Point of clarification: sam1's post was 5/4/2012.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Sam1Make no mistake about it. If the long distance trains were discontinued, I would like to see some of the savings plowed into the planned rail corridor from San Antonio to the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. The envisioned route would include a stop in Georgetown, TX, which just happens to be where I live.
Sam,
If long distance trans were discontinued is there any reason to believe they would be replaced by the trains you suggest? Isn't it more reasonable to believe that there would be no replacements at all for them?
John
http://thegazette.com/2013/04/24/iowa-house-halts-funding-for-passenger-rail-study/
The Mississippi River maybe a bridge too far for the Cornbelt Rocket.
Sound too good to be true? Indeed! I would like to see Mr. Smith's details -- as the "reporter" should have wanted to.
If newspapers have got the disappearing newspaper blues, one reason could be shallow reporting such as this story, which one can get for free on radio or TV.
Of late, that effort has focused on the economic benefits the proposed Omaha to Chicago rail would bring to Iowa City, drawing on examples from other cities across the country. Thursday, local officials and citizens heard from John Robert Smith, who serves as CEO of Reconnecting America. He also served four terms as mayor of Meridian, Miss. , where he spearheaded a passenger rail transportation project that brought $135 million into the town for developments in the surrounding area.
Of late, that effort has focused on the economic benefits the proposed Omaha to Chicago rail would bring to Iowa City, drawing on examples from other cities across the country.
Thursday, local officials and citizens heard from John Robert Smith, who serves as CEO of Reconnecting America. He also served four terms as mayor of Meridian, Miss. , where he spearheaded a passenger rail transportation project that brought $135 million into the town for developments in the surrounding area.
http://thegazette.com/2012/05/25/iowa-city-chamber-of-commerce-hopes-to-keep-passenger-rail-in-conversation/
The lobbying continues. Would this be applicable to other cities? Does this sound too good be true?
Great information, Victrola1; thank you!
Looks like the bus companies are making some pre-emptive strikes; they get enterprise points.
It would be ironic, wouldn't it, if the main role of the proposed train was to pick up the small change scorned by the bus ... the Grinnells, Atlantics, etc.?
Onion's announcement of President Obama's High-Speed Bus plan:
http://www.theonion.com/video/obama-replaces-costly-highspeed-rail-plan-with-hig,18473/
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Megabus will offer two departures to Omaha from Iowa City on a daily basis. The number of trips between Iowa City, Des Moines and Chicago will also increase to four departures each day.
http://thegazette.com/2011/08/04/megabus-announces-expanded-bus-service-from-iowa-city-to-omaha/
Megabus is offering service in this lane that is faster than the proposed 79 mph Rocket schedule. Megabus fares are cheaper than proposed fares to ride the Rocket.
Megabus is not stopping in Grinnell, Newton, nor any other county seat of under 50,000 people. Stops where few board waste time. Time is money. Mega bus is looking at what is profitable, not politically popular.
Burlington Trailways has revamped its thrice-daily Iowa City-Chicago bus service , reducing trip times and adding discount fare options in response to the competition from discounter Megabus......
The 10 a.m. departure from Iowa City will become an express service with only two stops in Davenport and Naperville, Ill. It arrives at in downtown Chicago at 2:30.
The 12:45 a.m. bus to Chicago will have no stops, Hibbs said.
http://business380.com/2011/09/01/iowa-city-to-chicago-bus-service-competition-heating-up/
The Quad Cities is the largest metropolitan area between Chicago and Omaha. Megabus does not stop there. Trailways is running a bus with no stops between Chicago and Iowa City. The bus lines market studies are telling them something.
The distance from Chicago to the Quad Cities maybe short enough that most people just drive between them. It takes time to pull off the interstate to make a downtown stop. If it is not worth stopping in the Quad Cities for express buses, is it worth subsidizing a Rocket?
While the bus speeds around the Quad Cities on Interstate 80, the Rocket would run at the speed of a requiem march through the spread out cities along the Mississippi. There would be time spent at a Moline station stop. If a towboat is passing through Rock Island's Lock & Dam, add in an open bridge delay.
The bus lines competing in this lane show there are passengers to be had. Can the Rocket realistically compete with the bus? Is the subsidy worth the experience of a train ride?
John Robert Smith, a prominent rail advocate, will speak to locals about the community benefits of rail service.
Smith's visit comes in light of the Iowa and Illinois transportation departments and the Federal Railroad Administration studying a possible passenger rail route from Chicago to Omaha. That study is expected to be completed in March or April 2013.
http://www.dailyiowan.com/2012/05/04/Metro/28307.html
The advocacy continues.
dakotafred Sam1: Amtrak has racked up accumulated losses of $28.5 billion since it began operations. Assuming that the ratio of the long distance train operating losses to Amtrak’s total losses has remained constant (48 per cent) since Amtrak began operations, the accumulated loss for the long distance trains is approximately $13.8 billion. Had this money been placed in an account earning the average ten-year Treasury note interest rate for 40 years, four months, it would have grown to $78.7 billion by September 2011. This would have been a nice kitty to enhance existing corridors or start new ones, which is the only place where passenger rail makes sense I would never argue with you, Sam1, that the losses don't add up and are even larger than they appear, when you consult interest. My quibble would be: If this money hadn't been spent on Amtrak, where would it have gone? Would it have been saved or invested more shrewdly? Pardon me for doubting it. I rather like that, with Amtrak, we have bought something tangible that people use and that has not only utility but meaning to us as Americans. If we have to start saving nickels and dimes, as we undoubtedly do, there are lots of places to start before Amtrak.
Sam1: Amtrak has racked up accumulated losses of $28.5 billion since it began operations. Assuming that the ratio of the long distance train operating losses to Amtrak’s total losses has remained constant (48 per cent) since Amtrak began operations, the accumulated loss for the long distance trains is approximately $13.8 billion. Had this money been placed in an account earning the average ten-year Treasury note interest rate for 40 years, four months, it would have grown to $78.7 billion by September 2011. This would have been a nice kitty to enhance existing corridors or start new ones, which is the only place where passenger rail makes sense
No one knows where the money would have gone if Amtrak had ditched the long distance trains. The key question is where would it go over the next 40 years if the long distance trains were discontinued. Again, no one knows. But at least the option would exist to use some or all of the savings to fund the Administration's plans to develop more passenger rail corridors or enhance the existing ones.
Make no mistake about it. If the long distance trains were discontinued, I would like to see some of the savings plowed into the planned rail corridor from San Antonio to the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. The envisioned route would include a stop in Georgetown, TX, which just happens to be where I live.
Sam1 Amtrak has racked up accumulated losses of $28.5 billion since it began operations. Assuming that the ratio of the long distance train operating losses to Amtrak’s total losses has remained constant (48 per cent) since Amtrak began operations, the accumulated loss for the long distance trains is approximately $13.8 billion. Had this money been placed in an account earning the average ten-year Treasury note interest rate for 40 years, four months, it would have grown to $78.7 billion by September 2011. This would have been a nice kitty to enhance existing corridors or start new ones, which is the only place where passenger rail makes sense
I would never argue with you, Sam1, that the losses don't add up and are even larger than they appear, when you consult interest. My quibble would be: If this money hadn't been spent on Amtrak, where would it have gone? Would it have been saved or invested more shrewdly? Pardon me for doubting it.
I rather like that, with Amtrak, we have bought something tangible that people use and that has not only utility but meaning to us as Americans. If we have to start saving nickels and dimes, as we undoubtedly do, there are lots of places to start before Amtrak.
MidlandMike Is the St Charles Air Line still in use by the City of N.O. It seems I heard there was a proposal to reroute, and eliminate the SCAL.
Is the St Charles Air Line still in use by the City of N.O. It seems I heard there was a proposal to reroute, and eliminate the SCAL.
The SCAL is still in use by the City of N.O., as well as the Illinois service on the I.C. There has been proposal to get rid of the SCAL, Mayor Daley really wanted it gone. However with Da Mayor out of office, as well as the housing market in the tank, I don't know if there is as much of a push to get rid of it as there was.
An "expensive model collector"
dakotafred Don't get me wrong. I love my Empire Builder, and do not go along with Sam1 and others who would discard the long-distance trains. I have stood up for those trains many times here. As long as they continue to attract riders -- and they do -- I think their subsidy is easily justified as tiny in the larger budget scheme and in view of our special national rail heritage.
Don't get me wrong. I love my Empire Builder, and do not go along with Sam1 and others who would discard the long-distance trains. I have stood up for those trains many times here. As long as they continue to attract riders -- and they do -- I think their subsidy is easily justified as tiny in the larger budget scheme and in view of our special national rail heritage.
0 0 1 385 2198 Retired 18 5 2578 14.0 Normal 0 false false false EN-US JA X-NONE
In the larger scheme of things you are correct. Amtrak’s annual losses, including those associated with the long distance trains, are tiny compared to the federal budget and federal budget deficits. Nevertheless, little things can add up.
Each year I read the OMB federal budget summary tables as well as the CBO’s adjustments. In addition, I read the Transportation Department budget as well as several others periodically. When I say that I read them, I mean line item by line item. They make for interesting reading if you are a numbers person. Otherwise not so interesting!
Annually the CBO publishes a list of items in the proposed budget that it believes could be eliminated or reduced, thereby reducing the annual deficit. For FY11 I identified 68 line items in the CBO report for items equal to or less than the annual operating subsidy for Amtrak. The total for these items is $26.5 billion, which is still a small percentage of the federal budget and federal budget deficit. But it makes a point. Small items add up to big items especially over time.
Assuming that ten per cent of the annual depreciation and interest expense is assigned to the long distance trains, which may be a bit conservative, in FY10 the long distance trains accounted for approximately 48 per cent of Amtrak’s operating loss.
Amtrak has racked up accumulated losses of $28.5 billion since it began operations. Assuming that the ratio of the long distance train operating losses to Amtrak’s total losses has remained constant (48 per cent) since Amtrak began operations, the accumulated loss for the long distance trains is approximately $13.8 billion. Had this money been placed in an account earning the average ten-year Treasury note interest rate for 40 years, four months, it would have grown to $78.7 billion by September 2011. This would have been a nice kitty to enhance existing corridors or start new ones, which is the only place where passenger rail makes sense.
Some people have opined that I must be against trains since I have long advocated eliminating the long distance trains, and I have been a frequent critique of Amtrak. They are wrong. I am enthusiastic about trains where they make sense. I take five to seven train trips every year, which is not easy to do from, within or to Texas given the paucity of Amtrak’s services in the Lone Star State. But spreading limited dollars over a so-called national passenger train network, when they should be focused where trains make sense, may be good politics, but it is a poor public transport solution.
Los Angeles Rams Guy Fred - I'm a native Iowan and, while my job with CPRS has me firmly entrenched in the Twin Cities, the Hawkeye state will always be home to me. I can vividly recall how incredibly heartbroken and devastated I was when the Cities trains were discontinued along with the IC's Hawkeye. While I can appreciate how travelers seemingly made other "arrangements", the fact is both central and northern Iowa have a void when it comes to travel alternatives. You can't tell me for a second that rail passenger service to Iowa City on IAIS (or further west to Omaha) won't attract ridership. You have nearby towns and cities that would welcome rail passenger service such as Cedar Rapids, Marshalltown, and Ames/Boone (just to name a few) that would benefit by having rail passenger service close by as opposed to driving down to Mt. Pleasant, Ottumwa, or Osceola. Same thing applies for extension of the proposed Chicago - Dubuque service to Waterloo. There are many communities in my native northeast Iowa that would benefit from having rail passenger service nearby..
Fred - I'm a native Iowan and, while my job with CPRS has me firmly entrenched in the Twin Cities, the Hawkeye state will always be home to me. I can vividly recall how incredibly heartbroken and devastated I was when the Cities trains were discontinued along with the IC's Hawkeye. While I can appreciate how travelers seemingly made other "arrangements", the fact is both central and northern Iowa have a void when it comes to travel alternatives. You can't tell me for a second that rail passenger service to Iowa City on IAIS (or further west to Omaha) won't attract ridership. You have nearby towns and cities that would welcome rail passenger service such as Cedar Rapids, Marshalltown, and Ames/Boone (just to name a few) that would benefit by having rail passenger service close by as opposed to driving down to Mt. Pleasant, Ottumwa, or Osceola. Same thing applies for extension of the proposed Chicago - Dubuque service to Waterloo. There are many communities in my native northeast Iowa that would benefit from having rail passenger service nearby..
LA, I guess the thing to do is see if Iowa is willing and able to chug as far as Iowa City, look at the results and take it from there. As I've said on earlier threads on this subject, I would love to ride into Iowa City on a train again, altho I'm afraid it would be a far cry from the old Rockets. The sweet thing on those old trips out of Chicago was a seat in the parlor car for an extra couple of bucks.
CSSHEGEWISCH DwightBranch: I really wish Illinois would drop the idea of an interchange with the former Q near Wyanet and use the money to rebuild the old RI between Joliet and there. It would serve both Ottawa and La Salle going toward the Quad Cities and would also make it much easier to restore Peoria service. The problem with using the former Rock Island route all the way into Chicago is that it would rule out using Chicago Union Station. A connecting track at Englewood would be precluded by the upcoming Englewood flyover project.
DwightBranch: I really wish Illinois would drop the idea of an interchange with the former Q near Wyanet and use the money to rebuild the old RI between Joliet and there. It would serve both Ottawa and La Salle going toward the Quad Cities and would also make it much easier to restore Peoria service.
I really wish Illinois would drop the idea of an interchange with the former Q near Wyanet and use the money to rebuild the old RI between Joliet and there. It would serve both Ottawa and La Salle going toward the Quad Cities and would also make it much easier to restore Peoria service.
The problem with using the former Rock Island route all the way into Chicago is that it would rule out using Chicago Union Station. A connecting track at Englewood would be precluded by the upcoming Englewood flyover project.
I am not sure if it is still in service, however there is a connection track from the Rock Island to the St Charles Air line. The down side is that it will require a backup move into and out of CUS.
It's an old debate. Is the impetus for new products and services pre-existing demand or can demand be created by offering new products and services? Both have validity, but examples such as computers, smart phones and the internet suggest the second. The key is to conduct accurate marketing studies to gauge the potential, but those are often inaccurate.
dakotafred Los Angeles Rams Guy: DakotaFred's posts on this thread suggest he is living back in the 50's or 60's. What he conveniently neglects to mention is that the premier passenger service between Chicago and Omaha at that time was offered by the joint Milwaukee Road - Union Pacific "Cities" trains along with the Burlington's California and Denver Zephyrs. So the Rock Island's Corn Belt Rocket was arguably a poor sister in this particular lane on a railroad that was quickly going to hell back in that time. My, how times have changed. Times sure have changed, LA. Where, 50 years ago, you had at least a dozen pairs of trains on three routes Chicago-Omaha, now you have one, the CZ. Travelers have long since moved on, made other arrangements. What evidence can you marshal in support of a fivefold increase in rail passenger capacity in that corridor? If you lived in Iowa instead of Minnesota, how much would you be willing to spend in support of that service? Yeah, someone who was around in the 1950s and '60s -- and suffered through the demise of his favorite form of transportation -- is bound to have taken away some perspectives. I'd run them against the fantasies of folks at Iowa DOT and elsewhere who have no real grounding in rail passenger service.
Los Angeles Rams Guy: DakotaFred's posts on this thread suggest he is living back in the 50's or 60's. What he conveniently neglects to mention is that the premier passenger service between Chicago and Omaha at that time was offered by the joint Milwaukee Road - Union Pacific "Cities" trains along with the Burlington's California and Denver Zephyrs. So the Rock Island's Corn Belt Rocket was arguably a poor sister in this particular lane on a railroad that was quickly going to hell back in that time. My, how times have changed.
DakotaFred's posts on this thread suggest he is living back in the 50's or 60's. What he conveniently neglects to mention is that the premier passenger service between Chicago and Omaha at that time was offered by the joint Milwaukee Road - Union Pacific "Cities" trains along with the Burlington's California and Denver Zephyrs. So the Rock Island's Corn Belt Rocket was arguably a poor sister in this particular lane on a railroad that was quickly going to hell back in that time. My, how times have changed.
Times sure have changed, LA.
Where, 50 years ago, you had at least a dozen pairs of trains on three routes Chicago-Omaha, now you have one, the CZ. Travelers have long since moved on, made other arrangements. What evidence can you marshal in support of a fivefold increase in rail passenger capacity in that corridor? If you lived in Iowa instead of Minnesota, how much would you be willing to spend in support of that service?
Yeah, someone who was around in the 1950s and '60s -- and suffered through the demise of his favorite form of transportation -- is bound to have taken away some perspectives. I'd run them against the fantasies of folks at Iowa DOT and elsewhere who have no real grounding in rail passenger service.
Los Angeles Rams Guy DakotaFred's posts on this thread suggest he is living back in the 50's or 60's. What he conveniently neglects to mention is that the premier passenger service between Chicago and Omaha at that time was offered by the joint Milwaukee Road - Union Pacific "Cities" trains along with the Burlington's California and Denver Zephyrs. So the Rock Island's Corn Belt Rocket was arguably a poor sister in this particular lane on a railroad that was quickly going to hell back in that time. My, how times have changed.
Looks like it would require going east of the diamond at the Joliet Union Station and then backing up on the interchange track to get onto the northbound old GM&O or AT&SF NB tracks.
I am not familiar with Joliet, is there no way to transfer from the RTA former Rock Island to the former GM&O/ATSF? I assume the RTA RI trains terminate at La Salle Street.
Dakguy201 Iowa can't or won't come up with the subsidy to extend the Chicago/Moline service to Iowa City, but we are to believe there is any hope for extending this service past Des Moines and into the least populated portion of the state? Sorry, this study is nothing more than a WPA project for consultants!
Iowa can't or won't come up with the subsidy to extend the Chicago/Moline service to Iowa City, but we are to believe there is any hope for extending this service past Des Moines and into the least populated portion of the state?
Sorry, this study is nothing more than a WPA project for consultants!
Iowa won't come up with money to cover shortfalls because of current politics. The political pendulum has a way of swinging back (and forth).
I hope any new service would start out just as far as Des Moines, and prove it's worth in local service. If it's extended to Omaha, hopefully it would be scheduled to serve the mass of local riders, rather than Amtrak scheduling it for the convenience of the few people that might transfer at Omaha from the Zephyr.
DwightBranch I really wish Illinois would drop the idea of an interchange with the former Q near Wyanet and use the money to rebuild the old RI between Joliet and there. It would serve both Ottawa and La Salle going toward the Quad Cities and would also make it much easier to restore Peoria service.
Victrola1 The largest state involved is Illinois. Illinois has been the political driving force behind this project. The largest statistical metropolitan area served between Chicago and Omaha will be the Quad Cities. Of first interest to Illinois in entering the wilds west of the Mississippi is Iowa City. A large number of Chicago area students attend the University of Iowa. Like Carbondale and McComb in Illinois, provide a train for them to ride home. The political will in Iowa for this train is not as great. Gov. Culver is gone. Gov. Branstad is not out to kill the project, but more along the line of shelving it. Some legislators have groused about tax dollars for passengers being used to upgrade the Iowa Interstate's ability to expedite freight. The current Iowa legislature is not overly concerned with how Chicago students travel home. Let Illinois pay for the train to make Moline. Let the students drive an hour east to Moline to catch the train. Iowa taxpayers already provide them with a university. The Iowa half of the Quad Cities has little interest in a train going west. Other than an Iowa Hawkeye's football game, or state wide convention, there is far more to see and do in Chicago. Strong lobbying by interests in Des Moines and at the University of Iowa will be necessary to move the train into Iowa. Illinois' moral support will be there, especially as far as Iowa City. If the train makes it to Iowa City, odds increase it will reach Des Moines. Iowa's provincial political center will lobby for it. Though seldom true, Des Moines is adept at claiming anything that benefits Des Moines benefits all of Iowa. Iowa's political will west of Des Moines will wane greatly. The distance is not great to Omaha, but there is little between Des Moines and Omaha. Omaha will need to exert political pressure to fill the void. Extending the train to nowhere to a metropolitan area almost big enough to support a big league athletic team may have some federal appeal. Will the State of Nebraska get aboard if the route is extended the short distance from Omaha to Lincoln? Release of a route study is just that. There is no cause to plan a Rocket ride through the cornfields from the Mississippi to the Missouri river in the near future.
The largest state involved is Illinois. Illinois has been the political driving force behind this project. The largest statistical metropolitan area served between Chicago and Omaha will be the Quad Cities.
Of first interest to Illinois in entering the wilds west of the Mississippi is Iowa City. A large number of Chicago area students attend the University of Iowa. Like Carbondale and McComb in Illinois, provide a train for them to ride home.
The political will in Iowa for this train is not as great. Gov. Culver is gone. Gov. Branstad is not out to kill the project, but more along the line of shelving it. Some legislators have groused about tax dollars for passengers being used to upgrade the Iowa Interstate's ability to expedite freight.
The current Iowa legislature is not overly concerned with how Chicago students travel home. Let Illinois pay for the train to make Moline. Let the students drive an hour east to Moline to catch the train. Iowa taxpayers already provide them with a university.
The Iowa half of the Quad Cities has little interest in a train going west. Other than an Iowa Hawkeye's football game, or state wide convention, there is far more to see and do in Chicago.
Strong lobbying by interests in Des Moines and at the University of Iowa will be necessary to move the train into Iowa. Illinois' moral support will be there, especially as far as Iowa City.
If the train makes it to Iowa City, odds increase it will reach Des Moines. Iowa's provincial political center will lobby for it. Though seldom true, Des Moines is adept at claiming anything that benefits Des Moines benefits all of Iowa.
Iowa's political will west of Des Moines will wane greatly. The distance is not great to Omaha, but there is little between Des Moines and Omaha. Omaha will need to exert political pressure to fill the void.
Extending the train to nowhere to a metropolitan area almost big enough to support a big league athletic team may have some federal appeal. Will the State of Nebraska get aboard if the route is extended the short distance from Omaha to Lincoln?
Release of a route study is just that. There is no cause to plan a Rocket ride through the cornfields from the Mississippi to the Missouri river in the near future.
Dakota,
I see no reason to knock Mark Hemphill or any other consultant. If the States and Feds want to waste a few million dollars of our tax money to hire a consultant, they may as well hire one who knows something.
Mac McCulloch
Murphy Siding dakotafred: Seeing Mark Hemphill associated with such a project suggests that he doesn't go where his wife goes so much as where the consulting bucks go. (Veteran TRAINS readers will recognize the reference.) For those of us that don't get the reference, could you plese explain?
dakotafred: Seeing Mark Hemphill associated with such a project suggests that he doesn't go where his wife goes so much as where the consulting bucks go. (Veteran TRAINS readers will recognize the reference.)
Seeing Mark Hemphill associated with such a project suggests that he doesn't go where his wife goes so much as where the consulting bucks go. (Veteran TRAINS readers will recognize the reference.)
Jim Wrinn predecessor Hemphill explained he was leaving his "dream" job as editor of TRAINS to follow his wife to her dream job. At least two job changes later, he has popped up as point man for Iowa DOT's consultant on the Moline-Omaha project, an Omaha firm, per yesterday's Newswire.
dakotafred So, Dwight, how many times do you suppose your "unusual" circumstances are replicated among the general population? Everybody has his individual circumstances, which ever since the auto and paved highways have resulted in decimation of passenger rail. Don't get me wrong. I love my Empire Builder, and do not go along with Sam1 and others who would discard the long-distance trains. I have stood up for those trains many times here. As long as they continue to attract riders -- and they do -- I think their subsidy is easily justified as tiny in the larger budget scheme and in view of our special national rail heritage. Where I lose patience is with blue-skying by such as the Iowa DOT promoting a project such as Chicago-Omaha on the Iowa Interstate that is never going to turn a wheel. Seeing Mark Hemphill associated with such a project suggests that he doesn't go where his wife goes so much as where the consulting bucks go. (Veteran TRAINS readers will recognize the reference.)
So, Dwight, how many times do you suppose your "unusual" circumstances are replicated among the general population? Everybody has his individual circumstances, which ever since the auto and paved highways have resulted in decimation of passenger rail.
Where I lose patience is with blue-skying by such as the Iowa DOT promoting a project such as Chicago-Omaha on the Iowa Interstate that is never going to turn a wheel.
DakotaFred's posts on this thread suggest he is living back in the 50's or 60's. What he conveniently neglects to mention is that the premier passenger service between Chicago and Omaha at that time was offered by the joint Milwaukee Road - Union Pacific "Cities" trains along with the Burlington's California and Denver Zephyrs. So the Rock Island's Corn Belt Rocket was arguably a poor sister in this particular lane on a railroad that was quickly going to hell back in that time. My, how times have changed. While I would still argue that the UP's "Overland Route" mainline across Iowa should have been the chosen instrument for this new service, there was really no other option than IAIS as UP will never allow regular passenger service on the Overland Route (I can't blame them, either for the amount of traffic the Overland Route hosts) and the CN's ex-IC/ICG/CC Iowa Division mainline has that dark section from Tara to Council Bluffs plus it doesn't serve any huge population centers aside from Dubuque, Waterloo and Ft. Dodge.
dakotafred Seeing Mark Hemphill associated with such a project suggests that he doesn't go where his wife goes so much as where the consulting bucks go. (Veteran TRAINS readers will recognize the reference.)
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.