With Superliners in apparently short supply, why use them here?
St. Paul, Milwaukee, Chicago (TCMC) second daily service
- Thread starter MARC Rider
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
That last picture threw me for a loop* because I figured out quickly that it was Chicago but there's no exposed platforms at CUS. Until I looked up that the riverside building over those platforms opened in 1983. That view didn't last much longer after that photo was taken!
*pun intended, even though the Loop is across the river.
ETA: response to post 128.
*pun intended, even though the Loop is across the river.
ETA: response to post 128.
The route would be the same route between Duluth and the Twin Cities.
MikefromCrete
Engineer
According to Trains News Wire, this three Superliner with one business car was run as a salute to CP and its top train handling rating. CP employees and families were invited to ride it. I doubt if there was any "road testing" involved.
Thanks to @jis for reporting from RailNation Meridian in another thread: Amtrak seems to be saying that the TCMC/second train won't actually be starting until 2024, if I read the post right. I know that this "delay" (at least from what was promised at some time) will disappoint a *lot* of people in the Twin Cities especially, but I guess I'd rather they do it right and have their ducks in a row before beginning the service. Hoping for more official updates soon, regardless.
Many may have seen this elsewhere, but we've finally received an official update on the status of the Chicago-Twin Cities second daily train: The service will begin sometime in 2024, according to both MnDOT and WisDOT. Of course, they offer no guarantees. Also, the construction timeline for the connected rail infrastructure improvements has been pushed out a year, from 2023-2025 to '24-'26. (WisDOT's landing page still shows the old dates). Clearly they couldn't get things together for 2023, which somewhat makes sense given the level of coordination needed between three state DOTs and everyone else, but in my opinion those at DOTs, Amtrak, etc., however excited, should have not mentioned and danglged the 2023 start date. At least in the Twin Cities, this perceived "delay" (I've mentioned elsewhere in the thread that the original plan was for service to start in '24/'25) is going to frustrate people. At worst, it will add to the perception of "Amtrak is dumb, this is never happening" that I've seen on social media. Ah well!
Here's the updated info, with identical language on WisDOT's website; bolding mine:
"We are working to implement additional Amtrak service along the Twin Cities – Milwaukee – Chicago corridor. This service expansion involves partnership agreements among the Federal Railroad Administration, the state DOTs, host railroads, and Amtrak. The partnership agreements are moving forward. When all the elements have been finalized between the parties, the schedules, fares, start date and official name of the train service will be jointly announced. We expect this service announcement in 2024. Thank you for your interest in this service expansion. We look forward to serving our passengers.
Here's the link to the MnDOT landing page for the TCMC, which includes the updated language about the planned start year. To me, the inclusion of the wording "official name" points to the potential for, as I heard at the most recent Great River Rail Commission meeting, the service to NOT use the "Great River" name that Amtrak selected. The MnDOT representative at the September GRRC meeting seemed to say that there was a lack of agreement on the name, and I feel that if they'd actually decided on using the name Great River, they may have at least added it to the website by now.
Here's the updated info, with identical language on WisDOT's website; bolding mine:
"We are working to implement additional Amtrak service along the Twin Cities – Milwaukee – Chicago corridor. This service expansion involves partnership agreements among the Federal Railroad Administration, the state DOTs, host railroads, and Amtrak. The partnership agreements are moving forward. When all the elements have been finalized between the parties, the schedules, fares, start date and official name of the train service will be jointly announced. We expect this service announcement in 2024. Thank you for your interest in this service expansion. We look forward to serving our passengers.
Here's the link to the MnDOT landing page for the TCMC, which includes the updated language about the planned start year. To me, the inclusion of the wording "official name" points to the potential for, as I heard at the most recent Great River Rail Commission meeting, the service to NOT use the "Great River" name that Amtrak selected. The MnDOT representative at the September GRRC meeting seemed to say that there was a lack of agreement on the name, and I feel that if they'd actually decided on using the name Great River, they may have at least added it to the website by now.
Kramerica
Service Attendant
At least that's good news about the name. Great River is a terrible name for a train that spends as much time near to Lake Michigan as it does the Great River. Calling this train some derivative of the Hiawatha is what makes the most sense.
Thanks for the update even if it's not quite yet the news we're hoping for.
Glad to see Great River doesn't seem likely to stick as the name. Less then 1/3 of the CHI-STP trip runs along the Mississippi. And while the strech of river Amtrak follows from LaCrosse to St Paul is a broad, major river with boats and barges, it's not what comes to mind when speaking of "life on the Mississippi" and river city culture. Twin Cities Hiawatha still sounds good to me but other good options are probably out there.
Glad to see Great River doesn't seem likely to stick as the name. Less then 1/3 of the CHI-STP trip runs along the Mississippi. And while the strech of river Amtrak follows from LaCrosse to St Paul is a broad, major river with boats and barges, it's not what comes to mind when speaking of "life on the Mississippi" and river city culture. Twin Cities Hiawatha still sounds good to me but other good options are probably out there.
Amtrak originally called the Pioneer the Columbia River Express. It was changed at the last-minute, avoiding squawks from the portions of the route that followed the Snake River or that had a Great Salt Lake.
Ironically, a MILW named train between Chicago and the Twin Cities was the Pioneer Ltd.
Last edited:
Yep, count me among those who are not fans of the Great River name. My preference has been for something along the lines of Twin Cities Hiawatha or Minnesota Hiawatha. I'm also not surprised that the startup date has slipped from 2023 to 2024. The talk about the actual startup date has seemed rather vague all along, with lots of perhapses and maybes and sometimes. Until I hear an actual startup date, I'll assume it remains quite a ways away.
Given the high failure rate of Charger locos and weekly cancellations of Milwaukee and Carbondale trains, and 2 car Quincy trains, all too often without cafe-business car, I don't see how they will run it at all. The 4 state consortium seems sound asleep with Amtrak's service failures.
Last edited:
Ha, glad to hear that I'm not the only one who doesn't love the Great River name. It did strike me as odd, given that it's not, to give a goofy example, a route that follows the Mississippi (to the extent possible) all the way from St. Paul to St. Louis. Now that route could certainly be called the Great River! 
I am also glad that the name hopefully won't stick! Of course, with Amtrak, nothing's a done deal until it finally, actually happens, so who knows. I agree with everyone who prefers the some derivative of the Hiawatha name. To me, it would make much more sense branding-wise (especially from the IL and WI perspective) as it will be an extension of an existing Hiawatha trip.
At least one person (who seems to be in the know) on the Empire Builder Facebook page claimed that the 'delay' is due to equipment issues in Chicago. This also doesn't surprise me, and it makes the most sense to me, as I know the DOTs--especially MN and WI's DOTs--are pretty anxious to get this going, and I would have been surprised if stuff on their end was the thing holding it up. (Again with the caveat that the FB poster may not know everything).
I am also glad that the name hopefully won't stick! Of course, with Amtrak, nothing's a done deal until it finally, actually happens, so who knows. I agree with everyone who prefers the some derivative of the Hiawatha name. To me, it would make much more sense branding-wise (especially from the IL and WI perspective) as it will be an extension of an existing Hiawatha trip.
At least one person (who seems to be in the know) on the Empire Builder Facebook page claimed that the 'delay' is due to equipment issues in Chicago. This also doesn't surprise me, and it makes the most sense to me, as I know the DOTs--especially MN and WI's DOTs--are pretty anxious to get this going, and I would have been surprised if stuff on their end was the thing holding it up. (Again with the caveat that the FB poster may not know everything).
TransitTyrant
Lead Service Attendant
For quite awhile both Wisconsin and Minnesota were saying the train could start in late 2023 possibly as a 3x weekly run. Wisconsin likely jumped the gun with announcing a September 2023 start seeing as all the service agreements are even signed yet.
Maybe call the train heading to St. Paul could be called the Twin Cities Limited and the train heading to Chicago could be called the Chicago Limited.
Yes, I remember those technically unofficial, yet officially communicated, announcements! I agree that Wisconsin really jumped the gun and was the primary reason the general public started thinking that fall 2023 when in reality, a few years ago the original start years were (at least from some MN sources) communicated as 2024 or even 2025. The funny thing to me is that a few social media rail advocate people broadcast the "September 2023 start" from those state of Wisconsin documents very, very widely, to the extent that someone renamed this new service's Wikipedia page to the "Great River service" and listed that WI source to claim it would start in September. I'm not a
It was both Wisconsin's "fault", and to some extent caused by the excited social media posts from advocacy groups in MN--not that I blame them for being excited. Under-promise and over-deliver should be the way of things when it comes to Amtrak, especially!
The North Star Hiawatha would be a good name!Why not revive the original Amtrak name for the Duluth service…The Arrowhead…or the later North Star?
I don't mind the idea of the Arrowhead, but seeing as that name referred specifically to the Arrowhead region of northeast Minnesota, of which Duluth is a part, it wouldn't fit as well. Unfortunately the North Star cannot be used (it would be an equal name to the TC Hiawatha, in my opinion) because the commuter rail service from Minneapolis to Big Lake, MN is called the Northstar. Would be far too confusing for MN people--and the Northstar has a terrible reputation in MN.Why not revive the original Amtrak name for the Duluth service…The Arrowhead…or the later North Star?
For those not from MN or who don't track commuter rail, the Northstar is a hugely frustrating project as it was meant to connect Minneapolis and St. Cloud, MN (one of the larger cities in rural MN), but for a variety of reasons, it was only built about halfway, to Big Lake. It always had low ridership even before COVID since it essentially ends in cornfields/a small town instead of the small metro it was intended to service, and due to its commuter focus and Metro Transit not bringing back much service until very recently, COVID has nearly killed it and revived calls to dismantle the service (which won't happen).
Why is everyone so obsessed with the name of the train ?
There may be a link. We sent Amtrak a list of proposed train names in 1976 as part of my work at ODOT, and as the Milwaukee Road wasn't using it, I included Pioneer Limited. I've always wondered if someone looked at the list or pulled it out of thin air.
I had a pleasant ride in coach on the CHI>MSP direction of the Pioneer Limited in 1967, connecting in St. Paul Union Station to the NP Mainstreeter. The attendant rented pillows to coach passengers for 50 cents (?). To the end, it was the premiere overnight train between Chicago and the Twin Cities. However, the Milwaukee's coach-only Fast Mail outlived all of the other night trains between those cities, as far as I know.
Last edited:
TransitTyrant
Lead Service Attendant
Listening to the WiSARP Zoom meeting didn’t provide much new information other than Lisa Stern of WisDOT put a lot of the blame at MNDOTs feet for the delayed rollout.
Ah, why am I not surprised that MnDOT is a large part of the cause. Did she mention anything specific that you remember? MnDOT (may as well still be called the Dept. of Highways, cough, cough) has a long history of slow-walking or active hostility towards anything intercity non-car transportation related. That, and MnDOT has never had enough staff capacity to do much beyond the bare minimum of rail planning, unfortunately.
- Status
