Hoosier State derails outside Chicago 6/8

It's the market, or the lack of one.

This is a prime example of why it's so tough for passenger trains to serve rural patrons.

The population of Indiana is pretty well dispersed, with only Indianapolis as a major metro area; none of the state's other cities could be classed as a transportation hub.

Of the state's three major universities, only Notre Dame can be considered as urbanized, and it aleady has a rail link to Chicago via the South Shore.

The problem isn't so much the lack of population, as the fact that it's widely scattered.

I'll cite an example from another field in my home state: Pennsylvania subsidizes several local bus lines in order to field a network of last resort. What this means is that feeder lines from several regions converge on a hub in Harrisburg once a day. A person going from Scranton to Altoona, for example, has to detour through both Pottsville and Harrisburg. (Erie? -You don't even want to think about it.)

Take it from one who tried to assist with this for well over a year; bus transportation is a bare-bones operation, founded upon the needs of those who, through age, health, or other critria, have no other option.

Now comapre this to the higher crewing requirements, union wage scales, and general overhead of a rail-oriented service.

If Amtrak is ever to make a serious attempt at establishing itself outside the corridors, it has to find a raison-d'etre beyond simple ridership.

My point is that we should state reality for the mere sake of stating reality so that we know what reality is without losing the essential truth of the situation — especially when that truth seems to be getting lost because some people don't like hearing it and are making lots of distracting noise. If you don't like that, well you know what? Too bad for you. Just don't tell me not to express my opinion and I'll extend you the same courtesy. If that's not good enough for you, then I think I know where the problem is.

And calling your explanations "incoherent mush" is not a personal attack. That's a phony issue. I was expressing frustration with your angry and not at all clear nor particularly consistent rationals. A personal attack would be if I called you a jerk or something like that. Saying that your explanations strike me as unclear is fair game whether you choose to acknowledge that or not.

And, as Barbara Bush would say, I am done with you. Ta.

Rural patrons are by definition "tough to serve" because they're, like, rural.

I assume the three universities in question are Indiana (Bloomington), Purdue (West Lafayette) and Notre Dame (South Bend). But as noted earlier, Lafayette is on the route of the Cardinal/Hoosier State. Amtrak operates out a brand-new intermodal facility there, and Purdue's enrollment is about 37,000.

But aren't we forgetting something? By enrollment, Notre Dame is the 7th largest university in Indiana. Number 3? IUPUI, in Indianapolis. (No. 4 is Ball State, in Muncie; No. 5 is Indiana State, in Terre Haute; No. 6 is IUPU Fort Wayne.)

And then there are these, also on the IND-CHI route:
Saint Joseph's College, Rensselaer: 1,000 enrollment
Butler University, Indianapolis: 3,900 enrollment
University of Indianapolis: 3,700 enrollment
Indiana Vocational Technical College, Lafayette: 1,800 enrollment

Further, Indianapolis ain't the sticks either. It's the 34th largest metropolitan area, with a population of 1.5 million. The Lafayette, IN., metro area is nearly 180,000. No, there's a market there, all right

- - - -

Apparently "I'm done with you" is a quote from Barbara Bush to Al Franken, who recounted the incident in his book Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them.

Mr. Fels -

Since you are using enrollment figures to make a point based on fact, could you kindly provide enrollment figures for those schools you cited and a source?

This may be off-topic, but the state univerities cited by Mr. Fels draw largely from the in-state populace, which is widely scattered. Such people are highly dependent on highway travel. Private colleges such as Notre Dame and De Paul tend to have more out-of-state students. Hence there may be potential for them to be sources of traffic for Amtrak, e.g. New Yorkers taking the LSL to Notre Dame (South Bend) or Chicagoans taking the Cardinal/Hoosier to DePaul (Indianapolis)

Here's my source. Glad to oblige. I have since found a more up-to-date source of enrollment figures for all but Notre Dame here. A Wikipedia article gave Notre Dame's fall 2002 enrollment as 11,311.

I strongly advise against counting some prospective travelers and not others. The truth is, every traveler outside the Northeast Bubble (er, Corridor) is "highly dependent on highways."

And no, at an average density of 170 persons per square mile, Indiana's population isn't "widely scattered." No more so than Michigan's (175) or Virginia's (179) .

I don't accept quick and easy pronouncements of doom for the Hoosier State. I don't accept the contention that this train is unmarketable. I contend that word of mouth would improve ridership--and that there are plenty of people along the route to market it to.

By the way, DePauw University (2,247) is in Greencastle, IN; DePaul is in Chicago: six tenths of a mile east of Chicago Union Station. Gosh, that puts it on the route of the Hoosier State!

mattfels wrote:Here's my source. I strongly advise against counting some prospective travelers and not others. The truth is, every traveler outside the Northeast Bubble (er, Corridor) is "highly dependent on highways."

And no, at an average density of 170 persons per square mile, Indiana's population isn't "widely scattered." No more so than Michigan's (175) or Virginia's (179) .

Average density is meaningless. It tells you nothing about distribution of a state's population. Take New York State, for example. The vast majority of people live in the five boros of New York City, Long Island, Westchester or Rockland Counties. Counties located in the Adirondacks are very sparsely populated. Hamilton County, the largest geographically at 1,720 square miles, has only 5,295 people, or 3.1 per square mile versus the state's average of 401.9.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/36/36041.html

If we look at the other states Mr. Fels cited, Virginia and Michigan, the large population centers are located in the eastern and southern regions, respectively. Go visit Appalachia or the Upper Peninsula to see what I'm referring to.

Indiana's population is distributed somewhat differently. Indianapolis, the state capital and largest city, is right in the middle. However, there are significant population centers all around: Hammond and Gary to the northwest, South Bend to the north, Fort Wayne to the northeast, Muncie, Anderson and New Castle to the east, Cincinnati suburbs to the southeast, Louisville suburbs to the south, Evansville and Bloomington to the southwest and Terre Haute to the West.

I don't accept quick and easy pronouncements of doom for the Hoosier State. I don't accept the contention that this train is unmarketable. I contend that word of mouth would improve ridership--and that there are plenty of people along the route to market it to.

Matt, if you're that skilled a marketer, then you can sell snow to Eskimos.

By the way, DePauw University (2,247) is in Greencastle, IN; DePaul is in Chicago: six tenths of a mile east of Chicago Union Station.

Thanks for correcting my error, Matt. I always get those two confused. Since DePauw is in Greencastle, that's another school you can't get to by train (although I think the New York Central's Southwestern Ltd. stopped there in the good old days).

If that's what "widely scattered" means, then North Carolina meets that same test. And no one's suggesting--not yet, anyway--that North Carolina somehow has too much train service.

If average train speed dooms the Hoosier State to unmarketability, as contended here, this is very, very bad news indeed.

• Hoosier State: 196 mi in 4 hr 50 min (40.6 mph)
• Coast Starlight: 1,389 mi in 35 hr (39.7 mph)
• Capitols, SAC-SJC: 134 mi in 3 hr 20 min (40.2 mph)
• Texas Eagle: 1306 mi in 32 hr 25 min (40.2 mph)
• Downeaster: 116 mi in 2 hr 45 min (42.2 mph)
• Vermonter: 606 mi in 13 hr 45 min (44.1 mph) (

Now why the rush to make up reasons to condemn this train? So it can be "axed"? To put it gently, that seems thoroughly counterproductive. Particularly in advance of the Midwest High-Speed Rail Initiative.

I am quite prepared to accept Mr. Fels' reporting of mileages and scheduled running times, but I do believe there a few contributing factors to address. Anycase, allow me to play "Don Steffe" here:

Vermonter: let us be mindful that of those 606 miles reported 299 are over the NEC running time Train 58 WAS-NHV is 5'06" or 58.2mph - that'll beat lawful driving in the Northeast hands down., even add the NHV station time and the slower speeds of the next 62 niiles and you have WAS-SPF running time 7'00" or 51,6mph - still pretty competitive. But now the fun begins starting with a backward move to Palmer on the B&A , then proceeding Northward over the CV to St Albans over a "not slow" but not fast" road with running time 6'10" or 40.8mph. The Vermonter of course serves intermediate stops, and is sponsored by a State agency encouraging people to make their destination in Vermont.

Oh and the scenery along the Winnoski River, great. Must say it was more fun when one could observe a plume of smoke filtering back as was the case circa 1956.

The "jury is out" on the Downeaster's speed. That the B&M has relented and permitted some 79mph operation may favorably impact this schedule.

The Texas Eagle of course has quite the gerrymandered route which means it is not going to get to any destination S of Longview with much expediency, this statement overlooks the UP's "stellar" timekeeping.

So now we get to the Hoosier State, from much experience (we're now in MY backyard) Ind-Chi West Subs can safely and lawfully (yours truly at the wheel) drive in 3hrs flat. There are the intermediate stops noted, which could have potential for traffic, But there is no scenery, presently no on-board amenities beyond a seat, and those riding simply want to get there expediently.

Unfortunately, other surface transport such as private auto or the pooch simply do a better job at this time - 4'50' is just not in the ball park.

But lest we forget, there has been an initiative in the past for Midwest High Speed Rail. If this ever goes anywhere, obviously IND-CHI would be a "cornerstone' route.

Oh and Don Steffe? Its Quiz time!!!

Once again, I advise against focusing only on endpoints. The relentless (and I say unreasonable) focus on the runinng time between Louisville and Chicago contributed to negative word of mouth that the Kentucky Cardinal had a hard time overcoming.

And is it possible that people might want to ride the train precisely because they're tired of "the pooch" or driving? Remember, the idea is not to take all your trips on Amtrak. The idea is to have Amtrak as an option for all your trips. That's a subtle, but crucial, distinction.

No problem whatever, with your immediate posting, Mr. Fels.

If on board amenities, such as a cafe car, on the "Hoosier", as distinct from "Cardinal" days could be offered, then the train has something that the other two do not.

But alas, we all know that burns up "the secret ingredient' (any of us around here from New York knoweth of what I meaneth).

Would I take the Hoosier State both ways? For distances longer than CHI-LFT, probably not. But at only 4 days a week, to me it seems more likely that a round trip over the CHI-IND segment would be at least one way on the Cardinal. That's reason enough to keep it around, and yes, even talk it up a little.

The Hoosier State increases the utility of the Cardinal over the IND-CHI segment common to both--and thus contributes not only to the Cardinal but also to every train it connects with. As those who have tried it will attest, planning a trip with a 3x/wk leg in the itinerary is a challenge at least, a trip-killer at most. Remember, it's a network. No Hoosier might mean no trip to Denver on the CZ, no trip to Glacier Park on the Builder, no trip to Albuquerque on the Chief.

Does anyone have any idea of boardings at the weekend?

mattfels wrote:If that's what "widely scattered" means, then North Carolina meets that same test. And no one's suggesting--not yet, anyway--that North Carolina somehow has too much train service.

North Carolina does not meet the test. Most of its population is concentrated in the center of the state, with I-95 roughly as the eastern boundary and I-85 roughly as the western boundary. That's why the state's three passenger routes serve places like Greensboro, Charlotte, Raleigh, Durham and Fayetteville but skip Asheville and Wilmington.

P.S. There's no such thing as "too much train service."

Let's take a close look at the geography of Indiana.

Of the major cities other than Indianapolis, only the following are on
major transportation routes.

South Bend and Fort Wayne (Chicago-East Coast)
Terre Haute and Evansville (Chicago-Gulf Coast)

All the other cities would feed traffic to an Indianapolis hub.

Indy can also act at a hub to several major cities (Chicago, Louisville, Cincinnati, Dayton/Columbus and Detroit). but all of these lie on the other (wrong) side of a state boudary. That means involving another set of politiicians whose last concern is to run a business in line with market disciplines.

Furthermore, many of those situated in areas viewed as feeders to the hub will find a direct route. Witness the ride-exchange sheets found in the student union of any university.

So we have another, in all probability, good-intentioned attempt to tailor a sevice to a clientele whch either travels due to pure necessity, or if traveling for pleasure, expects a more-personalized service and is not likely to identify with the captive portion of the ridership.

Add to this the requirement to schedule all movements around a once- or twice-a-day attmpt to co-ordinate all movements around a central location, and you have a pretty effective formula for disappointment.

The argument here is not to belittle the efforts of those who are trying to put together something that works. Or the intentions of those who, as with the Postal Service, are attempting to present an image more in line with the "entreprenurial" theme which has gained favor in recent years.

The market is simply too thin to justify the service on passenger patronage alone. Some form of co-operation with other agencies who can supply ancillary business is the only way up.

Good, so we can all agree? The Hoosier State is... A miserable little train. Sorry ! " The Devil made me do it".... Flip Wilson

So we have another, in all probability, good-intentioned attempt

"In all probability"? "Good-intentioned"? Oh, please. No need to be so patronizing. Let's state things plainly:

The Hoosier State exists to provide daily service over the Chicago-Lafayette-Indianapolis route. It runs only on the Cardinal's off days. Surely we're not trying to suggest that the Hoosier State exists in a vacuum, or that Indiana's supposedly "scattered" population is even relevant. One and a half million Indianans didn't get the memo; they coalesced into the the 34th largest metro area. How big is that? Have a look. Bigger than

• Albany-Schenectady-Troy (825.875, #44)
• Buffalo-Niagara Falls (1,170,111, #42)
• Richmond (1,096,957, #46)

Another 178,541 nonconformists live in the Lafayette metro area. This isn't exactly a wide place in the road either. It's bigger than

• Fargo (174,367)
• Charlottesville (174,021)
• Johnstown (152,598)
• Bloomington-Normal, IL (150,433)

all of which are midpoints on at least one daily Amtrak route

No market there? That's just wishful thinking for bashers (of if you prefer, "tut-tutters").

By any objective measure, there's easily enough of a market to support daily service along the IND-CHI route. And even at its current running time, this train is comparable to other Amtrak trains whose "marketability" no one questions. Positive word of mouth would help. But a minimum let's have an end to the bashing.