City, County, and KC should step up to bridge the gap to $13m under the agreement that the second trip be express only.
- 3,235
I’m sure the oil and auto industry lobbied for the cuts.
Perhaps Jackson County would participate to include Lee's Summit and Independence service. The symbolism of an express passenger train clanging straight through Jeff City without stopping would be nice.addxb2 wrote: ↑Dec 14, 2021City, County, and KC should step up to bridge the gap to $13m under the agreement that the second trip be express only.
KC and STL already pay more than their “fair share” to MODOT and the state in the first place. Why should they also have to put in city funds for basic things the state is supposed to do like build new bridges and basic transit service.
- 1,868
They shouldn't, but the state is taking its money and blowing it on highways to nowhere regardless of what we do, so all that remains is whether we want to pay for more trains or not. Or a general strike.ldai_phs wrote: ↑Dec 14, 2021KC and STL already pay more than their “fair share” to MODOT and the state in the first place. Why should they also have to put in city funds for basic things the state is supposed to do like build new bridges and basic transit service.
They are expecting record revenue for this year/next year, the least the State Legislature could do is fully fund its current commitments.
I totally agree but I think we should prioritize having service over sticking it to the state.ldai_phs wrote:KC and STL already pay more than their “fair share” to MODOT and the state in the first place. Why should they also have to put in city funds for basic things the state is supposed to do like build new bridges and basic transit service.
In fact, I think it would be incredible if we could take Amtrak out of the states authority all together. Give it to a Governing Commission made up of KCATA and Bi-State. Set it into their budgets. Call it regional rail that’s operated by Amtrak.
St. Louis and KC may benefit the most from robust Amtrak service but there are plenty of stations between the two cities as well. And don’t forget the station in NE Missouri along the Chicago to KC alignment (though I don’t think that’s state funded).
Your Bi-State/KCATA idea is not a bad one…but Missouri should fu*king pay for what is mostly a statewide service.
Your Bi-State/KCATA idea is not a bad one…but Missouri should fu*king pay for what is mostly a statewide service.
Bummer that service is being cut, likely permanently, but it sort of makes sense to me. All the times I've been on the River Runner, the train is maybe around 50% full. And what do businesses do when business is slow? Cut the workforce. In the case of the state, they're cutting funding for something that doesn't reach the necessary ridership numbers to warrant a second daily train.
Now, I do think that usage of the River Runner would've been higher if the train went faster than driving and STL and KC had better transit systems to actually get you places without relying on a car or Uber. I feel that if STL can get the North-South MetroLink and a BRT line or two and KC can build the streetcar expansions and another BRT line or two, then we'd have enough of a transit network to drive car-optional lifestyles and visitors.
For now though, we'll have to deal with reduced service as a result of the state cutting funding. When that MODOT survey went out a few months ago, I put in there that I supported a third daily River Runner under the belief that it would help increase ridership. My idea knowing the situation right now is to move the single river runner towards the middle of the day, work with UP to somehow increase speeds/priority, and make good out of the situation in the hope of one day getting a second train back.
Now, I do think that usage of the River Runner would've been higher if the train went faster than driving and STL and KC had better transit systems to actually get you places without relying on a car or Uber. I feel that if STL can get the North-South MetroLink and a BRT line or two and KC can build the streetcar expansions and another BRT line or two, then we'd have enough of a transit network to drive car-optional lifestyles and visitors.
For now though, we'll have to deal with reduced service as a result of the state cutting funding. When that MODOT survey went out a few months ago, I put in there that I supported a third daily River Runner under the belief that it would help increase ridership. My idea knowing the situation right now is to move the single river runner towards the middle of the day, work with UP to somehow increase speeds/priority, and make good out of the situation in the hope of one day getting a second train back.
Public service isn’t meant to break even. It’s an investment in your people who in return create a diverse and flexible economy. The states inability to measure indirect returns from spending is the problem.
STL can choose to throw its hands up and shrink to the economy the state wants it to be… or it can link with KC and get what it deserves… a fast, frequent, and clean regional rail connection.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
STL can choose to throw its hands up and shrink to the economy the state wants it to be… or it can link with KC and get what it deserves… a fast, frequent, and clean regional rail connection.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 488
I agree with you that public service doesnt need to "break even"addxb2 wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021Public service isn’t meant to break even. It’s an investment in your people who in return create a diverse and flexible economy. The states inability to measure indirect returns from spending is the problem.
STL can choose to throw its hands up and shrink to the economy the state wants it to be… or it can link with KC and get what it deserves… a fast, frequent, and clean regional rail connection.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Point to agree with Chris though - it is a completely useless rail line. Its far slower than driving. People who need a transit option between these cities should be supported through a bus service which is far more convenient, faster and far less expensive to the residents of Missouri.
Im a huge rail fan and think its great, but rail shouldnt be run at an expensive cost just because people like me enjoy it. Rail between STL and KC SHOULD be awesome. Based on post 9/11 security (and KC's airport location) it is a great distance where flying doesnt make a ton of sense but driving also takes long. If this service was 3 hours between cities I think it'd be tremendously successful. Its basically at 6 hours now which is terrible. It should either be invested in or investments should be made in other places until there's a plan to make the train truly successful.
Bus service between STL/COMO/KC is also terrible and cutting rail service will do nothing to change that.
- 1,291
No way in hell I'd take a bus to KC over Amtrak or flying. Having the train connection in Warrensburg was so crucial to get back home here from school on breaks when car travel wasn't an option. Plus, it's a lot nicer than driving as you're able to relax for a few hours in the nice business class seats (coach isn't bad either), enjoying the complimentary beverage (if in business class), being able to buy food if I wanted, and being able to get up and move around. Can't do any of those things on a bus, and certainly not if you're driving.
The one time Amtrak had to bus us to STL because of flooding on the tracks was honestly pure torture.
The one time Amtrak had to bus us to STL because of flooding on the tracks was honestly pure torture.
Yeah I think something people haven't been paying attention to is how the pandemic decimated intercity bus service. Greyhound used to have buses leaving for Chicago from STL every hour or two, and now they just run 3 per day. Their service was never great, but I did used to use Greyhound a lot because it was by far the cheapest option.
Addxb2 expressed my thoughts exactly and why I put the question of St Louis and KC going in on supporting a 2nd round trip. Heck, will double down and why not a 3rd round trip express only between the two (maybe 3 wiht Jeff City) cities. It is interesting to note that a Montana group known a Big Sky Passenger Rail is trying to drum support for a county based transportation group to pursue and support reinstated Amtrak service through central ND and Southern Montana. So why not go out of the box instead of analogy of throwing up the arms?addxb2 wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021STL can choose to throw its hands up and shrink to the economy the state wants it to be… or it can link with KC and get what it deserves… a fast, frequent, and clean regional rail connection.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Another twist, considering that the port and business committed giving a Germain airline $5 million a year for the trice weekly flights. Why not reach out to the folks that own brightline and see what possibility of MO, St Louis, KC and Amtrak would entertain in terms of turning over River Runner to a private entity if they would run minimum twice daily and or even three times daily schedule. Would free up equipment for Amtrak and getting a five year commitment to show if a private public is viable option might go over well politically. I brought up Brightline group because you need something more substantial then Indiana poor attempt at it a few years back.
- 1,868
I can't remember the last time I was on the road and it was more than 50% full.
- 3,432
How much time would be saved if one train didn't stop anywhere between STL and KC like the train between London and Paris?chriss752 wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021Bummer that service is being cut, likely permanently, but it sort of makes sense to me. All the times I've been on the River Runner, the train is maybe around 50% full. And what do businesses do when business is slow? Cut the workforce. In the case of the state, they're cutting funding for something that doesn't reach the necessary ridership numbers to warrant a second daily train.
Now, I do think that usage of the River Runner would've been higher if the train went faster than driving and STL and KC had better transit systems to actually get you places without relying on a car or Uber. I feel that if STL can get the North-South MetroLink and a BRT line or two and KC can build the streetcar expansions and another BRT line or two, then we'd have enough of a transit network to drive car-optional lifestyles and visitors.
For now though, we'll have to deal with reduced service as a result of the state cutting funding. When that MODOT survey went out a few months ago, I put in there that I supported a third daily River Runner under the belief that it would help increase ridership. My idea knowing the situation right now is to move the single river runner towards the middle of the day, work with UP to somehow increase speeds/priority, and make good out of the situation in the hope of one day getting a second train back.
Also, unlike an airplane, 50% full or 100% full doesn't have much meaning since a train can add cars or subtract cars as demand requires, unlike a airplane. So how much would it cost to have 2 trains but with fewer cars each? Or 3 trains? Maybe 3 shorter trains with exceptional personal service would pay for itself.
Also, should Missouri consider a pure luxury vacation train? Maybe the Hoffman Family would start it. It's not the Canadian or Colorado Rockies, but it is a nice river view and could stop for short side trips in cute wine towns, the State Capital, and maybe a Katy bicycle ride like the one Viking offers on it's river boat rides in Europe. Or maybe a round trip luxury train/boat trip. One way Train. Return Boat. & vice versa.
Some trains are going the way of cruise ships -- not for getting from A to B, but for fun vacation travel. Viking doesn't price it's river trips to compete with airplane travel between Amsterdam and Budapest. It makes it a whole different ground-level experience. It's the journey. And folks will pay a lot more for that than whey would just an airplane seat.
- 1,868
I think the locomotives are pretty expensive.gary kreie wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021How much time would be saved if one train didn't stop anywhere between STL and KC like the train between London and Paris?chriss752 wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021Bummer that service is being cut, likely permanently, but it sort of makes sense to me. All the times I've been on the River Runner, the train is maybe around 50% full. And what do businesses do when business is slow? Cut the workforce. In the case of the state, they're cutting funding for something that doesn't reach the necessary ridership numbers to warrant a second daily train.
Now, I do think that usage of the River Runner would've been higher if the train went faster than driving and STL and KC had better transit systems to actually get you places without relying on a car or Uber. I feel that if STL can get the North-South MetroLink and a BRT line or two and KC can build the streetcar expansions and another BRT line or two, then we'd have enough of a transit network to drive car-optional lifestyles and visitors.
For now though, we'll have to deal with reduced service as a result of the state cutting funding. When that MODOT survey went out a few months ago, I put in there that I supported a third daily River Runner under the belief that it would help increase ridership. My idea knowing the situation right now is to move the single river runner towards the middle of the day, work with UP to somehow increase speeds/priority, and make good out of the situation in the hope of one day getting a second train back.
Also, unlike an airplane, 50% full or 100% full doesn't have much meaning since a train can add cars or subtract cars as demand requires, unlike a airplane. So how much would it cost to have 2 trains but with fewer cars each? Or 3 trains? Maybe 3 shorter trains with exceptional personal service would pay for itself.
The route is 283 miles, at 5.5hrs that implies an average speed of ~51mph. If we assume a nonstop trip at an avg speed of 70mph then that would suggest a trip time of 4 hours. 95mph could do the trip under 3 hours. Obviously there's some practical limitations due to traffic, acceleration, etc, but it seems like an express comparable to driving should be feasible using the River Runner route, without assuming anything too crazy. Maybe there's even a more efficient express route, I don't know anything about that.
I'm gonna miss Amtrak day trips to Hermann though.
- 6,123
The former Wabash route through Moberly is almost identical in length. (I think it's technically shorter, but only by a half a mile or so. For all intents and purposes they're the same.)
However . . . it's flatter, straighter, and less prone to flooding. It'd also be less expensive to upgrade to high speed service. And you could link it to Columbia much more easily if you don't mind a stop in Centralia. If you want to thumb your nose at Jeff City that'd be the way to do it. Link St. Louis and Kansas City and see if Columbia wants to go in on it. (A hundred fifty years after the fact. You know, now that they're finally admitting the place is kind of slightly a city. Sort of. Loosely.)
However . . . it's flatter, straighter, and less prone to flooding. It'd also be less expensive to upgrade to high speed service. And you could link it to Columbia much more easily if you don't mind a stop in Centralia. If you want to thumb your nose at Jeff City that'd be the way to do it. Link St. Louis and Kansas City and see if Columbia wants to go in on it. (A hundred fifty years after the fact. You know, now that they're finally admitting the place is kind of slightly a city. Sort of. Loosely.)
Regarding Brightline, they previously identified as STL-Chicago as a future "route of interest" a while back. There was an internal memo I found prior to their and the Florida East Coast Industries website redesign earlier this year that listed STL-Chicago as "Brightline 3" after the completion of Brightline West. So, they've been looking at this area, just they haven't included KC in the mixdredger wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021Addxb2 expressed my thoughts exactly and why I put the question of St Louis and KC going in on supporting a 2nd round trip. Heck, will double down and why not a 3rd round trip express only between the two (maybe 3 wiht Jeff City) cities. It is interesting to note that a Montana group known a Big Sky Passenger Rail is trying to drum support for a county based transportation group to pursue and support reinstated Amtrak service through central ND and Southern Montana. So why not go out of the box instead of analogy of throwing up the arms?
Another twist, considering that the port and business committed giving a Germain airline $5 million a year for the trice weekly flights. Why not reach out to the folks that own brightline and see what possibility of MO, St Louis, KC and Amtrak would entertain in terms of turning over River Runner to a private entity if they would run minimum twice daily and or even three times daily schedule. Would free up equipment for Amtrak and getting a five year commitment to show if a private public is viable option might go over well politically. I brought up Brightline group because you need something more substantial then Indiana poor attempt at it a few years back.
If we could have one express train daily between STL and KC with speeds of around 65-70mph consistently, I think you'd see increased ridership since it would cut travel time to about 4 hours (which is better than 5 and a half).gary kreie wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021How much time would be saved if one train didn't stop anywhere between STL and KC like the train between London and Paris?chriss752 wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021Bummer that service is being cut, likely permanently, but it sort of makes sense to me. All the times I've been on the River Runner, the train is maybe around 50% full. And what do businesses do when business is slow? Cut the workforce. In the case of the state, they're cutting funding for something that doesn't reach the necessary ridership numbers to warrant a second daily train.
Now, I do think that usage of the River Runner would've been higher if the train went faster than driving and STL and KC had better transit systems to actually get you places without relying on a car or Uber. I feel that if STL can get the North-South MetroLink and a BRT line or two and KC can build the streetcar expansions and another BRT line or two, then we'd have enough of a transit network to drive car-optional lifestyles and visitors.
For now though, we'll have to deal with reduced service as a result of the state cutting funding. When that MODOT survey went out a few months ago, I put in there that I supported a third daily River Runner under the belief that it would help increase ridership. My idea knowing the situation right now is to move the single river runner towards the middle of the day, work with UP to somehow increase speeds/priority, and make good out of the situation in the hope of one day getting a second train back.
Also, unlike an airplane, 50% full or 100% full doesn't have much meaning since a train can add cars or subtract cars as demand requires, unlike a airplane. So how much would it cost to have 2 trains but with fewer cars each? Or 3 trains? Maybe 3 shorter trains with exceptional personal service would pay for itself.
Also, should Missouri consider a pure luxury vacation train? Maybe the Hoffman Family would start it. It's not the Canadian or Colorado Rockies, but it is a nice river view and could stop for short side trips in cute wine towns, the State Capital, and maybe a Katy bicycle ride like the one Viking offers on it's river boat rides in Europe. Or maybe a round trip luxury train/boat trip. One way Train. Return Boat. & vice versa.
Some trains are going the way of cruise ships -- not for getting from A to B, but for fun vacation travel. Viking doesn't price it's river trips to compete with airplane travel between Amsterdam and Budapest. It makes it a whole different ground-level experience. It's the journey. And folks will pay a lot more for that than whey would just an airplane seat.
The problem with train length is really due to Union Pacific Rules and minimum axle counts. If Amtrak could revert back to the standard, 3 coach long River Runner trains, it would be better, but I don't think the extra, empty rail cars add much expense to operations.
I understand that public services aren't meant to break even, I'm just trying to play devil's advocate and take a different approach to the situation.addxb2 wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021Public service isn’t meant to break even. It’s an investment in your people who in return create a diverse and flexible economy. The states inability to measure indirect returns from spending is the problem.
STL can choose to throw its hands up and shrink to the economy the state wants it to be… or it can link with KC and get what it deserves… a fast, frequent, and clean regional rail connection.
It doesn't help that I don't have much faith in Amtrak. They focus a lot of their time and most of their money on the heavily used Northeast Corridor (which makes total sense) while all their other routes in the US rely on the individual states to back the system up. Coupled with reluctance from state legislators to act on giving passenger trains priority over freight in many states Amtrak runs through makes it even more difficult to see Amtrak really succeeding outside the Northeast.
For Missouri, and even Illinois, we have the potential to have a single, higher-speed line that actually makes people to want to take the train rather than drive or fly. KC-STL-Chicago are powerhouses in their own rights and would all benefit from the connections. But to have a good train service, we need more than federal and state money, we need private investment money and law changes to make it worthwhile. And maybe that means phasing out Amtrak for something better in the Midwest.
It's not a revolutionary idea, in fact it might be a very controversial idea to phase out Amtrak, but what do we really have to lose in thinking up alternatives and/or partnerships? Service is being cut, delays are common, the new rail cars have no defined launch date (so we're stuck with the old rail cars, which for first time train riders and those from outside the US is a pitiful representation of what train travel should be), ridership is hit or miss, and speeds are slow.
Politicians wanted Hyperloop and that will never happen because it's a ridiculously stupid idea with experimental technology. Rail is proven, just we need to rethink passenger rail.
Thanks Chris, forgot about their interest in CHI - STL. It makes sense as now you have a metro pair w +10 million, relatively flat & straight run w some pretty significant investment made already as well as a run mostly on UP tracks/operator familiar w dispatching passenger rail traffic. So some decent parallels to Brightline existing Florida East Coast run from Miami up to Palm Beach.chriss752 wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021Regarding Brightline, they previously identified as STL-Chicago as a future "route of interest" a while back. There was an internal memo I found prior to their and the Florida East Coast Industries website redesign earlier this year that listed STL-Chicago as "Brightline 3" after the completion of Brightline West. So, they've been looking at this area, just they haven't included KC in the mixdredger wrote: ↑Dec 15, 2021Addxb2 expressed my thoughts exactly and why I put the question of St Louis and KC going in on supporting a 2nd round trip. Heck, will double down and why not a 3rd round trip express only between the two (maybe 3 wiht Jeff City) cities. It is interesting to note that a Montana group known a Big Sky Passenger Rail is trying to drum support for a county based transportation group to pursue and support reinstated Amtrak service through central ND and Southern Montana. So why not go out of the box instead of analogy of throwing up the arms?
Another twist, considering that the port and business committed giving a Germain airline $5 million a year for the trice weekly flights. Why not reach out to the folks that own brightline and see what possibility of MO, St Louis, KC and Amtrak would entertain in terms of turning over River Runner to a private entity if they would run minimum twice daily and or even three times daily schedule. Would free up equipment for Amtrak and getting a five year commitment to show if a private public is viable option might go over well politically. I brought up Brightline group because you need something more substantial then Indiana poor attempt at it a few years back.
In that respect, it would interesting to think of a Brightline daily express run from Chi town, to St Louis to KC. Could see 8 hour run if you could get 110 in rural IL and 90 mph in rural MO. Doubt they would have much CHI to KC run through traffic base but with most of your traffic base doing CHI-STL and STL-KC city pairs you could see biz travel in morning, afternoon meetings and then return evening trips if Brightline could commit enough trainset & twice daily if I got my math right.