Why would there be a stop at an air museum?

To attract more ridership.

Set your VCRs/DVRs or get online at www.wkyc.com at 7 p.m. tonight!

 

what the hell is a VCR?  :wtf:  :-)

I was looking at the maps KJP posted above and I'm a little curious. Other than the population density, what is the advantage of going through Springfield, Dayton, and Middletown? It seems to me that if we're considering all the options of getting between the 3-Cs, why do we assume that the route has to go through Dayton? Just looking quickly at a map, there's a couple of more direct rail routes between Columbus and Cincinatti. Have these already been looked at and ruled out already?

Set your VCRs/DVRs or get online at www.wkyc.com at 7 p.m. tonight!

 

what the hell is a VCR?  :wtf:  :-)

 

You wish you were that young. ;)

young enough that the last time I touched a VHS tape was to take it somewhere to be converted to a dvd.  :lol:

As to the Dayton issue, the general answer has been that the 3C's can't actually get this done with support of the Dayton area. Toss in the fact that the Cincy-Dayton section could end up being one of the most used parts of the system. I do wonder if a direct Cincy-Cbus could be wrapped into some sort of bail-out for Wilmington. Can box sorters build rail lines?

I was looking at the maps KJP posted above and I'm a little curious. Other than the population density, what is the advantage of going through Springfield, Dayton, and Middletown? It seems to me that if we're considering all the options of getting between the 3-Cs, why do we assume that the route has to go through Dayton? Just looking quickly at a map, there's a couple of more direct rail routes between Columbus and Cincinatti. Have these already been looked at and ruled out already?

 

Population is the biggest reason. The other is that the alternative route, CSX's Midland Subdivision and leased by the Indiana & Ohio RR, probably needs more upgrading and isn't that much shorter than the main route through Dayton. The Dayton route is a mainline railroad and in excellent condition. It's always been the main route between Columbus and Cincinnati (Pennsylvania RR's line through Xenia south to Cincinnati was the third option but most of it is gone).

 

The Midland Sub is used by only a couple of freight trains per day and is only slightly shorter than the main route through Dayton (125 miles vs. 118 miles). From my awareness of it, this is not a bad route condition-wise. A passenger train might be able to safely operate at 40-60 mph on this corridor, depending on the length of circuits for flashers/gates at road crossings. It also lacks an automatic rail traffic control system, but that's not a big deal since either route option will need to have a Postitive Control System added to conform to a new federal law.

 

However the Midland Sub will probably need to be resurfaced with some tie renewal and possibly the replacement any worn rail. There will also need to be some passing sidings added since it's all single track, but a siding or two may be necessary for the single-track portion of the Dayton route between Dayton and Columbus, as well.

 

So the short version is, past studies (in 1984) showed the Midland Sub route would save a little bit on operating costs with a slightly shorter route, but that savings were wiped out by a greater drop in passenger revenues because the population via the Midland Sub was so much less.

Trust me, Dayton and the immediate area will be a player in the 3-C start-up and Ohio Hub systems.

Video and story is available here:

 

http://www.wkyc.com/news/local/news_article.aspx?storyid=106582&catid=45

 

'Focus:' High-speed rail suddenly on fast track for Cleveland

Updated: 2/4/2009 7:42:44 PM  Posted: 2/4/2009 4:44:08 PM

 

CLEVELAND -- After years of discussions, plans, and strategy sessions, a plan to provide passenger rail service from Cleveland to Columbus and Cincinnati seems to finally be on the fast track with a high-tech, high-speed rail soon to follow.

 

....

 

 

Here's the video, with the best part at the end -- a poll showing 64 percent would use passenger rail in the 3-C Corridor. There's your consensus, Congressman Sawyer. Once again, the people are ahead of the politicians....

 

http://www.wkyc.com/video/default.aspx?maven_playerId=articleplayer&maven_referralPlaylistId=playlist&maven_referralObject=1021905152

how about a chicago-pittsburgh line for some toledo-cle action?

Here's the video, with the best part at the end..

 

Are you sure that's the best part? I would've said a starring role for a certain KJP .. :-D

 

But yeah, here's hoping this happens already.

Oddly enought there isn't much discussion about 3C in Dayton.  Instead the focus of local rail-talk is on a streetcar between donwtown and the University of Dayton/Miami Valley Hospital (our little "pill hill")/Fairgrounds area south of the downtown.  The concept is (maybe) to develop this corridor (to the city limits w. suburban Oakwood) as an expanded downtown on a N-S axis.

 

Interestingly, the 3-C line would pass right through this area (going E-W)

 

 

Great video!

I have to agree UncleRando, that was a good video.

Actually, an excellent piece of work.  Rare to see such depth and detail from a TV news report.... good video, interviews that supported the story (I especially liked the interviews with the RTA Rapid riders), a good balance of views.... even the skeptical Cong. Sawyer didn't sound like a die-hard idealogue.

Great video.  The reporter was actually knowledgeable for once.  Impressive. 

Nice job KJP!!!

I was looking at the maps KJP posted above and I'm a little curious. Other than the population density, what is the advantage of going through Springfield, Dayton, and Middletown? It seems to me that if we're considering all the options of getting between the 3-Cs, why do we assume that the route has to go through Dayton? Just looking quickly at a map, there's a couple of more direct rail routes between Columbus and Cincinatti. Have these already been looked at and ruled out already?

 

Population is the biggest reason. The other is that the alternative route, CSX's Midland Subdivision and leased by the Indiana & Ohio RR, probably needs more upgrading and isn't that much shorter than the main route through Dayton. The Dayton route is a mainline railroad and in excellent condition. It's always been the main route between Columbus and Cincinnati (Pennsylvania RR's line through Xenia south to Cincinnati was the third option but most of it is gone).

 

The Midland Sub is used by only a couple of freight trains per day and is only slightly shorter than the main route through Dayton (125 miles vs. 118 miles). From my awareness of it, this is not a bad route condition-wise. A passenger train might be able to safely operate at 40-60 mph on this corridor, depending on the length of circuits for flashers/gates at road crossings. It also lacks an automatic rail traffic control system, but that's not a big deal since either route option will need to have a Postitive Control System added to conform to a new federal law.

 

However the Midland Sub will probably need to be resurfaced with some tie renewal and possibly the replacement any worn rail. There will also need to be some passing sidings added since it's all single track, but a siding or two may be necessary for the single-track portion of the Dayton route between Dayton and Columbus, as well.

 

So the short version is, past studies (in 1984) showed the Midland Sub route would save a little bit on operating costs with a slightly shorter route, but that savings were wiped out by a greater drop in passenger revenues because the population via the Midland Sub was so much less.

Thanks, I assumed this had been thought out already, but I hadn't seen it before. I do agree that it makes more sense to take the route with the highest density of potential passengers. For the same reason, I'd like to see the Akron route, though I understand the issues that will probably prevent that from happening.

I like KJP's quote in the story.... "a low-mileage lifestyle".

Great video!  They also had a segment on the early news this morning (don't ask why I was up at 5:30am).  It's really nice to start seeing rail travel gaining momentum in the public eye.

I like KJP's quote in the story.... "a low-mileage lifestyle".

 

Thanks, but I rightfully stole that from someone else but I can't remember who.

How fast are the 3C trains going to travel?  I don't think it will work if its standard Amtrack speeds of avg. travel speed 79mph.  Now, sustained 110mph or above would garner respect and ridership.

 

I can't wait to ride my bike to the bus, ride the bus to the train station, take my bike on the train to Columbus or Cincinnati (from Dayton and in half the time as a car), and then ride around Columbus/Cincinnati on my bike/bus/streetcar.  How sweet would that be!?

^ in the video they said 80 mph, but having "regular" service like that is a stepping stone for "true" high speed rail. 

 

 

You nailed it CincyinDC. The 3-C service sets the table for more and faster trains and, if the experience is anything like what has happened in other states, popular demand will drive those upgrades.

^ so has any of the players in 3-C, Ohio Hub, or MWHSR gone to Europe or Japan to glean ideas on implementation?  Most of the cities who are working on getting streetcars really like the field trips to Portland.  Anything similar with intercity rail going on? 

Very difficult for any government agencies to do (like the ORDC) given tight budgets. A few advocacy groups like the Midwest High Speed Rail Association have gone overseas recently (Spain). 

 

But the ones who really need to go "over there" are the legislators, civic and business leaders who still don't get what high-quality passenger rail service can do.  It doesn't do much good for the "converted" to ride the Eurostart or the TGV .... much as I would love to make the trip.

 

Implementing conventional or high-speed rail isn't the problem. The problem is building the political will to get it underway.  The fact that the current stimulus bill allocates funding for transportation at a 3 to 1 ratio of highways over rail tells me we still have miles to go before we ride the rails.

How fast are the 3C trains going to travel? I don't think it will work if its standard Amtrack speeds of avg. travel speed 79mph. Now, sustained 110mph or above would garner respect and ridership.

 

Please see my post at:

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,18328.msg363440.html#msg363440

It is worth noting that most of the world has done just fine without high speed rail and continues to use rail for passenger traffic. It would great to have someday, but having something will help first.

Or that no high-speed rail project was built without a conventional-speed precedent that had already been operating. In fact, it was the over-popularity and political constituency created by it which allowed elected officials to the heavy political lifting necessary to start asking for billions in taxpayer funding without fear of losing their jobs.

 

California is only our latest example of this evolutionary process. Creationism has never worked in transportation.

How fast are the 3C trains going to travel? I don't think it will work if its standard Amtrack speeds of avg. travel speed 79mph. Now, sustained 110mph or above would garner respect and ridership.

 

Please see my post at:

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,18328.msg363440.html#msg363440

 

Thank you KJP.  Your contributions are greatly appreciated.

You're welcome. That ranking of the top four attributes desired of passenger rail service obviously isn't the same for everyone. For some, speed is at the top of their list of what they want when they travel.

^---"Implementing conventional or high-speed rail isn't the problem. The problem is building the political will to get it underway."

 

    Indeed, the technology is available, and we have the money. However, we spend the money on other things, such as freeways.

 

    The technical and operation challenges that we fret over so much on this board are solvable. I can't say the same of the political issues.

 

 

Implementing conventional or high-speed rail isn't the problem. The problem is building the political will to get it underway. The fact that the current stimulus bill allocates funding for transportation at a 3 to 1 ratio of highways over rail tells me we still have miles to go before we ride the rails.

 

What are you gonna do when, even on the local level, the major newspaper of city with Ohio's only rail transit system (the Plain Dealer in Cleveland), advocates on it's infrastructure "wish list" all roadway projects, including the much desired (and stupid) Opportunity Corridor freeway?

In the very near future, this will be what the train to Columbus looks like...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bym9Zds93rA

 

lol

I sure hope not! Then the people who designed the reservations system should be fired! :-D

I would say he should be tried for negligent homicide.  I just hope that train doesn't go around any curves, did you see all the people BETWEEN the cars?

I would say he should be tried for negligent homicide. I just hope that train doesn't go around any curves, did you see all the people BETWEEN the cars?

 

lol

Big news on the stimulus! Read about it at: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,14971.0.html

And then there's this article. Both of which show we have a lot of educating to do, specifically noting that highways and aviation are subsidized below the wheel (ie: publicly funded infrastructure, privately funded operations) while passenger trains are subsidized above the rail (ie: publicly funded operations, privately funded infrastructure).....

 

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090213/NEWS24/902130352

 

Article published February 13, 2009

Lawmakers skeptical of 'Three C's' passenger rail

By JIM PROVANCE

BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU CHIEF

 

COLUMBUS - Gov. Ted Strickland's plan to aggressively pursue restoration of passenger rail service between Cincinnati, Columbus, and Cleveland drew skepticism yesterday from lawmakers who have his $54.7 billion budget proposal in their hands.

 

"I want to see a very high priority given on [road] infrastructure before I am of the opinion that rail, as far as passengers, is something that is going to be beneficial to the state," Rep. Cheryl Grossman, a suburban Columbus Republican, told Ohio's new transportation director, Jolene Molitoris.

 

"From the information that I've been able to obtain, every rail system in this country is subsidized with the exception of two," she said. "If that's not a huge red flag … I don't know what is."

 

.....

KJP, question you may know the answer to... assuming this gets moving, where do the $'s come from for building new stations at the proposed stops?  Will there be money provided, will it be left up completely to the local community, etc.?

I'd like to know where Cincinnati's station (or main station) would be located?

McCleveland, if federal stimulus funding is tapped for this project, and given that $9.3 billion in federal funding covering 100 percent of a project's cost will be available for passenger rail, it is possible that local funding may not be necessary for this specific project.

 

We're just now learning the who/what/when/where/why details of the stimulus funding for rail. It appears that the $8 billion pot of money for high speed/passenger rail will be available for projects until Sept 30, 2012! However, a plan for how each state or other applicants will use the money will have to be submitted much earlier -- like in the next 60-120 days. After which the environmental planning work can be conducted to make the project "shovel ready."

 

As for Cincinnati's station, the city conducted a study a couple of years ago which recommended the station should be in the Longworth Hall area.

I would like to ask these representatives how the interstate system got built in the first place, private investment? So, in a fair market place, road and rail would both compete for the customers dollars. When you simply spend billions on interstates, how would that be any different if we built a nationwide high-speed rail network? How can rail compete in a market where one product is controlled and the other is expected not to be?

 

In a free market (which we seem to be forgetting) for the customer:

Road: Purchase of a vehicle $$$, maintenance of vehicle $-$$, toll/maintenance fee(all roads, not just freeways) $-$$

Rail:Purchase of a ticket $-$$

 

I would argue, which the new ODOT head seems to do (YA!), that in our current system, all transit is subsidized, except for the turnpike(?). Am I alone on this concept?

Am I alone on this concept?

 

Not here you aren't.

Even the Turnpike benefits from subsidies, as it is not responsible for substantial costs that the private enterprise railroads before them were responsible for. Those include not having to pay property taxes on the rights of way (highways: government owned; railroads: privately owned); not having to pay market-rate interest on debt instruments for capital; not having to pay the profit margin mark-up on the cost of capital from private lenders; not having to pay taxes on bonds issued by private lenders; plus others I'm probably forgetting...

As to the roads situation and Blade article, it is really hard to underestimate how mad it makes Toledoans that they don't have a direct highway connection to Columbus. I think a promise to find a way to make 23 a better connector between Toledo and Columbus would be necessary to getting support from a lot state reps in the NW part of the state. For goodness sakes, Toledo has better connections to Lansing than Columbus.

Toledo & NW Ohio need to back Governor Strickland's request to funds the Programatic Environmental Impact Study (PEIS) of the Ohio Hub if they want to make a direct passenger rail connection to Columbus & Detroit, as well as better East-West service, happen.  Getting the PEIS completed and getting an official recognition from the Feds for the Ohio Hub means it goes from being a "plan" to a "project". 

EDITORIAL

Ohio: hub of it all?

Restoring passenger-train service on 3-C corridor seen as one step in a bigger plan

Columbus Dispatch

Monday,  February 16, 2009 2:57 AM

 

 

The economics and politics of transportation form a Gordian knot. Not only to do cars, trucks, planes, trains and ships compete with each other, but each mode of transport receives some degree of state and federal subsidies, obscuring and altering the effect of market forces that normally would signal appropriate transportation investment.

 

But to the extent that market forces can be foreseen, railroads might be looking at their best chance at resurgence in decades.

 

.....

 

http://dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2009/02/16/RAILed.ART_ART_02-16-09_A8_6NCSVC3.html?sid=101