Indiana proposed budget zeros out Hoosier State funding

[Anderson]

@JustOnce
Even if there would be zero nominal time savings, throwing a half-dozen railroads out of the mix reduces a lot of possible complications and helps keep the buck stop somewhere. Operational simplicity is not without its benefits.

 

[DSS&A]

The reduced railroad conflicts in the route via Homewood to the CN (ex EJ&E) to the CSX would significantly increase the reliability and allow a small amount of "delay time" to be taken out of the schedule. Eastbound trains would see a few more minutes of reduced running time over westbound trains The Chicago Create Grand Crossing project currently estimates that it would save 10 to 15 for the Carbondale, IL and CNOL trains when it is completed.

Here is a link to the Create Grand Crossing website. It appears that other Create projects are a higher priority than this project with the limited funds at this time.

http://www.grandcrossingrail.com

 

[JustOnce]

The reduced railroad conflicts in the route via Homewood to the CN (ex EJ&E) to the CSX would significantly increase the reliability and allow a small amount of "delay time" to be taken out of the schedule. Eastbound trains would see a few more minutes of reduced running time over westbound trains The Chicago Create Grand Crossing project currently estimates that it would save 10 to 15 for the Carbondale, IL and CNOL trains when it is completed.

Here is a link to the Create Grand Crossing website. It appears that other Create projects are a higher priority than this project with the limited funds at this time.

http://www.grandcrossingrail.com

Last I heard, they were waiting for 75th Street CIP to complete and "make room" before starting grand Crossing: http://www.75thcip.org/

 

[dlagrua]

Honestly I would rather see a private operator take over it again because It's time we start talking about improving our rail system and not maintaining the status quo. Amtrak has been pretty crappy for the last several years especially the Hoosier State.

So what I would like to see in the reauthorization bill is language that guarantees that all of the long distance routes be maintained. But eliminates Amtrak's funding and let's the private sector bid on the various routes.

That would give incentive for the various bidders to provide better equipment, better on board service, better frequencies. And all of that would be better for the passenger.

But I do believe that the current network should be preserved, just not Amtrak. Amtrak is managed horribly and I think it's time we put the passengers and crews out of their misery by eliminating it.

Of course we will have to figure out ticketing, union agreements, and other things. I used to be Amtrak's staunchest supporter but now I'm fed up with the food service cuts, the agent cuts, the PV cuts especially, and the death by a thousand cuts our trains are getting. So let's save the trains and dump Amtrak.

If the LD routes were all auctioned off by the federal government, I don't believe that private industry would bid. The only chance at this would be if the freight RR owners purchased and ran the LD routes but what would be the attraction?. Even back in the day when passenger rail went just about everywhere the private railroads made the least profit on passenger service and that is when they also had the US Mail business. The last experiment with privatizing the Hoosier State was when Iowa Pacific took over. It was a short lived experiment plagued with over regulation, trying to operate within the state and federal bureaucracy and too little business.

 

[GBNorman]

I think all concerned need accept that the only CHI-IND rail route left is this CWI-MON-P&E used by Amtrak.

Both the CC&STL ("James Whitcomb Riley") and the PRR ("South Wind") have been chopped up. The Monon is "it".

CSX is not about to let it become a passenger only route for they have located several on line industries along such - and keeping them happy comes before any additional passenger trains.

To again, passenger train agency notwithstanding, offer competitive timings with highway, would require laying new track - and, volks, that is simply a "nottagonnahappin".

Ellis's IP superior on-board service experience meant nothing to the Coach passenger who simply "wants a ride".

 

[Metra Electric Rider]

Salzburg (pop 152317) - Vienna (pop 1868000) - distance 295km (186 mi) - train running time 2.5hrs - train frequency - hourly.

Indianapolis (pop 872680) - Chicago (pop 2707120) - distance 195mi - highway time 3.5hrs - train 5hr, frequency "one a day".

No wonder the Olympic Comittee, essentially run by Europeans, "found somewhere else" than Chicago for the '16 Games.

Not to be overly nitpicky, but Capital city to second city with government owned rail system...

(and as a 606xx'er, we didn't want the games... not one bit)

 

[neroden]

CSX would definitely sell the Monon line if Indiana wanted to pay for it; they have almost total disinterest in it. They wouldn't sell the mainline through Indianapolis, but the rest of it? They barely use it. The online industries are insignifcant; they'd retain rights to serve them and drop the rest.

Problem is, Indiana also has total disinterest. The northwest corner of the state cares about its rail; the rest is fantastically anti-passenger-rail, to the point of putting prohibitions on new rail transit into the state budget more than once (excepting the northwest corner).

 

[GBNorman]

METRA Electric, there is actually more Salzburg-Vienna service than I noted. In addition to the State owned OBB, there is also a private sector operator, Westbahn. Apparently Austria went on a "competition" initiative a few years ago. Their trains are "more or less hourly" take some 3hrs for the journey, and arrive in Vienna at an "out of the way" station. They cost considerably less than OBB, but are a "second class" experience.

Now regarding the '16 Olympics, I hope you don't think I wanted them disrupting normal life, as they would have for the seven some years. It sure seems as if most cities that have hosted them regrets it.

But it was interesting how I was flying out to New York on "selection day" 2009 - and on "The Official Airline..." (United). I arrived Terminal 1 and there was excitement in the air. Now the announcement came over TV's in the various Bars that Chicago was first to be eliminated. There was simply "shell shock" through the place.

My reaction of course was who cares, but that's me. But then, "Richard the Second" abdicated in part owing to the Olympic rejection.

 

[jis]

They are also fantastically anti-21st Century and sometimes apparently even anti-20th century when it comes to the antiness part of it.

 

[dgvrengineer]

Indiana's anti-rail stance is another reason to re-route from Lafayette to Kankakee. Get out of the state as fast as you can to a more pro-rail state. I know it would require a short backup move at both Lafayette and Kankakee and probable track work on the old NYC to get up to class 3 (60 mph) but the connections are still there and I think it would be faster than the current route and potentially higher passenger counts from Illinois stations.

 

[Thirdrail7]

We've heard this threat before. The question is how realistic is this threat?

 

[JustOnce]

We've heard this threat before. The question is how realistic is this threat?

Another good question. With Amtrak itself, this years presidential proposal to gut LD was an exact mirror of last years proposal. Will the Indiana State Senators and Representatives from communities along the route argue, fight, and horse-trade to keep it?

 

[DSS&A]

The link below is to a website with a good summary of theJames Whitcomb Riley/George Washington/Cardinal/Hoosier State trains.

The webpage also has a great summary of the timetables for the trains's multiple routes from 1971 to 2018.

http://on-track-on-line.com/amtrak50-cardinal.shtml

 

[Thirdrail7]

Another good question. With Amtrak itself, this years presidential proposal to gut LD was an exact mirror of last years proposal. Will the Indiana State Senators and Representatives from communities along the route argue, fight, and horse-trade to keep it?

Equally dangerous is Amtrak's position on Corridor services vs Long Distance service. If the Cardinal is on their disdain list, this threat to zero fund the state funded train may torpedo their hopes of using seed money for state supported services with the states picking up the balance.

Why pay for the whole cost of something if you can get help from other states to pay for it?

 

[DSS&A]

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!

Amtrak just announced an agreement with CSX to speed up the Hoosier State that will also have the benefit of reducing the ann ju al operating cost to India by $72,000. Here is Amtrak's press release:

https://media.amtrak.com/2019/03/another-improvement-in-amtrak-hoosier-state-service/

 

[JustOnce]

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!
...
https://media.amtrak.com/2019/03/another-improvement-in-amtrak-hoosier-state-service/

It doesn't say how they're speeding things up however, it does answer my earlier question of whether the local reps will fight for it: they are advocating for the service.

 

[Anthony V]

They still need to make this train at least twice daily, and extend one round trip to Cincinnati, and the other to Louisville and Nashville (a good start to reviving the Floridian). The Cardinal also needs to be daily.

 

[Thirdrail7]

I wonder if the Cardinal will change times as well.

 

[DSS&A]

They still need to make this train at least twice daily, and extend one round trip to Cincinnati, and the other to Louisville and Nashville (a good start to reviving the Floridian). The Cardinal also needs to be daily.

The Louisville & Indiana RR has just completed its upgrades for their trackage rights agreement with CSX so the CSX can use their railroad north out of Louisville. The railroad can now handle 286K freight cars over its entire length. Railway Age just awarded it the "Shortline of the Year" award. It's a completely different railroad compared to when Amtrak's Kentucky Cardinal ran over the same track.

https://www.railwayage.com/freight/...and-regional-railroads-of-the-year-lirc-rcpe/

 

[IndyLions]

I have stayed on the sidelines for this discussion until now, but as someone who actually uses the service fairly often - it is an understatement to say I’m relieved at this news.

For me (I get on in Crawfordsville) the new schedule will almost certainly be worse.

Now if they’d spend the $75K they saved on fixing the embarrassment that is the Indianapolis Amtrak / Greyhound station - I might consider using that station instead...

 

[MikefromCrete]

The best reroute for the Hoosier State/Cardinal would be to continue to switch to the CN just north of Dyer and continue to the former IC at Harvey. If the Grand Crossing project is ever brought to fruition, it would be an almost direct shot into Union Station. A reroute on the former EJ&E is totally impractical. It would mean the construction of a new connecting track at Dyer and well as a new station at Dyer. Since Dyer just built a new station within the past 10 years, I don't think they would be very happy with having to build another one.
The former James Whitcomb Riley route is now in the hands of a short line where the top speed is probably 30 miles per hour. Who's going pay for that rebuild?
The best solution would be for Indiana to buy the former Monon and rebuild it to passenger train standards. But, believe me folks, that is never going to happen.

 

[Anderson]

I wonder if the Cardinal will change times as well.

Eastbound, it seems to be doing so. Of course, eastbound is mostly academic. Westbound? *shrugs* It'd make things less confusing for folks, if nothing else. A train that has five minutes' difference in the timetable is more of a headache than one with five hours' difference, and twenty minutes is at a sort of "sweet spot" for mangling things.

 

[sttom]

I don't live anywhere near Indiana, but given how close Indianapolis is to Chicago, The Hoosier state should probably run every other hour at the least. I don't really get the hatred conservative politicians have for public transit. Besides the cynical part of them getting their campaigns funded by the car lobby. From what I have gathered from my own social circle, the average conservatives tend to be split on the issue of mass transit, but you get a lock step "no" when it comes to funding train improvements. Not sure if that helps, but it is food for thought...

 

[neroden]

I don't live anywhere near Indiana, but given how close Indianapolis is to Chicago, The Hoosier state should probably run every other hour at the least. I don't really get the hatred conservative politicians have for public transit. Besides the cynical part of them getting their campaigns funded by the car lobby. From what I have gathered from my own social circle, the average conservatives tend to be split on the issue of mass transit, but you get a lock step "no" when it comes to funding train improvements. Not sure if that helps, but it is food for thought...

I don't know why "conservative" is used as an adjective for Republican politicians, but I long ago gave up on finding any "conservation" in their policies. I really try to use the term "right wing" rather than "conservative" because I think "conservative" should be reserved for people who are conserving something.

In terms of rail, since the death of Paul Weyrich, it seems to have become some sort of social admission requirement of Republican organizations to oppose rail funding as a group, even for politicians who personally support it, which is weird, but that's what I see. It doesn't seem to have anything to do with policy, it's just some sort of bizarre litmus test. This is why you can get Republican legislators to support rail funding one at a time, but if they start putting lines in their party platform, it's all "destroy all rail".

 

[sttom]

I don't know why "conservative" is used as an adjective for Republican politicians, but I long ago gave up on finding any "conservation" in their policies. I really try to use the term "right wing" rather than "conservative" because I think "conservative" should be reserved for people who are conserving something.

In terms of rail, since the death of Paul Weyrich, it seems to have become some sort of social admission requirement of Republican organizations to oppose rail funding as a group, even for politicians who personally support it, which is weird, but that's what I see. It doesn't seem to have anything to do with policy, it's just some sort of bizarre litmus test. This is why you can get Republican legislators to support rail funding one at a time, but if they start putting lines in their party platform, it's all "destroy all rail".

Why do I use conservative to denote Republican? Because I am fairly new here and don't know how up tight the mods are about the "no politics rule".