Missouri River Runner to Omaha

[john charron]

Is amtrack, Kans, Missouri or Nebraska thininkg about extension of the Missouri river runner to Omaha on the Kansas Side this would provide a good cross link to the CZ an Sourthese Chief. and If they extend the Cardinal to St. Louis badkto the East Coast for Kansas and Nebrska

St. Louis now has a fine Intermodel station downtown with good Metrolink connections to the Interanationl air port every 12 Miniumtes. this would thicken uptraffic aonthe Runner and support a 3rd round trip thru Jeffersoncity which could help lawyers and legislators and consituantes to the Capitol or Supreme court.

Now the trains arrive to late in the day to get a days work done and you have to go to a hotel overnight. in Jeff City.

Then there is sercie to topeka and Denver.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Amtrak has been told most specifically that there are to be no more routes unfunded by the states. Despite that, Amtrak is talking about reorganizing the Sunset and Texas Eagle, extending the City of New Orleans to Orlando, sending a section of the Lake Shore Limited along the Broadway, sending sections of the Silver Service down the FEC, and sending the Cardinal out daily to St. Louis, not to mention resurrecting sleeper service on the former Twilight Shoreliner and other things.

And you ask if they are considering more?

 

[MJL]

I think it sounds like a great idea, but would depend on Missouri, Kansas, and/or Nebraska working together. Kansas right now is concentrating on the Oklahoma City / Wichita / Kansas City connection, so it's doubtful they would be able or willing to pitch in much for that.

Great idea, limited resources.

 

[Larry H.]

In an ideal world and one pre amtrak that probably worked great. I used to ride the Omaha train as far as Kansas City from St Louis years ago. Its a natural to provide access to the CZ from St. Louis without going though Chicago. But as been mentioned here recently too many still think everything revolves around Chicago.. I always say its probably because they don't have to spend upwards of an extra day or even hotel room to do so. Think of the wasted money and time a passenger has to spend to go from St. Louis and then back track to Omaha. If you could go directly it would be a godsend. However at the rate of new cars coming on line, and the old mind set of keeping trains to a minimum it probably couldn't even handle the actual demand for seats or rooms most of the time. That is another thing that has to change.. More cars should mean more paying customers. and quit using non revenue cars as an excuse to provide lousy limited service.

The through sleeper from St. Louis to New Orleans should be restored as well and that with the Omaha connection and possible CN to florida would open a whole world of possible travelers to Amtrak. I hope the slight improvements in positive thinking that seem to be seeping into Amtrak Think is not a temporary development. We have needed people who want to improve passengers comfort as well and access for a long time. Its about time!

 

[Larry H.]

I think it sounds like a great idea, but would depend on Missouri, Kansas, and/or Nebraska working together. Kansas right now is concentrating on the Oklahoma City / Wichita / Kansas City connection, so it's doubtful they would be able or willing to pitch in much for that.
Great idea, limited resources.

I'd rather they spent the 9 billion on restoring rail routes that really would greatly improve service to many parts of the country instead of speeding up lines that already are going the same place, even though an hour or so slower. Only people who live in major hubs now really benifit from amtrak. Most of the rest of us have almost no choices with out spending tons of time and money going out of our way when direct connections would be a real driver of improved passenger loads. Yes it takes money, what ever happened to that 850 billion that was going provide jobs and improve the economy.. Instead of perks for buying votes they could use it to really provide a network that works. And since union and government jobs appears the priority of this administration this idea should be right up their alley.

 

[afigg]

Amtrak has been told most specifically that there are to be no more routes unfunded by the states. Despite that, Amtrak is talking about reorganizing the Sunset and Texas Eagle, extending the City of New Orleans to Orlando, sending a section of the Lake Shore Limited along the Broadway, sending sections of the Silver Service down the FEC, and sending the Cardinal out daily to St. Louis, not to mention resurrecting sleeper service on the former Twilight Shoreliner and other things.And you ask if they are considering more?

Those are all established long distance trains which don't fall under the rule requiring state funding. If the reports & rumors are correct, then Amtrak is seriously looking at how to increase ridership and number of places served by the LD trains within the constraints of their current fleet equipment (and that being brought back into service with the stimulus money). If Amtrak can increase ridership and reach of the LD service without increasing cost more than the increase in revenue, then the improved fare box recovery & ridership numbers will put the LD service into a financially & politically healthier position.

Any Kansas City to Omaha expansion will have to be pushed and funded by the states involved, not Amtrak. However, the current mid-west "high" speed rail planning map is very Chicago hub focused. Other than the current KC to St. Louis route and the on shaky political ground 3C corridor in Ohio, all the lines head to Chicago. If Amtrak does eventually re-route the Cardinal to St. Louis that would create an active KC-St. Louis-Indianapolis corridor. If it is successful and the 3C service does indeed happen, that might provide a push towards extending the corridor line to Omaha, to create a east-west connecting route running from Omaha to KC to St. Louis to Indianapolis to Cincinnati to Cleveland so not everyone has to go through Chicago. But that is not in the current route map.

To start a KC to Omaha service, it could take 3 or 4 states to push for or agree to it, depending on the route & politics: MO, Iowa, NE, and KS. From what I can tell, MO is focused on the River Runner service and improving / adding new services towards Chicago and NE and Iowa are looking at new lines connecting Omaha to Des Moines to Chicago.

 

[Larry H.]

I guess I am dense, but if amtrak extended a train over several states why is that not long distance service? I think it is a huge mistake for all improvements in connections to be dependent on individual states having to pay. It defeats the whole concept of a national rail passenger system and makes the trains prisoner to state payments which is happening in several states now. Not a good way to run a railroad in my opinion. If the cardinal went to omaha wouldn't that be a long distance train?

 

[DaveKCMO]

amtrak has a new restriction: it cannot run operate any route less than 750 miles after 2013 (?) without a state subsidy. 750+ miles would equal long distance, regardless of the states served. service between KC and omaha would require operational funding from at least missouri, and probably nebraska and iowa, too... depending on the routing.

a missouri-sponsored route through st. joseph to omaha has been brought up in the missouri legislature before, but it never made it very far. priorities are the existing KC-STL route (which is on the national HSR map), then a STL to springfield/tulsa route (which was studied, then quickly shelved).

using the kansas development as a guide, if you want this route go out and find the political support for it. find advocates in the small cities on the route and have them have their mayors talk to their state/US reps to get the ball rolling. nothing will happen without legislative support at the state level. now that we have the prospect of dedicated federal funding for capital costs, however, the job is a lot easier.

 

[Larry H.]

With the government wanting to make every choice for not only the public but also the states, then it seems that they should be the ones to operate rail services. They are the ones who seem to be able to devise all manner of taxes to accomplish anything they want. With the mandates to the states for all kinds of educational, heath, environment, programs there is not a lot of extra money staying at the state level to pay for these things.

 

[jis]

I guess I am dense, but if amtrak extended a train over several states why is that not long distance service? I think it is a huge mistake for all improvements in connections to be dependent on individual states having to pay. It defeats the whole concept of a national rail passenger system and makes the trains prisoner to state payments which is happening in several states now. Not a good way to run a railroad in my opinion. If the cardinal went to omaha wouldn't that be a long distance train?

Consider asking you congressman that question. Maybe you will get an answer, maybe not.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Amtrak was mandated to do two things.

1) Thou Shalt Not Operate Train Service Less Than 750 Miles Without State Subsidy Unless It Is The Northeast Corridor.

2) Thou Shalt Not Start ANY New Train Service Without State Subsidy.

All of what Amtrak is talking about, if any of you have noticed, is extending or re-routing existing trains. Which is not technically starting a new train. So maybe it can fly under the radar.

Some of the problems the system are because of Amtrak's best efforts (or lack thereof.) But a hell of a lot of them are in spite of Amtrak's best efforts.

Some of the best parts in the system are because of Amtrak's best efforts. And a lot of them are in spite of Congress-puppeteering road-building lobbies best efforts.

For some of what you complain about, blame Amtrak by all means. For the rest of it, blame Congress, and blame the highway-building lobbies who would like nothing more than to kill the idea of reasonable high-speed rail. So long as we have trains, high speed rail is possible. To kill high speed rail, you must first kill Amtrak.

And it really is like that. Look at New Jersey. We just had a 25% fare increase for peak-period commuters. And- now listen to this- those of us who don't commute? Who use it for transportation in general? Well with the death of off-peak round trip tickets, we have a fare increase of between 43 and 67%. So where it used to cost me and my girlfriend $40 to go into New York round-trip, it will now cost us $58.75.

This represents nothing so much as Christie attempting to eliminate off-peak and weekend transit service. At which he will succeed. Why would he want to do this? Gee, I don't think his massive campaign contributions from highway construction have ANYTHING to do do with it at all. Not at alllll.

By the way, if any New Jersey or New York or Philly-area Pennsylvania residents are interested in signing a petition I am working on to double the state gas tax over a 6 month period and take all revenue proceedings and place them into restoring lost servicing and rescinding these fare increases, let me know. Better yet, if you are willing to vollunteer to go out and get signatures for it... Let me know that, too.

 

[bretton88]

Actually, a very interesting quirk in PRIAA was that it dropped the so called "condition 3" which was the prohibition of any new federally funded routes. So technically, it is possible for Amtrak to start up new routes that are over 750 miles if it wants. It no longer needs congressional approval to do so.

 

[Larry H.]

Amtrak was mandated to do two things.
1) Thou Shalt Not Operate Train Service Less Than 750 Miles Without State Subsidy Unless It Is The Northeast Corridor.

2) Thou Shalt Not Start ANY New Train Service Without State Subsidy.

All of what Amtrak is talking about, if any of you have noticed, is extending or re-routing existing trains. Which is not technically starting a new train. So maybe it can fly under the radar.

Some of the problems the system are because of Amtrak's best efforts (or lack thereof.) But a hell of a lot of them are in spite of Amtrak's best efforts.

Some of the best parts in the system are because of Amtrak's best efforts. And a lot of them are in spite of Congress-puppeteering road-building lobbies best efforts.

For some of what you complain about, blame Amtrak by all means. For the rest of it, blame Congress, and blame the highway-building lobbies who would like nothing more than to kill the idea of reasonable high-speed rail. So long as we have trains, high speed rail is possible. To kill high speed rail, you must first kill Amtrak.

And it really is like that. Look at New Jersey. We just had a 25% fare increase for peak-period commuters. And- now listen to this- those of us who don't commute? Who use it for transportation in general? Well with the death of off-peak round trip tickets, we have a fare increase of between 43 and 67%. So where it used to cost me and my girlfriend $40 to go into New York round-trip, it will now cost us $58.75.

This represents nothing so much as Christie attempting to eliminate off-peak and weekend transit service. At which he will succeed. Why would he want to do this? Gee, I don't think his massive campaign contributions from highway construction have ANYTHING to do do with it at all. Not at alllll.

By the way, if any New Jersey or New York or Philly-area Pennsylvania residents are interested in signing a petition I am working on to double the state gas tax over a 6 month period and take all revenue proceedings and place them into restoring lost servicing and rescinding these fare increases, let me know. Better yet, if you are willing to vollunteer to go out and get signatures for it... Let me know that, too.

I think you miss interpret when you read us as blaming only Amtrak..Amtrak unfortunately or fortunately depending on how you look at it is the whole concept government, states, congress people, buracrates, ect lumped together to give certain end results. That of course is the reason so many don't want government spreading into so many aspects of our lives, the track record at accomplishing real things for the public good with out screwing them up with favoritism or other personal interest is the reason so many or down on government attempting more controls of everyday life. It just doesn't work well in many cases. From now on when I say Amtrak just figure it mean all of the above, since it is.

Oh, and as usual, "Except in the Northwest Corridor" is typical congress speak, they get what they want while the rest of us be dammed.