Michigan's DOT may get Wisconsin's Talgo Trains

**hybridy** · May-01-14, 03:33 PM

2 high-speed train sets built for Wisconsin set to leave Milwaukee courtesy of tea bagger fav Governor Scott Walker.

Michigan's Department of Transportation is looking for alternatives to Amtrak trains for its Wolverine service while it waits for the 2018 delivery of a new generation of passenger cars, which are being manufactured for several Midwestern states in Rochelle, Ill. Because of a change in Amtrak's cost methodology this year, the federal government will no longer pay for the state of Michigan to use Amtrak trains on its Wolverine service. The agency's annual costs for operating and maintaining trains on its three train routes, including the Wolverine, ballooned from $8 million to $25 million this year.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwauk...#ixzz30UvxqooC

**mtburb** · May-01-14, 03:38 PM

I wonder how long this will take before I will be able to see one roll past Greenfield Village-or better yet, through Wyandotte on a new Detroit-Toledo route...

**Downriviera** · May-01-14, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by mtburb

I wonder how long this will take before I will be able to see one roll past Greenfield Village-or better yet, through Wyandotte on a new Detroit-Toledo route...

On July 5th and 6th you should be able to see the Norfolk Southern steam excursion roll through Wyandotte on its way to Toledo and back.

**Hermod** · May-01-14, 03:38 PM

"Talgo" trains sound good at first, but it is very difficult to cut out a bad order car.

**DetroitPlanner** · May-01-14, 03:46 PM

They have been upgrading the lines over the last several years to go with faster service. W of K'zoo its gunna fly now!

**French777** · May-01-14, 04:30 PM

Haha, the article picture states "Royal Creek" instead of Royal Oak as a stop.

**douglasm** · May-01-14, 04:45 PM

The article mentions the two trains built for Oregon. They're not the greatest looking things in the world [[at least looking at the cab.....they're nicknamed 'Mater), but they're part of a very popular Talgo service between Eugine, Ore and Vancouver, B.C. Fast and comfortable, they've made a major dent in air travel between Seattle and Portland. If you can get Illinois, Indiana and Michigan to cooperate on rail travel in the same way Washington and Oregon have, it would be a good thing.

http://www.amtrakcascades.com/default.htm

**MikeyinBrooklyn** · May-01-14, 05:04 PM

I don't care too much about what kind of rail car the state buys. I am still convinced that all federal money dedicated to intercity rail is best spent on the relatively heavily used East coast, and to a lesser extent the West coast. And state transit money is better spent on commuter service in and around Detroit and the other cities in Michigan. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars to support intercity rail in Michigan [[or most of the midwest) to support a very tiny fraction of travel is a waste of money. No real harm will come, mind you, except that said money could be used to support much more heavily-used local transit improvements. $1B spent on intercity rail takes many fewer people from place to place, does little to alleviate traffic, and will spur little economic growth. The opportunity cost of that misdirected money is substantial, in my opinion. Please note: I am not anti-train. If we could have everything in the world, I would love to take a train to Chicago every now and then, Traverse City in the summer, and Grand Rapids to visit Meijer Gardens. But since we have limited transit resources, I say: KEEP IT LOCAL.

Note to my beloved liberal friends: local transit expenditures are, by far, more beneficial to the poor and struggling than Amtrak subsidies. Business people and leisure travellers dominate Amtrak. The poor don't take Amtrak, with or without the subsidy. The median income of Amtrak riders is- I would guess by those I have seen on my years of East Coast rail travelling- is a lot higher than the average income.

**ghettopalmetto** · May-02-14, 07:10 AM

Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn

Spending hundreds of millions of dollars to support intercity rail in Michigan [[or most of the midwest) to support a very tiny fraction of travel is a waste of money. No real harm will come, mind you, except that said money could be used to support much more heavily-used local transit improvements.

You do know that each railcar carries about 96 people--this means an 8-car train foregoes the need for an additional 4-12 flights [[depending on size of plane) in our congested air traffic system? The same 8-car train also takes several hundred vehicles off I-94. That's not insignificant.

And what would you do about people who can't/won't drive or fly? Or people who are travelling to smaller cities, like Kalamazoo? Should they just stay home? Or perhaps you'd like to give them a ride?

Train travel is only "a tiny fraction" because there are only three trains a day between Detroit and Chicago--and those are usually sold out. If you add more trains, that "tiny fraction" will grow, just as it has in the Northeast Corridor, where 1-2 trains an hour carry twice as many people between DC and New York as ALL of the airlines COMBINED.

The cities in the Great Lakes region are spaced comparably to cities in Europe--well within the 350 mile-radius where rail travel is more competitive than air travel. That radius, of course, increases as train speeds increase. If we had a better passenger rail system, we wouldn't have so many sardine-can 50-seat money-losing "regional" jets cluttering the airports.

I'm just curious if you made the same argument when billions of dollars were spent to construct the new terminals at Metro Aiport. After all, people who fly out of DTW are just a "small fraction" of everyone.

**ABetterDetroit** · May-03-14, 11:28 PM

Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn

I don't care too much about what kind of rail car the state buys. I am still convinced that all federal money dedicated to intercity rail is best spent on the relatively heavily used East coast, and to a lesser extent the West coast.

Not sure where you are going on a few of these Mike. When I write that check in April every year am I supposed to feel proud that it doesn't come back to MI?

**MikeyinBrooklyn** · May-05-14, 09:27 AM

Originally Posted by ABetterDetroit

Not sure where you are going on a few of these Mike. When I write that check in April every year am I supposed to feel proud that it doesn't come back to MI?

Well, ABD, my perspective on federal money is that it should be spent wisely, even if that money doesn't come my way. The feds subsidize rail service via Amtrak, as well as grants to improve track & bridge infrastructure in various places. When they spend X dollars on rail service subsidies for the Boston to DC corridor, it can be justified because hundreds of thousands of people use it day in, day out. When they spend money on Amtrak service in Michigan, there is no corresponding justification based on passenger traffic. Similarly, all federal spending should be spent in what appears to be erratic fashion, but isn't. Iowa gets far more in agricultural aid than Arizona does. Alaska has more missile defense spending per capita than any other stay. Michigan gets more freshwater preservation money than any other state. The needs for various programs vary depending on the state. The expansive Midwest with widely spaced cities full of drivers don't have rail needs and demands on the same level as the East Coast, even on a per capita basis. If your pride is dependent on the level of federal spending that comes back to Detroit, you will be forever disappointed. I would be proud if the feds just spent money wisely or efficiently [[neither of which they do, of course).

**oladub** · May-01-14, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by hybridy

2 high-speed train sets built for Wisconsin set to leave Milwaukee
courtsey of tea bagger fav governor scott walker

The article is wrong on a couple of points. Gov. Doyle's Spanish trains were not for Chicago. The were to go back and forth between Madison and Milwaukee. It was a thoroughly stupid boondoggle because buses presently operate between Milwaukee and Madison more frequently, with more stops, and for less cost than subsidized train passengers assuming the rosy passenger projections claimed by Gov. Doyle. Gov. Doyle did get a few nice vacations to Spain though.

Gov. Walker did not even kill this plan. Gov. Doyle assumed that Gov. Elect Walker would kill the train so Doyle gave the federal money back to the government which immediately sent it to California.Walker had instead wanted to ask the federal government to reassign that money to make improvements on the much more trafficked Milwaukee-Chicago part of the line.

This sounds like a reasonable idea to sell these trains to Michigan. If Michigan, or anyone would order more trains, perhaps Gov. Doyle's train adventure will actually make sense.

While I'm at it, Gov. Doyle's other achievements included new taxes on hospital and nursing home stays.

**hybridy** · May-01-14, 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by oladub

The article is wrong on a couple of points. Gov. Doyle's Spanish trains were not for Chicago. The were to go back and forth between Madison and Milwaukee. It was a thoroughly stupid boondoggle because buses presently operate between Milwaukee and Madison more frequently, with more stops, and for less cost than subsidized train passengers assuming the rosy passenger projections claimed by Gov. Doyle. Gov. Doyle did get a few nice vacations to Spain though.

Gov. Walker did not even kill this plan. Gov. Doyle assumed that Gov. Elect Walker would kill the train so Doyle gave the federal money back to the government which immediately sent it to California.Walker had instead wanted to ask the federal government to reassign that money to make improvements on the much more trafficked Milwaukee-Chicago part of the line.

This sounds like a reasonable idea to sell these trains to Michigan. If Michigan, or anyone would order more trains, perhaps Gov. Doyle's train adventure will actually make sense.

While I'm at it, Gov. Doyle's other achievements included new taxes on hospital and nursing home stays.

Not entirely accurate. Talgo built these for Hiawatha Service from Chicago to Milwaukee. Walker campaigned on rejecting the $800 million in federal funds to expand high speed service from Milwaukee to madison and eventually the twin cities based on future state maintanence costs. Walker wanted to divert the money to the Highway projects even as car travel continues to decrease over time while mass transit use increases. Talgo set up shop in Milwaukee hoping to land future work on the Minnesota expansion.

**MikeyinBrooklyn** · May-01-14, 05:50 PM

Thank you, oladub.

**hybridy** · May-01-14, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn

Thank you, oladub.

Make sure to read my response so u're properly informed

**oladub** · May-01-14, 11:25 PM

Originally Posted by hybridy

Make sure to read my response so u're properly informed

Whatever Governor Walker wanted including spending that money on the Milwaukee-Chicago corridor and highway improvements is irrelevant since he could not even negotiate his wishes with the federal government. He never had that opportunity thanks to spiteful Gov. Doyle. Doyle sent the money back while Walker was still Governor Elect. End of story. Also, the federal money had nothing to do with trains going to Chicago. It was only for high speed rail between Madison and Milwaukee. If you want to bash Walker, find something that he did rather than what Doyle did. There are a number of things I disagree with Walker on. This is not one of them.

High speed rail [[in Wisconsin); Worth the Price? [[no)

**ghettopalmetto** · May-02-14, 07:19 AM

Originally Posted by oladub

Whatever Governor Walker wanted including spending that money on the Milwaukee-Chicago corridor and highway improvements is irrelevant since he could not even negotiate his wishes with the federal government.

The rules had been established, and Wisconsin applied under those rules in good faith. You don't get to negotiate once you win the prize. The funds had been earmarked for passenger rail...you don't get to choose to divert those funds to highways.

**oladub** · May-02-14, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

The rules had been established, and Wisconsin applied under those rules in good faith. You don't get to negotiate once you win the prize. The funds had been earmarked for passenger rail...you don't get to choose to divert those funds to highways.

How could Gov. Walker negotiate after Gov. Doyle got pissy and gave the money back to the federal government so that Walker didn't even have the option of negotiating? It's just as well. Had the new Madison-Milwaukee train service been established, it would have cost more money than a bus, been a load stone attached to taxpayers, probably would have reduced bus service and run less frequently than busses, and would not have saved time for up to half of passengers. Its average speed would have been 60mph; hardly the high speed rail service that the federal government was allegedly paying for. As far as 'once the rules are established', rules are broken all the time. Case in point: Democrats in Congress agreed to the sequestration.

**DetroiterOnTheWestCoast** · May-02-14, 10:53 AM

At least Governor Walker took a break from suppressing voter rights to take time to damage rail service.

**MikeyinBrooklyn** · May-02-14, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

At least Governor Walker took a break from suppressing voter rights to take time to hurt damage rail service.

Always makes me giggle.

jimmyr · May-02-14, 12:34 PM

^ Good on you for calling out his bullsh*t.

**oladub** · May-03-14, 09:59 PM

Let's say that airports are fifteen minutes further than downtown bus or rail stations at each end of a trip for the average passenger and that we have to get to an airport an hour earlier than a flight instead of 20 minutes early for a bus or train. That gives a bus or train a 70 minute edge over planes useful only for trips of no more than maybe 250 miles. A bus would have the additional advantage of more stops for some people so they wouldn't have to somehow get to the nearest big city airport or train terminal.

One advantage trains have over planes and busses has to do with how nasty a drive is. Driving from the Michigan State line to downtown Chicago is a nasty trip especially driving one's own car but annoying enough in a bus. A train, in theory, should be able to shoot right through Chicago, Gary, and Hammond. That would be worth a few dollars by itself.

Now, just for fun, I'm going to go to Travelocity, Amtrak, and Mega-us to compare air, rail, rail, and bus fares and transit times for [[arbitrarily) Detroit to Chicago one way one month from now June 3.

Best air fare $95 Metro to Midway 1hr19min flight time [[plus 70 min. see above)
Amtrak $34 for 'value' coach seat 5hr34min
MegaBus $1 [[really) 5hr15min

Using my guesstimate numbers, a plane saves 2hr36min. compared with a MegaBus and 2hr.55min. compared with a Amtrak.