Amtrak and Indianapolis

Here's a link to the Corridor ID application for the proposed Indianapolis to Chicago corridor.
https://miprc.org/Portals/0/userfiles/3 ... ements.pdf

Lots to chew on here.

Thanks for that. Very interesting. In addition to identifying the engineering firm that did the previous analysis of this corridor, which may point to a continuing role, I felt the most interesting passage was the speed target:
>To be truly competitive with travel by automobile, though, the travel time must be further reduced [beyond the target from the Patrick report from a few years back]. If the Corridor is chosen to participate in the Corridor Identification and Development Program, a travel time of 3.5 hours will be targeted.

Also, that they consider the Louisville service application a cooperative venture that will help support this route. You'd hope so, but it's good to see it mentioned.

Good luck with that approach. If Beech Grove were to be "relocated", they'd be closing down in-house overhauls and contracting it out. Which... could be done as part of the replacement RFP... The need for overhauls -will- go down as new equipment comes online.

Shutting down Beech Grove would be expensive. As long as the Cardinal is passing nearby, they can keep the status quo and continue to use the Cardinal as the hospital train.

Amtrak seems to be unwilling to invest in their routes. All maintenance and improvements are pushed off to the track owners and states. Which makes sense where the rails are exclusively used for state supported services. The current CSX connection works fine for the Cardinal and the hospital train use of the Cardinal. So there is no reason for Amtrak to invest in improving the link OR abandon Beech Grove. Status quo is working.

For those who would actually like to see improved Amtrak service between Chicago and Indianapolis the challenge is to fund any improvements needed (current link speed is not competitive) and to get a reasonable rate for Amtrak to operate any additional trains. The best actual hope of improved service would be a daily Cardinal.

It's not that Amtrak is unwilling to invest in their routes, its that they are mostly prohibited from doing so as a matter of law (i.e., this situation was created by Congress and can be changed only by Congress).

That's a lot easier said than done. Amtrak was given Beech Grove (or perhaps got it through PC's windup at a very cheap price). It's a monster facility that covers perhaps a half square mile. There are acres under roof. Within those buildings are millions of dollars of heavy machinery for car and locomotive repair such as drop tables, cranes, jigs and fixtures, etc... You also have a skilled workforce in the area that would not necessarily follow to a more Amtrak-friendly locale. You have over a century of environmental abuse that would have to be remedied, probably $50m cost right there. If they did find a more Amtrak-friendly place, you have to consider that many of them are more expensive and have the potential to siphon skilled machinists to other facilities such as aircraft or automobile manufacturing. Thats a big problem for Amtrak in Seattle - good machinests walk to Boeing all the time.

There might be a few good candidates for purchase:
Perahps an old steel mill in the Pittsburgh area or what's left of EMD in LaGrange? If the Chinese pull out of Chicago the subway car plant, but they would need a lot more trackage for storage. The former Pressed Steel Car freight car plant is adjacent and likely would sell for the right price as it's just a transload shop now.

TLDR moving Beech Grove is a monstrously expensive task.

That's why "moving" it isn't in the cards. But splitting it up might be.

Is there anything contractual that would prohibiting overhauls/repairs from being done by the supplier or another company? It was allowed for the Talgos. What about the Acelas and Avelino's?

eolesen wrote: ↑Sat Dec 30, 2023 6:52 pm If Beech Grove were to be "relocated", they'd be closing down in-house overhauls and contracting it out. Which... could be done as part of the replacement RFP... The need for overhauls -will- go down as new equipment comes online.

justalurker66 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 31, 2023 5:43 pm Shutting down Beech Grove would be expensive. As long as the Cardinal is passing nearby, they can keep the status quo and continue to use the Cardinal as the hospital train.

Tadman wrote: ↑Mon Jan 01, 2024 9:56 am That's a lot easier said than done. Amtrak was given Beech Grove (or perhaps got it through PC's windup at a very cheap price). It's a monster facility that covers perhaps a half square mile. There are acres under roof. Within those buildings are millions of dollars of heavy machinery for car and locomotive repair such as drop tables, cranes, jigs and fixtures, etc... You also have a skilled workforce in the area that would not necessarily follow to a more Amtrak-friendly locale. There might be a few good candidates for purchase: Perahps an old steel mill in the Pittsburgh area or of EMD in LaGrange? If the Chinese pull out of Chicago the subway car plant, but they would need a lot more trackage for storage. The former Pressed Steel Car freight car plant is adjacent and likely would sell for the right price as it's just a transload shop now. TLDR moving Beech Grove is a monstrously expensive task.

If Beech Grove were to close, heavy overhaul work would likely be consolidated in Wilmington and Bear, at least as an interim until a new dedicated facility was in service. But Wilmington is an electric shop, while the diesel fleet would need a place to go. It would be a long road for equipment on the Western LD pool and West Coast to make it to Bear: the Capitol eastbound to WAS, then up the NEC. Superliners would have an issue as the only access to Bear would be under the NEC catenary (via NS either from Newark or Wilmington). At least the facilities in Oakland and Los Angeles could(?) be upgraded to have heavy overhaul work for Caltrans and West Coasts fleets if need be to avoid a long trip to Bear. There’s Alstom on Mare Island which did heavy overhauls for the Caltrans fleet. But most of the national network fleet would be without a home base.

Having a national network/Midwest Hub facility in Pittsburgh would still require moves on 29/30 to and from Chicago (and equipment from the Northeast cycling on 42/43 from PHL). Ideally somewhere in Chicago or St. Louis areas would take advantage of being right at the hub and also on the national network.

Seems to me lots of folks missed Tad’s most important point.

The Beech Grove workforce will likely not relocate if the facility is closed. Amtrak will lose man-centuries of institutional knowledge. That is a bad thing.

Even if Indianapolis has not had anything that could be called "rail passenger service" since the '79 Carter Cuts (sorry, but 5hr CHI-IND - even when it was Daily - "doesn't cut it"), The Carsons, first Momma Julia and then Grandson Andre', have been good to Beech Grove. In fact, their IN-7 was gerrymandered to ensure the facility was included in such.

Even my Educator/Social Worker Indianapolis friends, who have no attachment whatever to the railroad industry, acknowledge that Andre is a good, and safe, Congressman. Even if Amtrak should whack all the LD's to concentrate on the NEC and hold contracts with the several locally funded rail passenger agencies, there would still be deadhead moves (railroad or Amtrak operated, who knows) of equipment to Beech Grove.

Wow, if such were to come to pass, would all the discussion sites, such as here, be alive with postings "Deadhead move of LA Metros coming"?

John_Perkowski wrote:Seems to me lots of folks missed Tad’s most important point.

The Beech Grove workforce will likely not relocate if the facility is closed. Amtrak will lose man-centuries of institutional knowledge. That is a bad thing.

Normally I would agree, but with the introduction of new cars and locomotives come new skills. What worked on cars older than the technicians isn't necessarily what needs to be done on reasonably new equipment.

We've seen the same type of shifts in aviation maintenance from high cost areas to lower cost areas. Most aviation maintenance is now done in the Sun Belt states instead of places like Detroit, Minneapolis, and Pittsburgh. What worked on a 1970s vintage Boeing is not necessarily the same as what you have to do with a 2010 composite Airbus.

Plus, you don't need the entire Workforce to move.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

That sums it up. Wilmington, Bear and Beech Grove are all legacy facilities inherited from private carriers.
Wilmington predates PRR electrification in 1907 and was a steam facility in the distant past.

The one issue about moving to southern states is union rules/right to work clauses.

I do know the Viewliners have their home base at Hialeah, what is the scope of work that can performed there?

R36 Combine Coach wrote: ↑Tue Jan 02, 2024 5:00 pm
The one issue about moving to southern states is union rules/right to work clauses.

You could buy the former Liberty Steel buildings outside NOLA or the Avondale Shipyard and set up shop there. NOLA is like Chicago south in that everything going east has to touch one of the two. Do your heavy repairs in Avondale and everthing moves to town on 58/59, 1/2, or 19/20.

Some of the shipbuilding and steelmaking facilities in the south are/were union.

But then you have to worry about the hurricanes. And is Louisiana that much more Amtrak-friendly than Indiana? New Orleans is, but the entire state is debatable.

R36 Combine Coach wrote: ↑Tue Jan 02, 2024 5:00 pm That sums it up. Wilmington, Bear and Beech Grove are all legacy facilities inherited from private carriers.

Mr. R36, who owned Bear "once upon a time"?

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Tue Jan 02, 2024 7:22 pm

R36 Combine Coach wrote: ↑Tue Jan 02, 2024 5:00 pm That sums it up. Wilmington, Bear and Beech Grove are all legacy facilities inherited from private carriers.

Mr. R36, who owned Bear "once upon a time"?

I'm curious about who owned all three.