Railroad Forums 

  • North Coast Hiawatha - Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority (BSPRA)

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
It is currently Sat May 18, 2024 1:58 pm

North Coast Hiawatha - Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority (BSPRA)

Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by vermontanan
 
mtuandrew wrote: ↑Wed Jun 10, 2020 4:24 pm Fascinating history of Montana railroading, Mr. Meyer. When suggesting Helena - Butte I meant to say via Garrison; I had no idea that the Butte - Garrison line had been leased off and then taken back.
Off topic, but the history of the Butte-Garrison line is even more interesting.

The Utah and Northern (later to become Union Pacific) was a narrow gauge railroad from Ogden, Utah which reached Butte in 1881. It was the first railroad in Montana. The Northern Pacific completed its main line to Garrison via Helena in 1883. The Utah and Northern line was extended to Garrison from Silver Bow also in 1883 and arrived just after the NP. By this time, Butte was evolving into what it would be called "The Richest HIll on Earth" so reaching it was exceptionally important. In 1886, the Utah and Northern track between Garrison and Butte was laid with a third rail (to accommodate narrow gauge Utah and Northern/UP and standard gauge NP), but since the section between Silver Bow and Garrison was simply the north end of a long branch line for UP, the UP leased the Utah and Northern to Northern Pacific for 999 years on August 1, 1886. The NP completed its line from Butte to the main line at Logan in 1890, which became the primary passenger train line (via the all-important city of Butte); the primary freight line continued to be the Helena route, which had superior grades and curvature, especially eastbound. The Butte line became the route of the NP North Coast Limited in 1900 and the Amtrak North Coast Hiawatha in 1971. The North Coast Hiawatha was discontinued in 1979 and in 1983 (or so), this route (Homestake Pass) was discontinued for service due to the route's steep grades and numerous bridges and curves. Today, the track remains in place, dramatically overgrown. It is out of service from Butte to Pipestone, just west of Whitehall, where there is an active ballast pit (ballast is used on MRL and BNSF). The line remains in service from Pipestone to the main line connection at Logan.

A harbinger of things to come, BN subleased the Butte-to-Garrison segment (ex-NP, ex-UP with 999 year lease) to short line Montana Western in 1986, which, probably not coincidentally, was the year before BN leased its ex- NP main line from Jones Jct. (east of Billings, Montana) to Sandpoint, Idaho to Montana Rail Link. With a shortline operating the Garrison-to Silver Bow segment, this prevented MRL from having direct access to UP interchange at Silver Bow (had the line also been leased or sold to MRL as other branch lines were). Business in and out of Butte declined significantly along with mining activity, and - as stated earlier - the line saw a dramatic drop in through traffic from the CP at Sweet Grass to the UP at Silver Bow following the marriages of BN and ATSF and UP and SP. So, in 2003, unable to make a go of it alone, Montana Western returned to BN (then BNSF).

And that's what we have today - an isolated 52 miles of BNSF between Butte and Garrison connecting with Montana Rail Link at Garrison and UP at Silver Bow - still on that 999 year lease, good through the year 2885.

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by vermontanan
 
mtuandrew wrote: ↑Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:23 pm
Exactly. For that matter, if the North Coast Hi rides again we could potentially see South Dakota lobby for it to be routed via Aberdeen. Wouldn’t be the best use of Federal dollars in re: mobility, but it would give South Dakota some political skin in the Amtrak game for the first time ever - those three votes (2S, 1H) are valuable.
Kind of like the ill-advised suggestions (earlier in this thread) about passenger train service between Butte and Salt Lake City and between Billings and Denver, the same can be said about the ex-Milwaukee Road main line across South Dakota (via Aberdeen). The ex-NP line through North Dakota is now all CTC (and even some short 2 MT CTC), but the route through Aberdeen is unsignaled west of Hettinger, ND, as well as between Benson and Appleton in Minnesota. Between Appleton and Hettinger, only a couple of islands of CTC. The current maximum speed for the whole route is 40 MPH. Siding capacity west of Hettinger is inadequate.

BN acquired most of this railroad in 1982 when the state of South Dakota bought it after the Milwaukee Road wanted out west of Ortonville, Minnesota. While the track is in better shape than the Milwaukee Road left it, one of things BN and BNSF haven't gotten around to is widening the cuts. Cuts plugged with snow were common occurrences in Milwaukee Road days, and in two of the last four winters, the line has been out of service for over a month at a time due to severe weather and the railroad not deeming the route of sufficient importance to dedicate resources to keep the cuts clear of recurring blizzards.

South Dakota has "skin in the game" now with regard to Amtrak. Check out this article:
https://dot.sd.gov/blog/134/federal-gra ... l-projects

The article states, “The STC funds are dedicated to three states, South Dakota, Wyoming and Alaska, that do not have passenger rail (Amtrak),” says Joel Jundt, Transportation Deputy Secretary. “These special federal funds are dedicated to rail projects within these states and these funds give us important financial resources to improve the state’s railroad infrastructure which is vital to shippers, rail companies and citizens.”

This is a recurring program where South Dakota's freight railroads can apply for grants where money is available in lieu of their not having Amtrak service. And, no, I have no idea why the STC statement doesn't also mention Hawai'i which also doesn't have Amtrak service either. But the point simply is that South Dakota does get something for its not having any intercity passenger trains.

Beyond that, the best way to serve South Dakota with a passenger train would be from St. Paul/Minneapolis on BNSF via Litchfield, Willmar, Marshall, and Garretson. The Minneapolis-Willmar section of course hosted the Amtrak Empire Builder until 1979, and the Willmar-Garretson section is part of BNSF's "Mid-Continent Corridor" between Winnipeg, Manitoba and Texas. The line does not have CTC, but it has a track speed of the maximum (for freight) of 49 MPH with most sidings having an alternative traffic control system, including power switches to increase fluidity. This leaves the last 18 miles (Garretson to Sioux Falls) to upgrade; it's generally 40 MPH with some permanent speed restrictions, but overall features the least-costly route with regard to infrastructure. And, by 2022, the $50 million "Willmar Wye" project will be complete which will dramatically increase fluidity through the Willmar terminal, which is the marshaling point (along with Sioux City) for BNSF operations in South Dakota.

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/designbuild/ ... index.html

https://www.wctrib.com/news/traffic-and ... onstructed

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by Gilbert B Norman
 
I think all around here know what I hold regarding even consideration of these routes where passenger service was gone well before A-Day, but how say this dream of a Mpls-Aberdeen train be named the "Zephyr Hiawatha"?

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by vermontanan
 
mtuandrew wrote: ↑Thu Jun 11, 2020 5:21 am Very unrelated to Montana, but it seems a branch from Omaha would be quicker and more effective at serving Sioux Falls.
I have to disagree. For a major metro area, the Minneapolis/St. Paul area has long been the focal point for both North and South Dakota. The Minneapolis/St. Paul metro area has a population of over 3.6 million, whereas Omaha's metro is just under 1 million.

Sioux Falls has a direct interstate highway to Omaha; A four-lane highway is available from Sioux Falls to Minneapolis, but it's not all controlled-access.

Whether a train to Omaha (213 miles) or Minneapolis (238 miles) would be be faster from Sioux Falls is debatable. The Omaha train would be much more complex as a state-sponsored train, passing through up to four states. The Twin Cities train just two, and Minnesota has a history of passenger train support and that's the state where the Minneapolis/St. Paul train would be traversing, except for about 20 miles. A train to Omaha would involve much more complexity to start the service.

As information, the 213 miles from Omaha to Sioux Falls is a UP routing to Sioux City and BNSF beyond. The former Milwaukee Road route from Sioux City to Sioux Falls is 23 miles shorter, but a direct connection in Sioux City would be very costly to create, or interchange very time-consuming. The route involves two sections of BNSF (Sioux City to near Elk Point and Canton to Sioux Falls) and the Dakota and Iowa Railroad (Elk Point-Canton). The DAIR would likely require significant capital to upgrade, primarily linked to its six crossings of the Big Sioux River (one of which got washed out last year near Canton and had to be rebuilt) and major speed restrictions negotiating the wyes at Elk Point and Canton.

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by mtuandrew
 
I can respect that, as a Minnesotan now living elsewhere. A train from Omaha/Council Bluffs hits more population centers, but you’re right about the trackage difficulties.

Speaking of routing via Willmar, wasn’t the NCH once routed that way? Or am I thinking of the Empire Builder while the two ran concurrently? (And could/would a new North Coast Hiawatha be sent that direction?)

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by Gilbert B Norman
 
vermontanan wrote: ↑Thu Jun 11, 2020 12:43 pm Sioux Falls has a direct interstate highway to Omaha; A four-lane highway is available from Sioux Falls to Minneapolis, but it's not all controlled-access.
A good point, Mr. Meyer--

Off the topic but definitely related, I can recall a few years ago driving South from Charlottesville on US29. It's four lane divided, but "not exactly" controlled access. It also has its share of "hills and dales".

So here comes a blind intersection; it's "Yellow marked" for 45. I slow to "something in that league". But here comes the "dale" - also comes Farmer Alfalfa with several bales of hay on a trailer behind his pickup and X-ing the lanes to head North.

Called for a bit of "hard braking".

I also note how "Virginia is for train lovers" was wise to sponsor a Wash-Lynchburg train; one encounter like that could have some folk on the rails. Also, "not sure how wise" it was to extend that train to Roanoke, for "the competition" there is I-81 - quite controlled access.

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by mtuandrew
 
Virginia is for train lovers (of which I’m one.) Many of them are collegiate.

And for that reason, I think the Upper Midwest can potentially be for train lovers too. The number of Twin Citians who attend North Dakota State and University of North Dakota (as well as U of M-Moorhead and -Crookston) is pretty sizable. Not sure about colleges further out, like any in Bismarck or Minot. But, I would have been happy to catch a train to Grand Forks to see friends or take in a hockey game once upon a time - especially a train that offered caffeinated or alcoholic beverages. Pretty sure the same applies to those going out to Gonzaga from Seattle, and collegiate types in the Montana southern tier. North Coast Service could easily be a cross-state initiative - even as discontinuous Regional trains with bus bridges, it functions as a common interest corridor for residents and travelers.

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by dgvrengineer
 
mtuandrew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2020 11:34 am
Speaking of routing via Willmar, wasn’t the NCH once routed that way? Or am I thinking of the Empire Builder while the two ran concurrently? (And could/would a new North Coast Hiawatha be sent that direction?)
Yes, the Builder went via Wilmar and Morris while the NCH went the current route via St. Cloud. The Builder moved to the NCH route when it was discontinued.

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by vermontanan
 
mtuandrew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2020 3:01 pm The number of Twin Citians who attend North Dakota State and University of North Dakota (as well as U of M-Moorhead and -Crookston) is pretty sizable.
https://www.ndsu.edu/admission/financial_aid/cost

Indeed. Tuition for many North Dakota state colleges are only slightly higher than in-state for Minnesota residents, and a bit higher than that for other bordering states and provinces.

--Mark Meyer

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by knope2001
 
If the focus is on a state-supported daylight train along Montana's southern tier (as opposed to a full NCH restoration) I'm curious what people think about how far it should go.

East
East of Billings the population thins out. Is the intrastate traffic worth extending up to Miles City and Glendive? Or would running east of Billings be more justified if at Glendive it headed northwest to Sidney and possibly even Williston? Subsidized EAS (essential air service) flying exists from Glendive and Sidney to Billings -- 9 seat aircraft a few times per day with low fares (mostly in the $30-$50 range each way). Glendive averages about 7 people per day going to Billings, Sidney about 27 per day to Billings. So there's some traffic looking for an option other than driving, and not everybody wants to fly. But then again that subsidized flying might compete for the same group of passengers the train would serve, and a train takes a few hours longer. It's very unlikely North Dakota would chip in anything for Williston's inclusion, so even though that may be a decent traffic generator I suppose the farebox would have to cover the added cost of the extension beyond Sidney which would be unlikely.

West
Is the benefit of going beyond Missoula, probably to Sandpoint to connect to/from the Empire Builder worth the cost? Being able to link the southern tier with Spokane, Portland and Seattle has definite traffic benefits. But again, Idaho probably wouldn't see much benefit in sending subsidy toward a Montana train which serves just Sandpoint in the middle of the night. There's no reasonable way to connect a Montana southern tier train to the eastbound Builder without wrecking the intra-Montana service. But a western connection at Sandpoint is workable. Is it worth it?

Thruway Bus
Great Falls and Helena are two key centers not easily added to either the northern tier or southern tier rail services. A thurway bus could link those two cities to the southern tier one of two ways:
(a) Twice-daily bus Great Falls-Helena-Butte and back to connect with the train both directions.
--or--
(b) Morning southbound to Butte to connect with the eastbound train with the bus continuing west from Butte up to Missoula. Going to Missoula from Great Falls and Helena via Butte adds very roughly an hour or two more than a direct highway route, but the people most likely served would be those who for various reasons are less likely to drive their own cars.

About 60% of the state's population lives in counties served with stops on a southern tier route if it runs up to Sidney and you include Great Falls and Helena with a thruway link. By comparison the northern tier served by the Empire Builder stops in counties with about 18% of the state's population. And while the population in the southern tier is relatively spread out among several relatively sizable communities, the majority of the northern tier's entire population is in a single county.

When it comes to colleges and universities, about 85-90% of the roughly 50,000 students in the state of Montana are in cities served by the southern tier (including HLN/GTF thruway bus).

If the state comes up with funding it seems there's a decent market here for a relatively modest train -- a coach or two and cafe car. Distances are far enough and the population centers are clustered and linear. The geographies of the west are why a city of 50k in the west might support multiple daily flights without subsidy but a city of 50k in the east may drive an hour or more to an airport. But would it pay to extend east of Billings and if so up to Sidney and perhaps even Williston? Would it pay to continue west to hook up to the Empire Builder in Sandpoint?

For illustration this is roughly what a full run with Empire Builder connection in Sandpoint might look like at some larger stops. These are based on mid-70's NCH times -- not sure if there have been any major improvements or deterioration points in tracks since to account for. If the train ended at Missoula or didn't go as far east the times could be adjusted to be even better, but these aren't too bad for intra-Montana travelers.

West
'0600 Williston
'0700 Sidney
'0805 Glendive
'0930 Miles City
'1205 Billings
'1500 Bozeman
'1725 Butte
'1950 Missoula
'2250 Sandpoint (59 minutes before westbound Empire Builder)

East
'0320 Sandpoint (45 minutes after eastbound Empire Builder)
'0800 Missoula
'1025 Butte
'1250 Bozeman
'1535 Billings
'1810 Miles City
'1935 Glendive
'2035 Sidney
'2135 Williston

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by gokeefe
 
I think it's worth noting that college student traffic can't carry a regional service on its own. It's an excellent enhancement to a good route but on its own the ridership is irregular and insufficient.

One notable exception would be a situation like Durham-UNH on the Downeaster which gets fantastic patronage from students all week from commuters and on weekends during the school year for students going to Boston for entertainment.

I doubt there would be comparable levels of ridership between Montana and Minnesota every Friday night for the 18 +/- hour "trip to the city".

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by Rockingham Racer
 
knope2001 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 13, 2020 2:11 pm If the focus is on a state-supported daylight train along Montana's southern tier (as opposed to a full NCH restoration) I'm curious what people think about how far it should go.

East
East of Billings the population thins out. Is the intrastate traffic worth extending up to Miles City and Glendive? Or would running east of Billings be more justified if at Glendive it headed northwest to Sidney and possibly even Williston? Subsidized EAS (essential air service) flying exists from Glendive and Sidney to Billings -- 9 seat aircraft a few times per day with low fares (mostly in the $30-$50 range each way). Glendive averages about 7 people per day going to Billings, Sidney about 27 per day to Billings. So there's some traffic looking for an option other than driving, and not everybody wants to fly. But then again that subsidized flying might compete for the same group of passengers the train would serve, and a train takes a few hours longer. It's very unlikely North Dakota would chip in anything for Williston's inclusion, so even though that may be a decent traffic generator I suppose the farebox would have to cover the added cost of the extension beyond Sidney which would be unlikely.

West
Is the benefit of going beyond Missoula, probably to Sandpoint to connect to/from the Empire Builder worth the cost? Being able to link the southern tier with Spokane, Portland and Seattle has definite traffic benefits. But again, Idaho probably wouldn't see much benefit in sending subsidy toward a Montana train which serves just Sandpoint in the middle of the night. There's no reasonable way to connect a Montana southern tier train to the eastbound Builder without wrecking the intra-Montana service. But a western connection at Sandpoint is workable. Is it worth it?

Thruway Bus
Great Falls and Helena are two key centers not easily added to either the northern tier or southern tier rail services. A thurway bus could link those two cities to the southern tier one of two ways:
(a) Twice-daily bus Great Falls-Helena-Butte and back to connect with the train both directions.
--or--
(b) Morning southbound to Butte to connect with the eastbound train with the bus continuing west from Butte up to Missoula. Going to Missoula from Great Falls and Helena via Butte adds very roughly an hour or two more than a direct highway route, but the people most likely served would be those who for various reasons are less likely to drive their own cars.

About 60% of the state's population lives in counties served with stops on a southern tier route if it runs up to Sidney and you include Great Falls and Helena with a thruway link. By comparison the northern tier served by the Empire Builder stops in counties with about 18% of the state's population. And while the population in the southern tier is relatively spread out among several relatively sizable communities, the majority of the northern tier's entire population is in a single county.

When it comes to colleges and universities, about 85-90% of the roughly 50,000 students in the state of Montana are in cities served by the southern tier (including HLN/GTF thruway bus).

If the state comes up with funding it seems there's a decent market here for a relatively modest train -- a coach or two and cafe car. Distances are far enough and the population centers are clustered and linear. The geographies of the west are why a city of 50k in the west might support multiple daily flights without subsidy but a city of 50k in the east may drive an hour or more to an airport. But would it pay to extend east of Billings and if so up to Sidney and perhaps even Williston? Would it pay to continue west to hook up to the Empire Builder in Sandpoint?

For illustration this is roughly what a full run with Empire Builder connection in Sandpoint might look like at some larger stops. These are based on mid-70's NCH times -- not sure if there have been any major improvements or deterioration points in tracks since to account for. If the train ended at Missoula or didn't go as far east the times could be adjusted to be even better, but these aren't too bad for intra-Montana travelers.

West
'0600 Williston
'0700 Sidney
'0805 Glendive
'0930 Miles City
'1205 Billings
'1500 Bozeman
'1725 Butte
'1950 Missoula
'2250 Sandpoint (59 minutes before westbound Empire Builder)

East
'0320 Sandpoint (45 minutes after eastbound Empire Builder)
'0800 Missoula
'1025 Butte
'1250 Bozeman
'1535 Billings
'1810 Miles City
'1935 Glendive[
'2035 Sidney
'2135 Williston
By mentoning Sandpoint and Williston, you are asking two other states to get involved. which complicates things. So it's not just a Montana train. A train coming east into Glendive will have to reverse directions there to take the BNSF Sidney Sub up to Snowdem and east to Williston, ND. Not an operational impossibility, but the backup move is clumsy at best. If turning the equipment in Williston is a requirement, there is no way to do that there.

I'd like to point this out, also: Culbertson, MT was mentioned as a stop for the Empire Builder many years ago. Nothing has happened in that regard, AFAIK. That does not bode well for a whole new route to get started.
Just sayin :wink:

Re: North Coast Hiawatha Study

  by Rockingham Racer
 
gokeefe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 13, 2020 2:27 pm I think it's worth noting that college student traffic can't carry a regional service on its own. It's an excellent enhancement to a good route but on its own the ridership is irregular and insufficient.

One notable exception would be a situation like Durham-UNH on the Downeaster which gets fantastic patronage from students all week from commuters and on weekends during the school year for students going to Boston for entertainment.

I doubt there would be comparable levels of ridership between Montana and Minnesota every Friday night for the 18 +/- hour "trip to the city".

I agree entirely. But even the UNH kids going to Boston do not use the train every day to go to there, or up to Portland for a lobster dinner. :-) Your premise of sporadic use by college students is right on.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
  • 1
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 32
 Return to “Amtrak”
 - All times are UTC-05:00 -