Join the discussion on the following article:
Minnesota, Wisconsin talking about a St. Paul ‘Hiawatha’
Actually, that consist in no way resembles what an extended Hiawatha would look like. It would likely be entirely Horizons, as Wisconsin sent back the Talgos (which are now sitting in Seattle) and neither Wisconsin nor Minnesota is part of the Nippon Sharyo bilevel order.
Would love to see this happen!..but it never will.
The sad fact that is if it does get off the ground it is still a pathetic 3 to 4 year process. The plus side is this corridor seems doable or at least should attract interest for non-Amtrak operator which I suspect makes Wisconsin administration interested. Thinking FL killing Tampa HSR but pretty much backing or at least siding with All Abroad over south Florida nimbyism
Better yet, Minnesota should look as this as part of the proposed service to Duluth. Offers run through in Minneapolis with Northstar commuter service connection as well as another connection to light rail. Or least look at service that at least makes one more stop into Minneapolis so you get a direct connection with Northstar
Why not buy the tow Tango units for this service?
What is there too Study for?? Too many Study’s takes too long.
Ohio has funded numerous passenger train studies for over 30 years - and we still don’t have Cleveland/Columbus/Dayton/Cincinnati Amtrak service.
One problem for both the Ohio service and the Chicago-St Paul service is speed. It is significantly faster to drive. I would rather spend more up front to get a service that more people will use and require less subsidy down the road. This doesn’t necessarily mean high speed. A lot of time can be saved be eliminating the slow points. Then again, maybe the Hoosier State shows that a slow train will still attract riders if it has the proper amenities. I suggest offering both amenities and faster service.
I also agree with the suggestion of connecting with Northstar, light rail, and the proposed Duluth train. The more you can network the route with other routes, the higher your ridership will be.
I think we need another Kansas City-chicago train or even a train to Denver this would allow more people to travel through Kansas City.
As with the “3-C” (Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati) proposal that Ohio’s progressive governor Kasich (the good friend of “stop that train in its tracks” fame Gov. Walker) stopped, many passengers on any Hiawatha service extension, whether to Minneapolis and Duluth or not, would not ride end to end, but be using the intermediate stops, thus the matter of “high speed” is a non-issue. This was true even in the days when the Milw. Rd. ran what was in reality a “corridor service” between Chi.-Milw.-MSP, but that was 5-7 trains a day each way offering varying levels of speed, service, and stops.
Would someone please explain to me why it takes 3-4 years to get a second train started on a route that already has service, stations, and train servicing facilities? By the way, I am all for this as I am somewhat regular on Trains 7 - 8 MSP - CHI.
The issue on the Milw.-St.P. route is capacity, which Soo/CP single-tracked ASAP in 1984/5, having the Soo single track mindset, for better or worse. One old Milw. Rd. guy said it was done “with a vengeance.” So now, with some plans to return to the past, the issue comes full course, as it has so many times with other roads.
And BTW, the old bottlenecks remain, eg,. Tunnel City, the Miss. River bridges, etc. And CP runs its freights right through the Milw. station. How is that for progressive thinking?
I agree with Eliot. What on earth needs to be studied to add a round trip on an existing route, especially 18-24 months? Sounds like there are “consultants” involved, milking it for all it’s worth. As a native Chicagoan who now lives in Minneapolis, I’d welcome this additional train.
Any monies allocated for studies should be placed in a fund to be used to purchase any available passenger cars that are out there. IIRC aren’t there about 10-12 ex-ATSF cars stored in the Dallas area?
Here’s what needs to be studied: it’s CP’s railroad. They are not obligated to operate any more psgr trains. To do so will remove capacity for freight trains. At a minimum, CP must be made whole on their performance with an additional psgr train. To so determine requires some study.
Walker is not bright and lives in the past: cars are the end all and be all. Somehow public transit is a luxury and only losers use it. The campaign revealed his myopic vision and lack of creativity in problem solving. This extra run makes sense for all three states. I will be shocked it Walker endorses it.
Or consider a MSP, Eau Claire, Madison, Ohare, Chicago train? Straighter, faster than eight hour EB. How bout five? Then terminate most EBs in MSP.
The first study of the second train was released last summer. Go to http://www.dot.state.mn.us/passengerrail/mn-chicago-study.html for a copy of the study. It’s more complicated than you might think, and, yes, CP Rail was very involved in it. Their changing requirements made the stufy over a year late.
Another factor in all of this is the scheduling of this second train. I’m sure a lot of folks would like this second train to arrive in Chicago in time in order to be able to connect with the long distance trains going to the west coast ( California Zephyr , Southwest Chief ) & Texas ( Texas Eagle). This would mean this train would have to leave MSP anywhere from 3am to 5am in order to reach Chicago in time due to the current CP route taking 8 hours if all is well. Scheduling would also factor in coming back from Chicago from those trains and getting back to MSP.