Ohio 3C corridor

[oltmannd]

I was reading a bit about the Ohio 3C corridor quick start plan. They plan on using the station in the convention center in Columbus. I was living in Columbus in 1979 when they were building it. Amtrak's National Limited was using an "Amshack" in the middle of town. The National was taken off before the Convention Center was completed. I suppose the station has been there, waiting for a train for the past 30 years. Talk about planning ahead!

[schlimm]

 Foresight to the Nth degree!  Here's a site with some info:

 http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Rail/Programs/passenger/3CisME/Pages/StationLocations.aspx

[dakotafred]

From a story I saw -- on either the Trains news wire or the BLE site, I forget which -- it looks as if the OhioDOT schedule makers are already looking at all-daylight service on this route. I wonder if they are not missing a bet, as is Amtrak in certain other corridors, by not trying for overnight business travel in sleepers.

I am a former Ohioan, and 50 years ago this service was comparatively strong in, say, the Cleveland-Chicago market after the daylight coach business had gone south. There were some businessmen back then who still liked their trains and arriving in their destination city able to do a full day of business.

 I wonder if this could not be attractive once again, given the overall unpleasantness of modern air travel. In markets such as Cleveland-Chicago's 341 miles ... or Cleveland-Cincinnati. It goes without saying there would have to be amenities ... like the lounge car the Nickel Plate Road had open for business a couple of hours before departure of its night trains.

Sleepers do a capacity business on most of Amtrak's long-distance routes. I just wonder if they are not worth another try in the overnight trade. You don't even need high speed when your customers are sleeping and you're going only 250-400 miles.

[schlimm]

It's an intriguing idea,  Sleeper train expenses are very high, however, with low loading per car, and higher crew expenses than coach.  But if it were business-oriented (and it would possibly save one hotel night), maybe the full costs could be covered by revenue through higher ticket prices.

[oltmannd]

dakotafred

There were some businessmen back then who still liked their trains and arriving in their destination city able to do a full day of business.

All you need to know about this can be found by reading some of the articles about the ridership of the Broadway and 20th Century in the late 50s and early 60s. These trains got crushed by propeller driven air service. A businessman will fly out in the evening (probably later than the train departs) and stay at a hotel if he needs to make an early AM appt. - all for less than the price of a ticket in a sleeper. And, he'll sleep better and have an easier time getting washed up...

[dakotafred]

Ah, but Oltmannd:

All we know about passenger trains, period, we learned the hard way in the late '50s and early '60s. That includes the daylight coach business.

Now, however, we're acting as if the passenger train can be reinvented in light of new, negative developments in the air and on the highway -- call it suspension of disbelief. I'm only suggesting overnight sleepers could be part of that, worth a look at least.

 Incidently, I don't think you'll find as many late-night flights in airline lineups as you did before the advent of spoke-and-wheel. 

[oltmannd]

dakotafred

Ah, but Oltmannd:

All we know about passenger trains, period, we learned the hard way in the late '50s and early '60s. That includes the daylight coach business.

Now, however, we're acting as if the passenger train can be reinvented in light of new, negative developments in the air and on the highway -- call it suspension of disbelief. I'm only suggesting overnight sleepers could be part of that, worth a look at least.

 Incidently, I don't think you'll find as many late-night flights in airline lineups as you did before the advent of spoke-and-wheel. 

Yes, there is a widening niche for trains that can make decent short - to medium haul trips along populated corridors, but I think low asset utilization and high cost of operation pretty much doom sleeper business travel.

[blue streak 1]

dakotafred

Incidently, I don't think you'll find as many late-night flights in airline lineups as you did before the advent of spoke-and-wheel. 

As a veteran of many late night flights --- What killed the night owl airline trips were ---

1. Same thing that killed many pass trains -- loss of short haul mail contracts. Went to trucks that operated at an earlier time.to be sortable for next day's delievery.

2. Fuel shortages and the resultant fuel cost rise tended airlines to go to day only trips. Jet fuel 9 cent gal before 1973 now about $1.60 + depending on fuel contract. 

3. Deregulation - Passengers did not want to travel at night for close to same basic fare. 

4. If a passenger did not show up his 2.2 bags were replaced by mail that actually paid better.

5. 4 Eastern Air Lines actually ran a hub & spoke system through Houston (arr 0130 dep 0400)  where passengers could not check bags. discontinued because of airbus A-300 parts availability and #3.

 

[schlimm]

Well whatever killed passenger trains in the 60's (IMO, mostly it was the railroads' own doing, like the SP), the unfortunate consequence for those of us who would like to see a viable corridor, etc. system in the future is rather bleak.  When polls are taken concerning support for HSR, etc., the results show at best lukewarm support.  Not too surprising when you consider that there are very few people under the age of 70 who experienced a decent rail network (pre-1960).  Most Americans have had no experience or have any idea of what good passenger service could be like, unless they are old or have traveled/lived in Europe or Japan.  When most Americans think about trains, the image is of a steam engine, a slow freight or maybe a graffiti-covered subway car.  So for many of them, suggesting riding the train as a serious travel option causes them to look at you in bewilderment or as though you are deranged or that you are engaging in nostalgia for the "good ol' days."   It is going to be a hard sell.

[dakotafred]

I agree with schlimm about a hard sell. It's going to take a lot of promotion and, more importantly, an acccumulation of good experiences by all those people unacquainted with rail. I take encouragement from positive developments like Chicago-St.Louis and Seattle-Portland (in addition to the NEC, which never lapsed).

 I remember it took a long time for the general public, as opposed to business and government travelers, to get used to thinking airplanes when it was time to take a trip. But catch on airplanes did, because they made sense at the time (and always will for a certain kind of trip). Trains catching on again will depend on their making sense to the public.

Those of us who never lost the faith think some of those 1950s and '60s trains could be running today if it hadn't been for factors such as loss of the mail and the general poor earnings of the industry as a whole. Plus outrageous taxation by every subdivision, outdated work rules and all the public money thrown at the competition. The revival model won't be encumbered by any of that ... BUT will require a sustained commitment from the states.

 Useful or not, popular or not, these new trains will require a subsidy. Will states like Ohio be up to it on a consistent basis? So their services don't have to live hand-to-mouth as Amtrak has? I think success will come down to that ... and that's a result I can live with.   

   

[oltmannd]

dakotafred

I agree with schlimm about a hard sell. It's going to take a lot of promotion and, more importantly, an acccumulation of good experiences by all those people unacquainted with rail. I take encouragement from positive developments like Chicago-St.Louis and Seattle-Portland (in addition to the NEC, which never lapsed).

 I remember it took a long time for the general public, as opposed to business and government travelers, to get used to thinking airplanes when it was time to take a trip. But catch on airplanes did, because they made sense at the time (and always will for a certain kind of trip). Trains catching on again will depend on their making sense to the public.

Those of us who never lost the faith think some of those 1950s and '60s trains could be running today if it hadn't been for factors such as loss of the mail and the general poor earnings of the industry as a whole. Plus outrageous taxation by every subdivision, outdated work rules and all the public money thrown at the competition. The revival model won't be encumbered by any of that ... BUT will require a sustained commitment from the states.

 Useful or not, popular or not, these new trains will require a subsidy. Will states like Ohio be up to it on a consistent basis? So their services don't have to live hand-to-mouth as Amtrak has? I think success will come down to that ... and that's a result I can live with.   

   

Maybe not so hard... Look a California, LA in particular. They went from nearly zero passenger rail (5 San Diegans and 3 LD trains) to a half-decent commuter and regional network. If can get Southern Californians out of their cars, you can do it anywhere.

[blue streak 1]

Don:  I was spending 5 - 8 days a month in LAX during all the planning and implementing of the various services. Compared to today the words really got nasty. To go to 11 LAX - San Diego trains a day (12 weekends) shows a good mix of commuters and pleasure travelers on that route. Same thing with metrolink. Now the biggest problem is lack of parking at some stations! The next problem is not enough service for whatever reason and the lack of funds.

Although hoping for it to work out there I came to believe it would never work especially Metrolink. Was I ever wrong !!!!.  

[dakotafred]

Uh, oh, it looks like there may be political problems with state acceptance of the federal money. I always thought the plan for the estimated state subsidy of $17 million annually -- "We'll sell advertising," etc. -- sounded a little blithe. Critics also don't like the pokey schedules. I agree that, if you're going to be 2 hours slower than the car between Cleveland and Cincinnati after spending $400 million, why bother?

 With improvements to the line for passengers you had better be able to average 60 mph over 260 miles or you're not trying.

 Pardon me if this has been explained elsewhere, but what is the protection in the federal grants against "stranded investment" -- a state bailing on its subsidization of service in one, two, five or 10 years, after the federal investment has been made?   

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

A problem working against the Ohio proposal is that there hasn't been much in the way of north-south service within the state even back into the pre-Amtrak era.  By the mid-60's, you had the Cincinnatian on a Cincy-Detroit route and odd stub runs between Cleveland and Cincinnati, I don't think that there were through trains on that route.

[NewAlbany]

The 3C corridor passenger train has hit a snag. Sen. Harris, President of the Ohio Senate has sent 22 questions to Governor Strickland concerning the 3C project. Governor Strickland is going to have ODOT/ORDC answer the questions. The answers are expected in a couple of weeks. Another problem is US Railcar's request for $80M for a startup of DMU railcar factory in Columbus, Ohio has been turned down. Conversations say that this will force the 3C to buy DMU cars from American Railcar in Arkansas which is part of Carl IChanns financial empire.

[HarveyK400]

CSSHEGEWISCH

A problem working against the Ohio proposal is that there hasn't been much in the way of north-south service within the state even back into the pre-Amtrak era.  By the mid-60's, you had the Cincinnatian on a Cincy-Detroit route and odd stub runs between Cleveland and Cincinnati, I don't think that there were through trains on that route.

 

My dog-eared 1966 Guide shows the Ohio State Limited, #15-16, and the Night Special, #306-327.  #16 had the only daytime schedule dp Cincinnati at 2:40 pm and averaged a blistering 40 mph; the others were overnight. 

For a brief time, the Xplorer ran a single daytime r/t.  What was that supposed to prove? 

SP wasn't the only one killing passenger trains.

Would there be a market for a Cincinnati - Cleveland service that ran overnight between Cleveland and the East Coast?  I'm a little surprised this wasn't in the original System Plan; but it may have been co-opted to some extent by the National Limited.  Another possibility would be to extend service from Cincinnati to Louisville and Nashville (Memphis may be too far).

An East Coast overnight service would coincide with at least one daytime frequency in the 3-C corridor.  If not a through train, coach(es) and sleeper(s) might be carried on either the Lakeshore, Capitol, or both and set out.  Changing trains in Cleveland in the middle of the night would be deadly - brings back unpleasant memories; but that's still possible for some depending on the option.  At least put reclining chairs and low lighting in a waiting lounge (not a bad idea for any connecting point). 

The morning through/connecting service from Cleveland and evening return from Cincinnati would be mirrored by a r/t beginning in Cincinnati and supplemented by a train beginning in Columbus and making two r/ts to Cincinnati.  Getting running time down to five hours, only a 52 mph average, would begin to be acceptable and shouldn't be too difficult to achieve with even a 79 mph limit.  This isn't rocket science.

As a side note, NYC ran the Knickerbocker #341 and Southwestern #312 that provided a daytime schedule to Indianapolis and Saint Louis that overlapped the National Limited.  As with the 3-C corridor, through service might be provided instead from Toledo through Fort Wayne and Muncie to Indianapolis and Saint Louis.  The negatives are the equipment can't be turned on the same day; and reliable connections to Kansas City at Saint Louis may be as problematic as at Chicago.

[schlimm]

 I was looking at a 1967 PRR TT.  It listed # 74-4 the Cincinnati Limited, Lv Cincy at 3:25pm, Ar Columbus 6:20pm, hook on to # 4, the Penn Texas, Lv Col at 7:00pm, Ar NYC 8:15am.  It carried thru coaches and a 10-6 sleeper to NYC.