the East Coast through St. Louis, connecting to the Southwest Chief to the West Coast would work today, or is there just not enough demand?


It would depend on many factors. I don't think it's necessary at the moment. However if it's done correctly, yeah. 

I personally, would rather connect through Chicago though.


----------



## jebr (Feb 26, 2021)

I don't think it makes sense diverting an existing LD train, extending/splitting a LD train (likely the Cardinal,) or building a new LD train that ends in STL/KCY. Right now all the connections can generally be made in Chicago, and I think most people would rather lay over in Chicago than at the smaller stations further out. If the demand is there, it'd be as a corridor train, and while it's fine to consider connections as part of the schedule making, it should be run separately to preserve on-time performance and reliability for corridor customers, who would likely make up the biggest customer base.


----------



## bms (Feb 26, 2021)

jebr said:


> I don't think it makes sense diverting an existing LD train, extending/splitting a LD train (likely the Cardinal,) or building a new LD train that ends in STL/KCY. Right now all the connections can generally be made in Chicago, and I think most people would rather lay over in Chicago than at the smaller stations further out. If the demand is there, it'd be as a corridor train, and while it's fine to consider connections as part of the schedule making, it should be run separately to preserve on-time performance and reliability for corridor customers, who would likely make up the biggest customer base.



Oh no, certainly none of the existing services should be disrupted. I'm just thinking a WAS-STL or NYP-STL train could be a good addition to the schedule.


----------



## Cal (Feb 26, 2021)

bms said:


> Oh no, certainly none of the existing services should be disrupted. I'm just thinking a WAS-STL or NYP-STL train could be a good addition to the schedule.


Well, if we're being realistic, Amtrak is in no way looking to add a new long distance route right now. In addition, equipment is not there. 

And, are the tracks there?


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Feb 27, 2021)

I've said in other threads the priority should be to create a secondary hub in either New Orleans or in Texas (San Antonio, Dallas, or Houston) to connect East/West traffic between Texas/California and Florida.


----------



## jis (Feb 27, 2021)

Cal said:


> Well, if we're being realistic, Amtrak is in no way looking to add a new long distance route right now. In addition, equipment is not there.
> 
> And, are the tracks there?


All the proposals that were presented in the PIPs were based on passenger train capable tracks that exist and had full analysis of where the equipment would be found for executing on the plans. In short the plan was "shovel ready" (as required by the legislation that caused the PIPs to be prepared - the same legislation that created PRIIA 209 state trains etc.) , but the then Amtrak management (which BTW was Boardman, not Anderson), decided to place the entire thing in cold storage, and then Amtrak made the whole thing disappear like magic!


----------



## Cal (Feb 27, 2021)

jis said:


> All the proposals that were presented in the PIPs were based on passenger train capable tracks that exist and had full analysis of where the equipment would be found for executing on the plans. In short the plan was "shovel ready" (as required by the legislation that caused the PIPs to be prepared - the same legislation that created PRIIA 209 state trains etc.) , but the then Amtrak management (which BTW was Boardman, not Anderson), decided to place the entire thing in cold storage, and then Amtrak made the whole thing disappear like magic!


Lol ok

Okay, what is a PIP? I'm still new..


----------



## Cal (Feb 27, 2021)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> I've said in other threads the priority should be to create a secondary hub in either New Orleans or in Texas (San Antonio, Dallas, or Houston) to connect East/West traffic between Texas/California and Florida.


I think New Orleans would be better.


----------



## jis (Feb 27, 2021)

Cal said:


> Lol ok
> 
> Okay, what is a PIP? I'm still new..


Performance Improvement Plan that the Congress tasked Amtrak to produce for all LD trains.


----------



## Willbridge (Feb 27, 2021)

jis said:


> All the proposals that were presented in the PIPs were based on passenger train capable tracks that exist and had full analysis of where the equipment would be found for executing on the plans. In short the plan was "shovel ready" (as required by the legislation that caused the PIPs to be prepared - the same legislation that created PRIIA 209 state trains etc.) , but the then Amtrak management (which BTW was Boardman, not Anderson), decided to place the entire thing in cold storage, and then Amtrak made the whole thing disappear like magic!


It's why I'm stuck with so many pdf's and print copies of old studies and reports! The "public" only gets to look at this information for a while. If you don't get a copy for yourself it'll be hard to find later. When I worked for ODOT I had a stack pass for the State Library and could roam wide-eyed among the forgotten or frequently repeated studies. The public could get a look on request but you had to know what to ask for.


----------



## Seaboard92 (Feb 27, 2021)

Actually there are all sorts of routings across the midwest that would give you some great variety in routes. Cleveland-St. Louis is still a mainline for CSX. EX NYC from Cleveland to Terre Haute via Marion and Indianapolis. Then it's EX Pennsy on into St. Louis. I do think there is a potential to have some trains out of St. Louis as Chicago gets more congested. I think St. Louis makes less sense than somewhere like Indy or Cincinnati where you can have a ton of various corridor trains interacting with each other.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Feb 28, 2021)

Here's one I found for the Capital Limited courtesy of Trains.com which discusses through service between the CL and the Pennsylvanian at Pittsburgh.



http://trn.trains.com/~/media/Files/PDF/CapLtdPIPsec210PRIIA9-30-10.ashx#:~:text=a%20PIP%20for%20the%20Capitol%20Limitedas%20mandated%20by,tried%20to%20improve%20its%20long-distance%20routes%E2%80%99%20financial%20performance


.


----------



## jiml (Feb 28, 2021)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> Here's one I found for the Capital Limited courtesy of Trains.com which discusses through service between the CL and the Pennsylvanian at Pittsburgh.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lots of interesting "meat" in that proposal, including the much-talked-about combination of the Capitol with Silver Service.


----------



## TrackWalker (Feb 28, 2021)

Cal said:


> Okay, what is a PIP? I'm still new..





jis said:


> Performance Improvement Plan that the Congress tasked Amtrak to produce for all LD trains.



Is there available a sticky anywhere on this site with all these abbreviations and what they mean?


----------



## jis (Feb 28, 2021)

There is this thread, though it probably needs a bit of updating....






Commonly Used Abbreviations and Terms


This topic has been opened to provide a glossary of various abbreviations and terms that are used by AU members. Like many other subjects, Amtrak and rail travel can have a language unto itself that, for the uninitiated, might be baffling and a bit intimidating. The posts that follow define...




www.amtraktrains.com


----------



## TrackWalker (Feb 28, 2021)

jis said:


> There is this thread, though it probably needs a bit of updating....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks.


----------



## Cal (Feb 28, 2021)

jis said:


> There is this thread, though it probably needs a bit of updating....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I saw that once and tried to find it again, but I didn't remember what it was. Thanks


----------



## Cal (Feb 28, 2021)

HHmm, I didn't see PIP on there?


----------



## me_little_me (Feb 28, 2021)

Cal said:


> HHmm, I didn't see PIP on there?





> ...though it probably needs a bit of updating....



I think that's why jis added those words.


----------



## jpakala (Feb 28, 2021)

I did find PIP by Googling it plus Amtrak, although above that was Plenary Infrastructure Partners and Plenary Infrastructure Philadelphia.


----------



## west point (Feb 28, 2021)

IMO Amtrak reservations needs to have a demand program that measures city pair demand. So every time there is a request by a potential passenger for a ticket from say "Dallas to Atlanta" it will be recorded in some que. Easy enough to eliminate multiple requests for same pair by our posters.

Amtrak can take those numbers and then add train routes to the most requested pairs. I used Dallas - ATL as one example that might be requested many times. Also the requests for city pairs along a route would be added in as well. Request for say a 8 - 12 hour second service can also be programed if the time of departure is retained even though a passenger takes what is available,.


----------



## neroden (Mar 1, 2021)

bms said:


> In decades past, St. Louis was considered a much more important city than it is now. Many transcontinental travelers connected between East-West trains at St. Louis.
> 
> Today, all these connections are made in Chicago. That works well considering the populations of Chicago and St. Louis, but St. Louis still would work well for a connection point in so many cases. For example, a trip from Cincinnati to Kansas City could be a lot shorter if the connection were made in St. Louis rather than overnight in Chicago.
> 
> Do you guys think a train from the East Coast through St. Louis, connecting to the Southwest Chief to the West Coast would work today, or is there just not enough demand?


Economies of scale means it makes sense to connect everything through Chicago until Amtrak has roughly *twice* as much service as it does now. Then it would make sense to have a secondary hub, I'd say. But first we'd have to have two trains a day on every existing long-distance route. IMO.


----------



## bms (Mar 1, 2021)

neroden said:


> Economies of scale means it makes sense to connect everything through Chicago until Amtrak has roughly *twice* as much service as it does now. Then it would make sense to have a secondary hub, I'd say. But first we'd have to have two trains a day on every existing long-distance route. IMO.



Sounds about right, Good post.


----------



## Willbridge (Mar 1, 2021)

west point said:


> IMO Amtrak reservations needs to have a demand program that measures city pair demand. So every time there is a request by a potential passenger for a ticket from say "Dallas to Atlanta" it will be recorded in some que. Easy enough to eliminate multiple requests for same pair by our posters.
> 
> Amtrak can take those numbers and then add train routes to the most requested pairs. I used Dallas - ATL as one example that might be requested many times. Also the requests for city pairs along a route would be added in as well. Request for say a 8 - 12 hour second service can also be programed if the time of departure is retained even though a passenger takes what is available,.


I made this same request for transit service planning. Was told we couldn't do it because the software was proprietary and didn't include that feature. It's a typical silo-based missed opportunity.


----------



## sttom (Mar 2, 2021)

neroden said:


> Economies of scale means it makes sense to connect everything through Chicago until Amtrak has roughly *twice* as much service as it does now. Then it would make sense to have a secondary hub, I'd say. But first we'd have to have two trains a day on every existing long-distance route. IMO.


Amtrak wouldn't need twice the service to make St Louis into a hub. If the National Limited was revived, and through cars to the City of New Orleans from Kansas City, a route to Oklahoma City and a route to Denver were on the table it would be a hub, but a bare bones hub. With this much service, someone could connect from DC to points west such as LA, Texas, and Denver without having to go through Chicago. It would also make Kansas City into a quasi hub, which would also be a good thing. Come to think of it, fighting to make more hubs would necessarily mean more service......


----------



## neroden (Mar 2, 2021)

There just isn't the demand for it. People aren't campaigning to avoid Chicago. There's barely enough demand to operate New Orleans as a hub, which is why all the trains misconnect. Chicago is working just fine as a hub.

Build up the demand by building up the supply. Once there's so many passengers changing trains from the East Coast to the South at Chicago that it's causing congestion in Chicago and Chicago wants to "get them out of the way", then yeah, you'll have a case for a secondary hub...


----------



## sttom (Mar 2, 2021)

I would also like to make the point of what do any of us mean by hub? Does hub mean equal to Chicago's present level of service and nothing less or just a major city's downtown station where 4+ routes intersect and a convenient enough connection can be made? If we are going by the first definition, then no, there is no way St Louis or any other city will be a hub anytime soon unless Amtrak expands service by several orders of magnitude. If we are going with the second definition of "hub" then it wouldn't take much to make almost any big city a "hub". 

If we're talking demand, Amtrak has no way to divine internally demand for transportation even within its own system. Why would anyone consider Amtrak from Kansas City to New Orleans if there isn't a direct service? Or Chicago to Florida or anywhere to anywhere without direct train service? Amtrak's skeletal system is a network externality problem. People don't use it because it isn't useful therefore there is no justification for expanding the network. How and why we potentially get a more useful rail network in this country is irrelevant to me so long as we get one. And if telling Congress "Hey why are these major cities not hubs for the national rail network, cough up some cash for trains" gets us more trains, then that is a good thing.


----------



## neroden (Mar 2, 2021)

Now, on the merits of a direct train from St. Louis to Indianapolis and Cincy... well, if there's enough passengers for it and you can convince state legislators to support it, go for it! I just don't think that campaigning on the basis of providing connections that aren't at Chicago is going to do you any good at this point; it'll just annoy Chicago politicians.


----------



## jis (Mar 15, 2021)

Cal said:


> Lol ok
> 
> Okay, what is a PIP? I'm still new..


There is a nice summary of them in an old Trains article from several years back...






What's become of Amtrak's Performance Improvement Plans? - Trains Magazine - Trains News Wire, Railroad News, Railroad Industry News, Web Cams, and Forms


Trains magazine offers railroad news, railroad industry insight, commentary on today's freight railroads, passenger service (Amtrak), locomotive technology, railroad preservation and history, railfan opportunities (tourist railroads, fan trips), and great railroad photography.



cs.trains.com


----------

