It’s good that the Wichita City Council is taking a fresh look at reviving passenger rail transportation to Wichita. Council members asked city staff to look at a resolution supporting a north-south extension of Amtrak’s Heartland Flyer route from Oklahoma City through Wichita to Kansas City, Mo.
With rising gas prices and airline delays, Wichita should have more transportation options, and rail could be a popular option along this busy corridor.
It’s worth a close study. Could the old Union Station depot in Old Town actually be put back to use?
39 Comments
It’s high time America embraced bullet train technology. It’s proven in Japan and France and investment in infrastructure just makes sense to replace freeways with super trains.
From downtown Wichita to downtown Oklahoma City, or downtown Kansas City, in an hour or so; to Denver or Dallas in under two hours; to Los Angeles overnight… makes more sense than any alternative transportation equation.
It just makes sense.
So Americans won’t do it.
Damned fine idea! Build it and the will come, I know I’d love it.
Traveled Amtrak from Newton to Williams, AZ.Only way to go.
Hell yes. Regional rail and multi-use transportation hubs are a huge economic driver. Want to be a “world class” city? Invest in transportation infrastructure.
Let’s remember the best thing about rail: It’s the easiest form of transportation to electrify, and thus, the best hope for cutting foreign oil use and fighting the terrorists.
Anyhow, how’s this for a nice first step? Commuter rail from Andover to downtown Wichita, and on out to the airport. Right of way already exists for most of that route. We could pay for most of it by simply _not_ building a new parking garage at the airport. We could encourage people to use it by _not_ passing a school bond issue, but by funding the schools through gasoline taxes instead. And then we could extend the commuter rail to Newton, and Kingman, and Winfield, and Ark City, and Ponca City…
Let’s hope the railroads make a comeback. Since Teddy Roosevelt brought anti-trust action against the railroads combined with the invention of the automobile, passenger trains fell of the radar screen for viable transportation.
With rising oil prices, It’s time for them to come back again.
Gawd…. have you ever traveled Europe by train? A wonderful experience, safe, fast, reasonably priced, comfortable. Oh yeah, per passenger mile… much lower carbon footprint than automobiles.
Once upon a time, long, long ago, the sixth grade students of the Wichita school system each year took a train from Union Station to Topeka to visit the State Capitol. (1963?)
If we could get the trains running again, this is just one more opportunity that could be restored.
I’m all for passenger train travel. To extend the Heartland Flyer route from OKC to KC, it will take direct subsidization of the extension from both the OK and KS legislatures, it seems to me. An analogy is the “Downeaster” Amtrak route that runs from Boston, MA to Portland, ME. The states (MA, NH, ME) joined together to form a transportation consortium to subsidize the extended service. From what I know, this has proved successful, with additional trains added to the schedule.
While I hold to the romantic notion of coast to coast passenger rail, it seems the reality is in the U.S. that rail, at this point, makes more sense on shorter routes. The Northeast corridor service of Amtrak seems to substantiate this.
Perhaps, over time, with “bullet trains” and other high speed rail service, it will make more sense to us to leave our cars behind and take the train for longer trips as an alternative to flying. Until then, it seems that judicious extensions of service on shorter routes is the way to go.
All for it!
Let private industry step right up and pay for the cost of the “study” and pay for the rail service.
Wonderful idea.
Just don’t hit my pocket book to fund another one of your adventures. Amtrak is going broke, and continually needs increasing federal subsidy to survive. Interesting how easy you all find it to spend other peoples money.
Wichita and Kansas have been stupid and short sighted NOT to exploit our central location as to rail travel.
Look just above my post as to why.
Too many nickel squeezers.
The few times I have checked out rail service from this area to the west coast, it took longer, and was nearly expensive as air travel. My conclusion? Why bother. If rail service could pay for itself, it already would have.
I just hope it doesn’t turn out like the Simpson’s “MonoRail” episode!……MonoRail!
littlejohn, I’m wondering what the cost of air service would be without the federal money going to airport construction, maintenance and operations. FAA hires the air controllers, not the airports being one example.
They’ll need bigger parking lots.
When the KU/KSU fans pile on the trains to travel down to OKC when they play the Sooners. :)
Instead of just being a “fly over” state, Kansas could be come a “roll over” state with trains rolling through. Increased infrastructure costs, with little or no effect on the economy. Bottom line: check passenger counts. Projections of earnings based upon passengers.
Very few climb on board.
Lot’sa $$$ to serve very, very few.
If you build it, they will come.
Works for Casinos doesn’t it?
They could fund the railroad with a Global Warming tax on utility bills and gasoline.
$10 per month on gas/electric bills.
$.50/gallon additional state tax on gasoline.
Isn’t Global Warming a good enough cause for all to share in the solution? Or should only the stinking filthy rich have to pay for it?
with 4 dollar+ gas this summer trains could very well be a vialbe alternative to driving
Mag-lev would be a great fit out here. Constructed above the plains, running around 250 MPH. The concept was proven in asia, with many more planned in both Asia and Europe. It would work here.
Even without fancy bullet or mag-lev trains rail service would be a big plus. Consider a fairly conservative 80 mph train to nearby locations like KC, OkC, Denver - especially their airports.
Then add extended ’somewhat luxury’ service for longer trips - nice views, meals, etc etc.
Then build a really substantial rail network over the years which we really need in this country IMO.
Max - I like your idea.
The old train station is available as soon as Cox finishes their move. Imagine the station restored to its original glory…shops, mini-bars, restaurants like the old Dr. Redbird’s Medicinal Inn. People from KC and OKC come to Wichita for a concert could come in early and have a walk around Old Town, stay in an Old Town hotel, ride the trolley…BLINK…… BLINK….did I just wake up from a dream???? This is a perfect opportunity to help get the money back that was spent on the arena. It would be a great way to help revitalize the Old Town/Downtown area. It’s time Wichita paid attention to something that is a real opportunity to serve a lot of people, save energy, and make some money!
Why not Bullet train service from KC to Dallas?
Tom - I like the idea of bullet trains in the longer term. However that would require a lot of upgrades. However, RIGHT NOW we could run ‘regular’ trains on the existing tracks.
Dr Redbirds? Someone is giving away their age. i do miss them, though. Their great sandwiches, and beer.
“I’m wondering what the cost of air service would be without the federal money going to airport construction, maintenance and operations. FAA hires the air controllers, not the airports being one example”
I think that is a valid point, however, the rails have also had their subsidies in that they were given the land that they operate on. And others. For instance, no ss tax (they have their own retirement). The rails have had at various times multiple direct subsidies. As a side note, the airports have multiple airlines to take care of. What little I know of rail terminals, not so much. No competition. Monopoloy. Yet they still cannot make it on their own (passenger traffic) without direct subsidies. And do not airlines pay a fee each and every time they land or take off at the airport? And do they not pay fuel taxes? I am not being argumentative, but just pointing out that some various thoughts. I think there would have to be a HUGE price difference for people to take the rails rather fly.
littlejohn, I concede the correctness of the land; the fees airlines pay. Both railroads and airlines pay fuel taxes. It seems to me that in the case of air terminals, being forced to serve multiple airlines is appropriate, given the large degree to which the same were constructed and are funded by public money. Rail terminals, as I recall, were/are the property of the respective railroads. Yes, railroad retirement is the system, not Social Security. The funds go into a federal government repository, the same as Social Security as I recall, and the same is referred to at least informally as a tax.
I, too, am not trying to be argumentative. It seems to me, however, that without a great deal of current public funding, the costs of air travel would be much, much higher than it is.
Part of the issue with rail travel is, of course, the time factor involved, which makes the same unattractive in the current world (except for relatively short distance travel, given airport congestion, etc., the time to travel by air is shorter than if travel by rail as it currently exists is elected). I’m of an age that thinks that slowing down a bit would not be a bad thing.
Plus, trains are much handier carrying those gifts to the relatives during holiday seasons. :)
Plus, trains are a much more comfortable way to travel for those of us who are of “average” (cough) size. :-)
heh true Vaughn,
I hate flying unless I can get business or first class.
Having knees squished and shoulders scrunched is not my idea of comfort.
My elbows end up being attached to my kidneys on an flight. :D
I am very empathetic, Regular. :-)
Vaughn-
I certainly think that air travel costs have directly benefitted from some public moneys. As have the railroads. I do sympathize with you (and commiserate with you) on the size of airline seats.
However, given travel of four or five hours time a bit cramped, to two days of comfort travel, I will take the shorter time. There are vacations to which I like longer times, and sightseeing along the way. For that, I will motor myself. I once took a bus from San Diego to Wichita. A more scenic, more excruciatinngly slow path could not possibly be devised. It was cheaper, but OMG. Anway, this is the age of microwave cooking, and High speed internet. Rail travel, in my opinion, will never take off. Again, unless there is a HUGE price difference. and even then, except for short distances (WIchita to KC, OR OKC, maybe Dallas), air travel would win out.
littlejohn, understand and agree in general with your observation.
Personal story: as I’ve bored y’all with, our younger daughter is graduating from college in Maine this May. We would be able to travel to and from via Amtrak for less than driving, when one takes meals, motels, etc., into account, and the length of the travel part of the trip would be about 2 days shorter each way via the train. However, this far in advance, we can fly for less than what the Amtrak fare would be, and in much less time, and (obviously) have made the reservations and will do so. However, when factoring in the cost of parking (unless we can get someone to take us and retrieve us from the airport here), the price delta shrinks, and it is, unfortunately, purely a matter of time. Oh, well, it gives us a few more days to explore. :-)
I would love to sit back, relax, and read a good book while someone else does the driving.
I would not have to stress going to OKC to visit family and I have done it all three ways – driving a car, flying and riding a bus.
If there was a train to OKC, I would be on it at lease once a month.
And here is a little trivia for anyone who wants to chew on it as I have at lease 5 years in on refueling commercial airlines.
My guess is that it is probably the same today as it was twenty five years ago on the average the airlines would be refueled each time before take-off, 2,500 gallons of Jet-A fuel.
Multiply that with however many flights out of Wichita and that will give you an ideal on how much fuel is burnt for Wichita just for the airlines alone.
Yes…I guess I did give away my age with that one! I guess it’s because I’m “older” I appreciate the slower pace of life from back then. I also am afraid of flying and don’t like being squeezed into a small space like a school of sardines. I think the boomer generation would appreciate being able to take a nice, laid back weekend trip and soak up some nostalgia. I know I’d rather do that than sit and listen to a bunch of singing c’boys. Just imagine all the things that could be done with the old Union Station. There’s a whole lot more to it than the train.
littlejohn, I preferred the no joke folks albumin and yolk sandwich with the mushroom wild rice and a red beer….
A big waste of money. Nobody rides Amtrak. Nobody will ride it in Wichita either. It used to come to Wichita (union station) and nobody rode it then.
Libs and Cons agree–bring the rail service to Wichita.
I have read too much on this list about how passenger rail should “pay for itself” or it is as expensive as air travel. Have you tried to fly out of Topeka’s airport lately? How about driving the 600 miles between Kansas City and Fort Worth? Nobody uses the train? Have you taken the time to actually see how many board at the stops? Where is your research? Why don’t you check out http://www.northflyer.org or PassengerRailKS.org to get some facts about passenger trains and then you can make more informed decisions.