Second train CHI-MSP

[norfolkwesternhenry]

I have long wanted an Amtrak connection from MSP to Stevens Point, WI, as well as Stevens Point to Chicago. Many people want a second frequency CHI-MSP, and after a little looking in my old Soo Line Timetables, you could hit Chicago, Milwaukee, Fon Du Lac, Oshkosh, Waupaca, Stevens Point, Marshfield, Eau Claire (few miles north), and MSP. I think using the old Milwaukee Road CHI-MKE, and the old WC/Soo Line MKE-MSP. Using the ex Milw line from CHI to MKE would save some costs on upgrading another 90 miles of the line, as well as eliminating the need to head west to connect with CN track from CUS. The line is currently owned by CN, track speed is currently 45 but I've clocked trains doing 53. I believe the line is signalled and only needs track upgrades and stations. The line hosts approximately 24 trains a day, but there is room for more, I've seen 18 road trains in and out of Stevens Point in 12 hours. There is a growing demand for train service in Stevens Point, because everyone has to drive down to Portage which is an hour on the freeway. The track could probably support up to 50 MPH as is, but adding extra speed comes at an extra price, although jusylt upgrades to 79 MPH track aren't nearly as expensive as going beyond 79 MPH. I know Wisconsin in the past has been hostile to train service, but if Amtrak can convince WI to get enough for a study, with promises for benefits for WI (which there would be many considering all the towns that it would run in), wait till Scott Walker is out of office and hopefully convince the next governer to get some funding started. Farebox recovery could be decent, especially when college kids are coming to and from school, as well as the large retiree population. The University in Stevens Point is going green and getting to the university by train would be a good way to promote being green. It is also a very scenic route, so possibly take the EB one way and the other route the other way. I think Amtrak could revive the name of "The Laker" an old Soo Line route that travelled much of the same route. Finally, I think a simple P42-baggage-cafe/business-coach-coach-coach would do the trick, maybe using Amfleet/Horizon equipment if the NS Bi-levels ever come.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

[WICT106]

Some questions for which you should have answers for in order to advocate this: How many people will this serve ? What are the populations of the Metropolitan Statistical Areas included ? How do you intend to introduce train service to a population accustomed to driving everywhere ? And ( this is the same question asked during the discussion of extending the Hiawatha Service through Madison ) How are you going to get others to support this when they have never taken a train for any reason and cannot perceive themselves ever taking a train trip anywhere ? Then, one will also have to deal with those who don't want to invest in the service because "it doesn't stop in MY town," etc., etc. The issue with any service expansion in Wisconsin is that you will encounter the same, or similar, objections that were used during the 2010 efforts to extend and re- introduce service through Madison.

Then, you will encounter the issues of that the WI DOT has not done any environmental assessment for the segment of track under discussion here, and opponents will use the environmental assessment process to stall, or obstruct, or delay, or hamper, efforts to expand service.

Overall, a larger hill to climb than the Madison Hiawatha extension. However, there is talk of a second MSP-- CHI train over the present route:

Phase 1 of the Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago Intercity Passenger Rail Service study is nearing a conclusion and the public meetings in Minnesota and Wisconsin have been scheduled. The purpose of the public meetings is to present the results of the Rail Traffic Control modeling, explain the conceptual designs for rail system improvements, and to answer questions. Below are the tentative dates and times of the meetings.

In Wisconsin: Wednesday, September 6, from 5:00 to 7:00 pm at the La Crosse County Administrative Center. Presentation at 5:30 with question and answer session to follow.

In Minnesota: Thursday, September 7, from 5:00 to 7:00 pm, in the Red Cap Room at Union Depot in Saint Paul. Presentation at 5:30 with question and answer session to follow.

There are others who want to have more Wisconsin train service to more Wisconsin places, but it is a tough, uphill battle. Have you considered joining WisARP ? https://wisarp.wordpress.com/

 

[jphjaxfl]

Some questions for which you should have answers for in order to advocate this: How many people will this serve ? What are the populations of the Metropolitan Statistical Areas included ? How do you intend to introduce train service to a population accustomed to driving everywhere ? And ( this is the same question asked during the discussion of extending the Hiawatha Service through Madison ) How are you going to get others to support this when they cannot see themselves ever taking a train trip anywhere ? Then, one will also have to deal with those who don't want to invest in the service because "it doesn't stop in MY town," etc., etc. The issue with any service expansion in Wisconsin is that you will encounter the same, or similar, objections that were used during the 2010 efforts to extend and re- introduce service through Madison.

Then, you will encounter the issues of that the WI DOT has not done any environmental assessment for the segment of track under discussion here, and opponents will use the environmental assessment process to stall efforts to expand service.

Overall, a larger hill to climb than the Madison Hiawatha extension. However, there is talk of a second MSP-- CHI train over the present route:

Phase 1 of the Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago Intercity Passenger Rail Service study is nearing a conclusion and the public meetings in Minnesota and Wisconsin have been scheduled. The purpose of the public meetings is to present the results of the Rail Traffic Control modeling, explain the conceptual designs for rail system improvements, and to answer questions. Below are the tentative dates and times of the meetings.

In Wisconsin: Wednesday, September 6, from 5:00 to 7:00 pm at the La Crosse County Administrative Center. Presentation at 5:30 with question and answer session to follow.

In Minnesota: Thursday, September 7, from 5:00 to 7:00 pm, in the Red Cap Room at Union Depot in Saint Paul. Presentation at 5:30 with question and answer session to follow.

There are others who want to have more Wisconsin train service to more Wisconsin places, but it is a tough, uphill battle. Have you considered joining WisARP ? https://wisarp.wordpress.com/

You have done an excellent assessment of reinstating passenger train service just about any place in the US. Look at all the obstacles AAF/Brightline has encountered in Florida which is a privately funded project. I strongly believe that Brightline from Miami to Orlando will be very successful once it starts running due to the heavy volume of tourists, especially from Europe, that are use to taking trains, but the locals in certain Florida counties have fought it from day 1.

 

[neroden]

Second train from MSP to CHI was well in hand until the criminal Governor Walker was catapulted into office in Wisconsin by a flood of dirty out-of-state money. If his crime gang is removed from power, it is likely to happen.

 

[MisterUptempo]

I'd suggest looking for, and working with, organizations that are already advocating for rail service in the region of Wisconsin you mention. One such organization is the West Central Wisconsin Rail Coalition. Their website URL is as follows - http://www.westwisconsinrail.org/

The purpose of the organization is work towards establishing passenger service between Eau Claire and the Twin Cities.

img src - startribune.com

While it is not the entire route that you envision, it's a start, and a smart one at that. In addition to the Coalition's efforts towards this corridor, MNDOT has had an Eau Claire - MSP train on their long-term vision list for a while now.

I don't foresee a seminal moment in which the nation will suddenly determine that an extensive nationwide rail network needs to be a reality, the way it did for an interstate highway system. As such, it will have to be built in small steps, cheered on by locals, in hopes that each successive route added wins more converts who will push for more rail. Take what you can get with this proposal, while continually working for more expansion.

 

[Metra Electric Rider]

I wasn't aware that this was a proposal - I've always thought that replacing some of the Wisconsin thruway service (and moving the buses to new routes) with rail seemed like a good idea.

 

[MisterUptempo]

I wasn't aware that this was a proposal - I've always thought that replacing some of the Wisconsin thruway service (and moving the buses to new routes) with rail seemed like a good idea.

Minnesota actually has a very ambitious plan to expand rail service in the region. Whether they can pull it off is another matter. Service to Duluth via the Northern Lights Express and a second MSP - CHI frequency seem to be at the top of their priorities list at the moment.

img src - http://www.dot.state.mn.us

 

[neroden]

They almost had the Northfield line under construction when I went to college there, and then some evil state legislators put in a poison pill to kill it.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

I wasn't aware that this was a proposal ...

Minnesota actually has a very ambitious plan to expand rail service in the region. ... Service to Duluth via the Northern Lights Express and a second MSP - CHI frequency seem to be at the top of their priorities list at the moment.

img src - http://www.dot.state.mn.us

A wonderfully optimistic program, I'll give them that.

Of course, Chicago-Milwaukee-St Paul-St Cloud is top of the list, and could happen just as soon as Amtrak gets delivery on a bunch of new equipment. And Duluth seems feasible, with the

+++++++++++++++++++++

Hey! The system ate my comment! I may try to rewrite and repost it later, but for now, Sorry.

 

[brianpmcdonnell17]

Is there a proposed schedule for the second MSP-CHI train? I think a second train would be great on this route, but if it ends up like Lynchburg where the NER and Crescent closely follow one another, the benefit is greatly minimized. I would like to see essentially the reverse of the current schedule, with a morning departure and a nighttime arrival at Chicago with afternoon service in both directions at MSP. Regardless, it is likely that two train sets will be needed for the route.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

[Eric S]

The feasibility study from 2015 depicted a morning departure from CHI and an afternoon departure from MSP. Last time I checked, the study was still posted on the MnDOT website.

 

[brianpmcdonnell17]

The feasibility study from 2015 depicted a morning departure from CHI and an afternoon departure from MSP. Last time I checked, the study was still posted on the MnDOT website.

That would be great, especially for me. MSP is one of my favorite places to visit so it would be nice to have a single overnight return from Chicago with around 24 hours in MSP. Is there any idea as to when this could actually be implemented? It sounds like the Siemens cars will be delivered in 2-3 years, but is there anything else holding it up?

 

[Eric S]

If/when the Midwest corridor cars are delivered, the equipment currently used for those trains would presumably be displaced and potentially available for other trains, such as a new CHI-MSP train. But there would still be the matter of funding whatever level of improvements Amtrak, CP (and potentially BNSF), Metra, IDOT, MnDOT, and WisDOT determine are necessary to accommodate an additional passenger train. And then cobble together the non-federal (some combination of IL, MN, WI state and perhaps local) funding to cover operating costs.

Here's the site with info on the ongoing study:

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/passengerrail/tc-mil-chi/index.html

 

[Hotblack Desiato]

is there anything else holding it up?

Agreements with host railroads, and the inevitable eight- or nine-figure price tag they're going to ask for to accommodate another train on the line, and a funding mechanism in place to pay for the service (one which would span three states, including a state that has a government that already turned down the option to extend rail service west of Milwaukee). But other than those details, not really.

 

[brianpmcdonnell17]

is there anything else holding it up?

Agreements with host railroads, and the inevitable eight- or nine-figure price tag they're going to ask for to accommodate another train on the line, and a funding mechanism in place to pay for the service (one which would span three states, including a state that has a government that already turned down the option to extend rail service west of Milwaukee). But other than those details, not really.

I just found the study, which estimates a cost of $95 million. The most fair way to split it would probably be around 50% Minnesota, 40% Wisconsin, and 10% Illinois. Assuming the states could put together the funding, would there be a delay for the start of service because of infrastructure improvements or could the service start immediately once the funds and cars are recieved?
Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

[WICT106]

is there anything else holding it up?

Agreements with host railroads, and the inevitable eight- or nine-figure price tag they're going to ask for to accommodate another train on the line, and a funding mechanism in place to pay for the service (one which would span three states, including a state that has a government that already turned down the option to extend rail service west of Milwaukee). But other than those details, not really.

I just found the study, which estimates a cost of $95 million. The most fair way to split it would probably be around 50% Minnesota, 40% Wisconsin, and 10% Illinois. Assuming the states could put together the funding, would there be a delay for the start of service because of infrastructure improvements or could the service start immediately once the funds and cars are received?
Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

Yes, there would be a delay, in order to add a modest amount of track capacity. When service through Madison is returned, the track both entering and exiting Madison will require significant upgrades, as there are some segments that travel through some marshes.

 

[Eric S]

is there anything else holding it up?

Agreements with host railroads, and the inevitable eight- or nine-figure price tag they're going to ask for to accommodate another train on the line, and a funding mechanism in place to pay for the service (one which would span three states, including a state that has a government that already turned down the option to extend rail service west of Milwaukee). But other than those details, not really.

I just found the study, which estimates a cost of $95 million. The most fair way to split it would probably be around 50% Minnesota, 40% Wisconsin, and 10% Illinois. Assuming the states could put together the funding, would there be a delay for the start of service because of infrastructure improvements or could the service start immediately once the funds and cars are received?
Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

Yes, there would be a delay, in order to add a modest amount of track capacity. When service through Madison is returned, the track both entering and exiting Madison will require significant upgrades, as there are some segments that travel through some marshes.

I like your optimism

 

[bretton88]

is there anything else holding it up?

Agreements with host railroads, and the inevitable eight- or nine-figure price tag they're going to ask for to accommodate another train on the line, and a funding mechanism in place to pay for the service (one which would span three states, including a state that has a government that already turned down the option to extend rail service west of Milwaukee). But other than those details, not really.

I just found the study, which estimates a cost of $95 million. The most fair way to split it would probably be around 50% Minnesota, 40% Wisconsin, and 10% Illinois. Assuming the states could put together the funding, would there be a delay for the start of service because of infrastructure improvements or could the service start immediately once the funds and cars are received?
Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

Yes, there would be a delay, in order to add a modest amount of track capacity. When service through Madison is returned, the track both entering and exiting Madison will require significant upgrades, as there are some segments that travel through some marshes.

I like your optimism

CP is pretty reasonable, so they aren't asking for the Moon here. Because the price tag is reasonable, they can probably cobble together some Federal grants to help fund it. To note, this also ties into Wisconsin's Hiawatha upgrade project. So Wisconsin and Illinois' share of the project will come from those upgrades (A couple of new sidings for 2 extras Hiawatha trips).
Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

[brianpmcdonnell17]

A couple of new articles came out over the past few days about the potential new train including this one: http://www.waow.com/story/36286536/2017/09/04/possibility-of-second-amtrak-train-coming-through-la-crosse

It claims that the train could potentially start operation as early as 2020.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

[Eric S]

CP is pretty reasonable, so they aren't asking for the Moon here. Because the price tag is reasonable, they can probably cobble together some Federal grants to help fund it. To note, this also ties into Wisconsin's Hiawatha upgrade project. So Wisconsin and Illinois' share of the project will come from those upgrades (A couple of new sidings for 2 extras Hiawatha trips).

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

I'd just note that there is no funding lined up for the Hiawatha upgrades either at this point. If IL and WI commit to funding the improvements necessary to add 3 more Hiawathas (going from 7 to 10 per day) then, yeah, that'd help the proposed CHI-MSP train as well.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

A couple of new articles came out over the past few days about the potential new train including this one: http://www.waow.com/story/36286536/2017/09/04/possibility-of-second-amtrak-train-coming-through-la-crosse

It claims that the train could potentially start operation as early as 2020.

Nice little article, thanks.

But I quibble with your paraphrase that someone claims the train could potentially start as early as 2020. The Minnesota rail planner actually said, "If everything lined up perfectly and funding was available and we could reach agreements with the railroads, the best case scenario ... " That's a lot of qualifying "ifs" between 2017 and 2020.

Things could move fast if the Wisconsin state government and/or the one in D.C. came under new management. But I don't think the current owners will be having that.