I would love to take Amtrak to DC, but I don't want to go to Chicago to get there nor do I want to leave at 3:00 AM.  I wish the system was funded better.

I don't think you have to go to Chicago. I think there is line that leaves chicago and passes through Cincy, goes to DC and then on to NY. kind like a U. The problem is the darn timing. I would love to take the Amtrak to  Chicago from Cleve, but the times are terrible. I wish something could be done about that. I had not taken the Amtrak in years and took it twice this last week to go from Chicago to downstate Ill. it was terrific in every way from speed, cost, customer service and scenery. I loved it! I wish there could be some advocacy from customers to try and get more service in Cleveland to Chicago, or more important better departure times. W/o having read the previous 26 pages in this thread, I am guessing the bad OH service as something to do with all the auto and tire manufacturing in OH? The train was being used very heavily on both trips I took in Illinois. Maybe b/c it was spring break for a lot of people, but it was really nice to see.

^ I've looked into taking the Cardinal from DC to Cincinnati.  To say it's not convenient doesn't do the situation justice.  It's simply a joke.  The few rides I've taken from DC up the east coast corridor were very good. 

There is no earthly reasaon that the Cardinal should not be a daily train.  Cincy and Southern Ohio deserve better service.

I wish there could be some advocacy from customers to try and get more service in Cleveland to Chicago, or more important better departure times.

 

See www.allaboardohio.org

... I think there is line that leaves chicago and passes through Cincy, goes to DC ...

 

Cardinal (#50) departs Cincinnati 3:29a.m.Sunday, Wednesday and Friday, arrives Washington, D.C. at 5:55p.m.

 

Cardinal (#51) departs Washington, D.C. 11:10a.m. Sunday, Wednesday and Friday, arrives Cincinnati 1:03a.m.

 

You'd really have to want to ride a train to take that trip.

yes. Leaving or arriving in the middle of the night is BS. losing a nights sleep is enough to make me  want to skip the train.

 

 

Cardinal (#50) departs Cincinnati 3:29a.m.Sunday, Wednesday and Friday, arrives Washington, D.C. at 5:55p.m.

 

Cardinal (#51) departs Washington, D.C. 11:10a.m. Sunday, Wednesday and Friday, arrives Cincinnati 1:03a.m.

 

You'd really have to want to ride a train to take that trip.

 

not that I own a car anymore, but I can make the drive from DC to Cincinnati in 9 hours.  THEN I even have a car to drive myself around town with. 

the only time you need a car in DC is 10/11 PM to 5 AM.  Since the metro system isn't as reliable and taxis are a rip off.  Damn zones!!

^ you've not been following DC news.  Zones are about to go bye-bye and the cabbies are LIVID.  I've not had a problem with cabbies, and my neighborhood is notorious for the "I don't know where that is" excuse.  They generally don't want to take you here because it's not enough zones away and there are no pick-ups for a return trip back to Dupont Circle.  Read what this guy went through:  http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post.cgi?id=715

 

 

>You'd really have to want to ride a train to take that trip.

 

Part of the problem too is that someone has to drop you off and pick you up from Union Terminal in the middle of the night unless you take a cab, which adds to the cost.

 

It's about a 45 minute walk from either downtown or the UC area to Union Terminal, but that would not be a fun walk to make at 3am.  In fact I'd be worried about the police stopping you as you walk through prostitute-land. 

Well I'm one of the biggest rail advocates in Ohio and I think the Cardinal as it is presently operated is a joke. The only way to change that is for all of us start making a LOT of noise about the level of "service" Cincinnati gets. it won't change until we do that.

gee. it is almost as if it is set up for failure. ..I am not sure what makes it worse: whether it is intentional or unintentional. A disgrace, no matter.

And somehow, despite the lousy schedule, the Cardinal manages to draw around 19,000 passengers a year at CUT.  Imagine if it were a daily train on a decent schedule.  Amtrak should also consider a stop at Oxford to serve the Miami University area.

I'm in the pre $-spending phase of planning a trip to Germany.  Yes, apples and oranges, but let's see what the Volk who care about mobility have done.  I'm looking at taking a trip from Munich to Nuremberg.  According to http://bahn.de, I can spend 1 hour and 2 minutes getting there on a train.  According to http://maps.google.de, driving would be 1 hour and 47 minutes.  Which do you think I'll do?  ;)

 

 

this little town of 31,000 in central Illinois gets 3 trips a day to Chicago all during reasonable hours (ie 730 am to I think 9 in evening). Paid $16 a ticket for a 2.5 hour ride that would take about 3.25 hours to drive. It is no wonder they are getting the business.  Conspiracy we can't get a decent, affordable schedule to Chi or NY from Cleveland or Cincinnati? I think not. Granted the little town was literally built around the railroad, but still!

^ what little town in nowhere USA wasn't built on the RR? 

 

ok, the ones on rivers, but you get what I'm saying!  :)

 

 

true

Seriously, when I can take a quick, frequent, reliable train from CVG or DAY to visit friends and family, I'll be happy.  And if a train from DC to CUT were a good option, even better!

 

 

I am convinced for anything under 500 miles the train is more pleasant than flying and cetainly better than driving IF it is affordable . If I were retired and time was not so valuable, I would train it about anywhere I could.

this little town of 31,000 in central Illinois gets 3 trips a day to Chicago all during reasonable hours (ie 730 am to I think 9 in evening). Paid $16 a ticket for a 2.5 hour ride that would take about 3.25 hours to drive. It is no wonder they are getting the business.  Conspiracy we can't get a decent, affordable schedule to Chi or NY from Cleveland or Cincinnati? I think not. Granted the little town was literally built around the railroad, but still!

 

Illinois pays to support rail passenger service. That's one reason why this town has good service. There recently paid to add more service and ridership boomed. The same will happen here, once Ohio gets going.

 

Within the last month, the Governor asked Amtrak to do a 3-C Corridor route study at a cost of about $300,000. This will take about a year and will tell the state what it will cost to start service.

With all this business people have that takes them to Columbus (I have to say that is the only reason I have been thus far), it would be great to connect them all. I would just hope the price would be in a great range. As I mentioned I took a ride that would be about the distance of Columbus to Cleveland and it was 16 dollars. I hope they look at the impact of business as well. I think some companies may look at an Ohio city and feel it inefficient that you can only drive or fly. While the train may only take a little less time than driving, you can get a lot of work done if you choose. they have heavy duty outlets for electronic and commuters available at every seat. Frankly with all the security and the crumby airport locations, flying is a hassle too. 

I hate flying!

^ you've not been following DC news.  Zones are about to go bye-bye and the cabbies are LIVID.  I've not had a problem with cabbies, and my neighborhood is notorious for the "I don't know where that is" excuse.  They generally don't want to take you here because it's not enough zones away and there are no pick-ups for a return trip back to Dupont Circle.  Read what this guy went through:  http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post.cgi?id=715

 

 

 

Thank goodness and thanks for the tip.  I'm still pissed off about the $20 fare I paid to go from the Hyatt Regency on D street to Library of Congress.  :x :x  You get charged because we "called" for a taxi?  I was like WTF?  Then another charge because there were 3 of us.  I have never been "nickel-and-dimed" like that before.  I was so pissed I just threw a $20 at the bastard! :shoot: :shoot:

When I first read the initial paragraphs, my first thought was that they were going to say the Amtrak isn't viable and should be abandoned. I'm glad that they are recognizing that Amtrak needs its own dedicated tracking. It's unfortunate that it took so long and so much tax payer money to realize.

The study was sought by Sen. Lautenberg. He's always been a passenger rail supporter. So when he seeks information, it's usually to try to improve passenger train services.

AMTRAK FEASIBILITY STUDY OF PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE FROM QUAD CITIES TO IOWA CITY RELEASED:

railpace.com

 

A study conducted by Amtrak on behalf of the Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) concerning the feasibility of passenger rail service from the Quad Cities to Iowa City on a route originating at Chicago was released today at a news conference in Iowa City. Annual ridership on the full route is estimated at about 187,000 passengers, based on two daily round-trips and if improvements are made allowing maximum speeds of 79 mph.

read more at:

 

http://railpace.com/hotnews/

Excellent report by NBC on passenger trains, the proposed high-speed line between Chicago and Cleveland is also mentioned.

 

Video: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#24374101

Pretty well done!

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080509/NEWS11/805090371/-1/NEWS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article published May 9, 2008

 

Train day in Toledo aims to raise awareness

 

By DAVID PATCH

BLADE STAFF WRITER

 

 

Visitors to the National Train Day event tomorrow at Martin Luther King, Jr. Plaza will be able to enter drawings for Amtrak tickets, peruse exhibits detailing proposed passenger-train routes in the Toledo area, or watch miniature trains clickety-clack along model track.

 

What they won't be able to do during the event's hours, 11 a.m. to 7 p.m., is board a real train, much less ride one - unless one of the Amtrak trains scheduled to stop in Toledo overnight is seriously late.

 

Read more at the link above:

Yep, I'll be in Toodle-lee-doo tomorrow.

A great National Train Day in Toledo today.  Lots of great exhibits and an excellent program put on by All Aboard Ohio and TMACOG (the MPO). By mid-afternoon, I would say they had seen 700 to 800 people take tours of the Toledo Union Station and the exhibits.  Organizers got official resoultions from both the Toledo City Council and the Ohio Senate, as well as a rousing speech in support of passenger rail by Toledo Mayor Carty Finkbeiner. :clap: :clap:

 

KJP.... what did you think of the event?

I was impressed, especially since All Aboard Ohio's Toledo folks and TMACOG didn't start planning for it until late March. We need to do these in other Ohio cities next year.

A few Photos from National Train Day at Toledo Union Station (May 10, 2008)

I too was very impressed with the event and the turnout. Blown away was more like it. Way to go, Toledo!!! :clap:

May 9, 2008

Mica continues pursuit of “true” U.S. high speed rail

 

Offering public support for House Resolution H.R. 6003 at a press conference in Washington May 8, Rep. John L. Mica, ranking member of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, also is advancing H.R. 6004, "a bill to provide for competitive development and operation of high-speed rail corridor projects." Mica believes that that Amtrak is ill-equipped to provide adequate high speed rail options in the U.S.

 

http://www.railwayage.com/breaking_news.shtml

That's what I'm talkin about!!    Be BOLD!!      120-200 mph is a damn good start...

I'm asking a serious debate point question:

 

Would you rather have two 150-mph to 200-mph routes that are each 400 miles or less in length costing $70 billion total....

or

Fifty 90-mph to 110-mph routes of the same length or less for $35 billion?

 

For me, the answer is the latter. Experience shows that top speed isn't the biggest draw for passengers -- it's fares, choice of departure times and reliability.

It's an excellent point. Frankly, I think most people would be happy with a train, regardless of whether it runs at 80, 110 or 220 MPH.  They just want options.... convenient, frequent, reliable and at least faster than they can (legally) drive the same distance.

 

Note that I said "most people would be happy", but hopefully not "satisfied".  We should and must pursue better, faster options.... but the need for broader service demands that an incremental approach that brings passenger rail to the Ohio and the nation.

 

The rest of us got squat when Amtrak's Acela was started up in the Northeast Corridor.  The Acela is now 10 years old and Ohio has less service today.

^^I actually would agree with you on the latter!!!

To be fair, though, the Northeast Corridor has to be one of the most transit-friendly corridors in the country, no? It makes some sense to me to build the Acela line in this corridor since it would be supported by the traveling public.

 

That's not to say that transit infrastructure shouldn't be improved throughout the country. It's time for people to have better alternatives to driving. Our country needs to start doing something to get us off oil.

To be fair, though, the Northeast Corridor has to be one of the most transit-friendly corridors in the country, no? It makes some sense to me to build the Acela line in this corridor since it would be supported by the traveling public.

 

That's not to say that transit infrastructure shouldn't be improved throughout the country. It's time for people to have better alternatives to driving. Our country needs to start doing something to get us off oil.

 

the point is Amtrak used the Acela to get folks interested in travel by rail, but its budget, congress and partial mismanagement along with the viewed "favoritism" for those living between Boston and Washington, DC hasn't been pretty.

 

Amtrack cannot expand the Acela any further in the NE corridor due to infrastructure yet they could work with local governments/states to replicate the Acela service on city pairs with high enplanements.  i.e. Cleveland, St. Louis or Milwaukee to Chicago, via an Acela type service and connection to a regional rail "a la" Philly's Septa in NE Ohio with Cleveland being the hub.

http://www.rtands.com/breaking_news.shtml#Feature3-5-14

 

May 13, 2008

 

 

Amtrak to build station in New Buffalo, Mich.

 

Soon travel to the other side of Lake Michigan will be available in, perhaps, less than one hour from New Buffalo, Mich., according to local newspapers. An agreement has been reached to build an Amtrak passenger station beside the railroad's high-speed line at the lakefront in New Buffalo. There will be four daily non-stop trips to and from the Amtrak station in Chicago's loop.

 

Read more at the link above:

I'm asking a serious debate point question:

 

Would you rather have two 150-mph to 200-mph routes that are each 400 miles or less in length costing $70 billion total....

or

Fifty 90-mph to 110-mph routes of the same length or less for $35 billion?

 

For me, the answer is the latter. Experience shows that top speed isn't the biggest draw for passengers -- it's fares, choice of departure times and reliability.

 

Meanwhile, we'll be happy with our slow train while the rest of the industrialized countries are moving more than twice as fast as we are.  Right *now* Americans are more worried about fares due to the state of our economy.  When we get ourselves out of this mess, we don't want to be even further behind the global community, while even more substandard projects are pushed through the pipeline domestically.

 

Whenever less tax money goes to expanding roadways, we'll have more than enough to allocate towards rail projects.

Right *now* Americans are more worried about fares due to the state of our economy.

 

Actually, that's consistently been the case. Lower fares are typically the biggest ridership draw, with frequency of service second.

 

By the way, I love your forum name, Blue Line.

I agree with Blue Line.  I think we need to start out on a strong note.  We are already behind the rest of the industrialized world.  One, I really don't think anyone would ride the trains if the speeds were only nearing 100 mph tops.  People would probably much rather drive.  I just don't think you would have much of a selling point if you just started out slow.  Also, if we started out with just the slow trains at a cost of 35 billion dollars and people actually did ride them and then they desired to expand to faster trains at a cost of 70 billion dollars, then we would have spent 105 billion dollars, when we probably could have just spent 70 billion dollars. 

Hey, thanks very much.

 

It just worries me that we'll be thinking too much about the present and not enough about the future.  Passenger rail has  been a long time coming in making its return in the US.  I'd hope that what happens follows a smart model for implementation and reasonable pricing for the passenger.  Transit was never a profitable endeavor on its own.  Time will tell if a connection between our Nation's Capitol and our Nation's great global enterprise is in our best interest.  I sure hope it would be seen as such.

That sounds great in principle, but it's never been done that way. I know, you're going to tell me that, just because it's never been done that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Well, it has been tried -- numerous times. Never has a high-speed rail system of 125 mph or faster been built where there were no passenger trains before, or just a train or two a day. The reason is that is no foundation for it, in terms of political constituency, proof of potential ridership, available connecting transportation, reshaping of urban forms, etc. High-speed systems exist in other parts of the world as a result of evolution, not of creationism.

 

In California, where America's car-crazy lifestyle arguably got its start, ridership on trains that average less than 50 mph endpoint-to-endpoint was skyrocketing in the 1990s before gas prices did. The reason is that fares were low and frequent train services emerged from just a few trains a day. They now have 22 to 32 trains per day on the Capitol and Pacific Surfliner corridors where ridership on each line exceeds 1 million per year. Also, extensive Amtrak bus services to off-line cities were developed with state assistance and are coordinated with train schedules. In major cities, regional commuter rail services, light-rail lines and subways were developed and expanded, and share stations with the Amtrak services. This same thing has happened in Europe, UK, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, China, Malaysia, Vietnam, Brazil and so on.

 

If someone built high-speed rail without all the supportive foundations I wrote about earlier, it would be the first time this has happened in the history of world transportation. Maybe it can finally be done, but similar efforts in this country have all failed. Why? Impatience. Does it really have to happen in our lifetime in order for it to be worthwhile?

 

And your critique of spending $35 billion for a 90-110 mph rail passenger service as a duplication or waste of money is not valid. The reason is this conventional-speed system is complementary. Conventional speed trains make more station stops at more cities and towns along a route than a high-speed does, much the way a state or county highway often didn't get ripped out when the parallel Interstate was built. And consider the TGV system in France, only one-third of its route miles are on new, dedicated rights of way where trains reach or exceed 170 mph. The rest of the system uses 19th-century rail lines, many of which previously were upgraded to 100+ speeds for the old Trans-Europe Express network which preceded the TGV, ICE, AVE and other European high-speed trains. This interoperability of trains on new/old infrastructure is also why a steel-wheel on steel-rail system is superior to Maglev.

 

It's also another reason why you learn to crawl before you walk, and you learn to walk before you run when it comes to passenger rail. I know it's frustrating to consider how far behind we are. Visit Europe sometime, if you haven't already. When you see it in person, you realize how incredibly small the high-speed rail system is in Europe compared to the overall passenger rail network. It's just massive, and makes the high-speed rail system profitable. Seeing it in person will make you more frustrated AND more encouraged. Suddenly, it doesn't seem like some abstract idea. But it does take many decades to foster the conditions in which high speed rail will be profitable.

One could even say that one could spend most of one's life in Europe without ever using the high speed rail. Of course, Europeans have bought tons of tickets on airlines like Ryanair instead of taking the train. They also drive quite a bit or least enough to create American-style traffic jams in Southern Germany and in Italy near Florence and Rome.

Since this is a thread about "Re-thinking US Transportation Policy", it is worth noting here that one of the big handicaps standing in the way of passenger rail.... much less the dream of High-Speed Rail.... is the lack of a federal transportation policy toward this end.  It's been lacking for decades, but the current administration has taken advantage of that and raised the bar so high that even the remote prospect of federal funding for passenger rail projects that feature service at convetional speeds can't qualify.  They've done that with FTA "New Starts" funds for light rail and streetcars as well.

 

One of the results of this is that the general public (especially here in Ohio) has had few points of reference upon which to base what really good passenger rail and transit can be.  With that lack of reference, it's incredibly difficult for most people to even get their brains wrapped around the concept of true high-speed rail.  The impact of rising gasoline prices may be changing that dynamic somewhat,  but if the comments I hear are any indication, most people would be happy with almost any kind of off-the-shelf passenger service.  I've actually had a few people tell me "yeah, I'd love a French TGV here in the U.S.  But I need options right now or at least sooner than an HSR corridor can be selected, engineered, built and begin running trains."

 

 

Actually, Noozer, this is the Amtrak thread. The "Re-thinking US Transportation Policy" thread is down the hall and to your right.