Passenger Trains > Current Hoosier State budget not sufficient: INDOT

Reported: INDOT says the $3 million budget is not acceptable to Amtrak
to run the Hoosier State; they need an extra $400,000 per year.

The State says there is no more money.

What was the number IP wanted to keep operating to the end of their contract?

Posted from iPhone

For this train, running this slow and infrequently, it just isn't worth it.

If the state were serious, it would end this operation, develop a plan for the engineering and construction necessary to operate the train in 3.5 hours or less Chicago-Indy, negotaite agreements wth all involved parties, and find the hundreds of millions necessary to inaugurate multiple daily frequencies.

Oh, well.

Perhaps the frequency could be reduced a bit, like to three days per week, by eliminating the lightest ridership day in each direction.  Another option would be to run the service biweekly, so that it fits into the Indiana budget scenario.

IF the Cardinal were to operate daily, instead of tri=weakly, which only makes sense, then Indiana could operate a different schedule, such as out of Chicago in the morning, back in the afternoon, with just one crew round trip.  They could do it all in 12 hours.  Surely that would save money from several angles (less personnel and housing), while providing a 2nd train on the corridor.

Maybe they can run the train just once a month, and put a dome car on it. Surely, this wouldn't cost too much, right?

Posted from Android

MEKoch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> IF the Cardinal were to operate daily, instead of
> tri=weakly, which only makes sense, then Indiana
> could operate a different schedule, such as out of
> Chicago in the morning, back in the afternoon,
> with just one crew round trip.  They could do it
> all in 12 hours.  Surely that would save money
> from several angles (less personnel and housing),
> while providing a 2nd train on the corridor.


Running it out of Indianapolis and back with one crew in one day didn't work, why would it work in reverse?

Why would Indiana fund jobs in another state?

Maybe the solution is to run three daily r/t buses for a year, and see if they can build up enough ridership to justify a (slower) train.

I really, really like riding passenger trains.

But even I would be more likely to take the bus than ride the Hoosier State between Chicago and Indianapolis. Once the dome car leaves the train, it will be a long and boring ride, arrving and departing Indy at miserable times.

I'm aware of Illinois studies for Chicago to Quad Cities and Chicago to Rockford. Both of these studies included discussion of infrastructure improvements need to bring train speeds up. I have not seen one for the Chicago to Indy service. If one has been completed, can someone provide a link?

As for why Indiana should support service to another state, NW Indiana is part of and benefits from the economic engine centered in Chicago.  

kevink Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As for why Indiana should support service to
> another state, NW Indiana is part of and benefits
> from the economic engine centered in Chicago.  


Not sure if this is in response to my post or not, and if it isn't, I apologize.

But I will take a moment to clarify either way. Why would Indiana fund the arrangement using Chicago workers instead of Indiana workers as MEKoch suggested? I remember a similar situation where Michigan demanded the crews work from a base in Michigan in order to get funding.

It is pretty clear the Indiana runs the Hoosier state only as an in-fill train for lack of a daily Cardinal. Therefore, in the very unlikely event the Cardinal went daily, the Hooiser State would likely be gone immediately.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is pretty clear the Indiana runs the Hoosier
> state only as an in-fill train for lack of a daily
> Cardinal. Therefore, in the very unlikely event
> the Cardinal went daily, the Hooiser State would
> likely be gone immediately.

If the Cardinal went to "no times" a week,  I doubt Indiana would finance an Indianapolis to Chicago train.  Or an Indy to Cincy train.

1976 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not sure if this is in response to my post or not,
> and if it isn't, I apologize.
>
> But I will take a moment to clarify either way.
> Why would Indiana fund the arrangement using
> Chicago workers instead of Indiana workers as
> MEKoch suggested? I remember a similar situation
> where Michigan demanded the crews work from a base
> in Michigan in order to get funding.

No apology needed. Perhaps Indiana could require the crews to live in NW Indiana. I have several coworkers that live in the region and commute downtown. It's a shame that so many potential corridors cross state lines as it seems to complicate the process of starting or expanding service.



 

Somehow I don't think Amtrak will create a crew board specifically for the Loosier State.

That's the only way you could do that, considering seniority and union contracts.

kevink Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No apology needed. Perhaps Indiana could require
> the crews to live in NW Indiana. I have several
> coworkers that live in the region and commute
> downtown. It's a shame that so many potential
> corridors cross state lines as it seems to
> complicate the process of starting or expanding
> service.
>
>
>
>  

So the partners, State of Indiana and online Cities, have agreed to pay $283,587/month for the service.

The new NRPC contract for 2017 shows the 2016 numbers that were renegotiated and the projected 2017 numbers.

Back when IPH provided the train, maintenance, and OBS; NRPC was only supposed to get $202,564/month, including the much inflated deadhead fee of $29,833/month ($9000 would have been reasonable) and mechanical rider fee.

The funding in place should have left $60,000/month + extra business class revenue for IPH after fuel, but this was not so it would seem.

I still think a way could have been figured out to monitor be remote telemetry Pin 10 on the MU of trailing locomotives back to the forward cab to avoid the mechanical deadhead fee, was this only for wheel-slip protection as reported elsewhere?

Now NRPC wants $311,065/month to operate the entire service, a deficit of $27,478/month against funding, about $330k/year, so I suppose the service will be downgraded or crew arrangements changed. Can anybody see anything else happening?

Why couldn't NRPC have partnered more to make this a success say by allowing 6 or 7 day a week service with the equipment, IND to CHI, perhaps sans the IPH locomotive on Cardinal days?



 



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 03/25/17 18:52 by District.

Clip of the budget.

 

---

That mechanical rider only went from Beech Grove to Chicago and return to Beech Grove twice a week. One of those trips was to take Beech Grove deadhead equipment to Chicago and back. $15,000 seems like a price gouge. And $29,000 to deadhead the IPH equipment? North on Mondays and south on Tuesdays.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/25/17 18:40 by AmHog.

Amtrak was certainly the winner with IP equipment on the line. Huge fees for the two backhauls each week (one each direction) and mechanical support and since Amtrak refused to use the IP Hoosier State for their equipment moves (credited on the spreadsheet above) IP was working on leftovers.

Now the fees get shifted around and the train costs more per month than it did with IP equipment? A good illustration that IP was not getting what their equipment was worth.