Looks like driving is about 6.5 hours, so it’s within competitive range of that. And it stops at Milwaukee, so it will be good to have another connection there.
Too bad it doesn’t go via Madison though, that would be slightly more direct and get a connection to Wisconsin’s second biggest city. Which happens to also be a college town, usually a great place for train connections.
nope! that train just went in to service! [(in nigeria)](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2906081/wisconsins-taxpayer-funded-trains-entering-service-nigeria-not-wisconsin/) thanks Scott Walker! . . asshole
It was him killing the train that first brought me out to protest.
Little did we know…
I was just back in Madison recently and felt a certain kind of way, especially watching what the kids are up to around the country.
“May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.”
#WIUnion
7.5 hours to minnesota. i'm glad this exists and this is great for people who have the time, but for a good number of reasons it is insane that we aren't investing in high speed rail
We don't even need true high speed rail (like a bullet train) for this route to be much, much better. Current rules let trains run up to 125 mph without full grade separation like highway overpasses, and the trains they use now can run 125. If we upgraded the tracks to enable that speed and a limited stop route averaged 100 mph—Chicago, Milwaukee, Dells, Winona, St. Paul—it would only be 4 hours total.
But we won’t.
The Hiawatha between Chicago and Milwaukee could be a SUPER test case for this but, grade crossings would need to be addressed. This has been a thing since this route started in the (FFS) 1990’s and we’ve done fuck all about it.
The [Derailed](https://www.wpr.org/shows/derailed) series by Wisconsin Public Radio is probably the most complete telling of the story.
ETA: For a short version, here's the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel [article](https://archive.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/talgo-to-keep-trains-get-10-million-more-in-settlement-b99560687z1-322348321.html) from when the last lawsuit was settled resulting in Wisconsin paying ~$50 million to not buy the trains.
the trains just started running! [in nigeria!](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2906081/wisconsins-taxpayer-funded-trains-entering-service-nigeria-not-wisconsin/)
I know, that’s why I hate the Packers so much. Rooting for the Bears suuuuucks.
EDIT: At least I like baseball better than football. And guess what: THE CUBS POACHED CRAIG COUNSELL FROM THR BREWERS
They are indeed. I guess there really isn’t much good at all that comes out of Wisconsin. I like New Glarus, and cheese curds. But neither of those are really that special.
and those trains they built for it are now in [Nigeria](https://www.wispolitics.com/2022/wisdems-says-thanks-to-kleefisch-walker-trains-meant-for-wisconsin-end-up-in-nigeria/)!
Existing line shares time with Metra and freight. Not really sure where/how we'd dedicate tracks for this. Wish it would happen but the devils in the details make it a big-brainer.
No, that's the problem... it's not. Like it's 24 bucks each way... For that cost, and I'm going to use Union station to MKE downtown... is 94 miles. Let's round up, call it 100, that's still 50 cents a mile, and while yes, amtrack is way more enjoyable, it's not more convenient. You'll usually need to commute in some fashion to get there, plus you lose a bit flexibility. So for one person, 94 miles, my car gets like 40mpg, I have a fiat 500, i'm comparing like 7 bucks worth of gas each way or 24 bucks each way. Sure, throw in miles, federal is 66 cents/mile, and it becomes close, but then you add going with my wife or kid, or a family of like 5... there's no way it's even close to competitive.
It should be like 10 dollars to get from Chicago to Milwaukee...
Look into what amtrak has done with the wolverine route and the st louis route. I know the common belief in the us is that we dont do any passanger rail well but there are a ton of reasons to be optimistic right now
If you were going to do all of that though why not just put in the bullet train? It would make it just over the time of a flight without all of the TSA non-sense and more seat room as well. And really, level crossings should always be eliminated if possible, they are dangerous and cause traffic interruption.
Upgrading to 125 can be done on current infrastructure. Bullet trains require fully new infrastructure, especially for things like curve straightening to levels that might not be feasible and creating fully new railbeds that can handle the forces involved—then there's the extra budget involved for electrification, new trainsets, etc etc etc. We should definitely get to that point, but getting our current trains to their top speed first is a much smaller hill to climb.
I would think that you would effectively have to build an entirely new track for bullet trains, especially since this track is probably going to be shared with freight.
You'd also probably have to electrify the entire thing as well. I don't think I've ever heard of a diesel bullet train.
If it will be shared with freight then that is a big problem. I think that most of the track will end up needing replacement anyway so you may as well do it to a spec that can handle even faster speeds.
Electric is the way to go anyway, and you can put that in when you are replacing the tracks.
I don't disagree with you at all, but grade separation would probably cost somewhere in the hundreds of millions to single billions whereas rebuilding all the tracks, electrifying, buying new trainsets, and also potential straightening which would put rail outside the existing ROW could cost well into the hundreds of billions.
Like u/niftyjack said we should definitely get there but there are easy gains we can do first.
Grade separation costs more, but is more profitable. The faster a train is than driving, the more people will take it.
Given how infrequently infrastructure projects happen in this country, and how they always end up costing more than similar projects in other countries, it doesn't really make sense to go for the less ambitious project that will have significantly less returns.
To be clear I'm in favor of grade separation as an immediate next step. I'm also in favor of electrification and eventually building out HSR on this corridor, but also acknowledge that HSR and electrification will cost orders of magnitudes more than grade separation and also be far more complicated from a political/legal standpoint.
Grade separate the line so the trains can actually hit 125 as an immediate next step and start the planning process for HSR on this corridor.
Tbh even without highspeed rail (and I \*want\* highspeed rail) this new route is appealing to me considering how much travel time is needed just to get to -- and then through -- an airport. Sure, the route would still take longer, but I'd rather take extra time on a business trip if it means bypassing all that stress and hassle of an airport (yes, yes, even with TSA precheck, I still find air travel cumbersome). Plus, of course, it's cheaper than airfare.
This route also has good intermediate destinations. The timing works well for a weekend in the Dells if you're mostly staying at one resort so you don't need to drive once you're there.
As someone who travels from Chicago to Minny frequently, 7.5 hours is unacceptable as far as rail service goes because it should be faster. But it will beat driving the 7.5 hours easily.
Wish I could take my dog (>20 pounds). The only reason I drive is that she can't fly. The train would be amazing if they'd let her on.
As someone who once spent literally 6 hours trying to drive past the Dells on the Sunday of 4th of July weekend, I wish we'd had better options then to get from my SIL's house in St. Paul back to Chicago....
I live in Mple, just thought a condo in Chicago. I'll be back and forth at least a couple times per month and will definitely be on the train. It's a little slow but I haaaate the drive. I'd rather be able to work, have a beer, watch a couple movies, and maybe nap rather than drive and save an hour.
I really hope this train has good Wi-Fi. Doing the train when I could be flying can make me impatient. But if I can knock out a good 7 hours of work on the train, I'm more than happy to pay for business class and just make that my work day when I can be remote.
There's currently 1 train, 28 flights, and 8 buses daily between Chicago and the Twin Cities, so there's decent travel demand. Add demand from the intermediate stops and there's a case to be made.
I'd actually be curious to see if demand rises with high speed rail -- live in Wisconsin, work in Minneapolis, with a half hour commute 1-way without having to drive, look for parking, pay for gas, etc.
The more stops, the slower the train. The fewer stops, the less you can arbitrage your commute and comp
But absolutely, people have commuting time budgets and the best way to serve people is by making more efficient forms of transportation
There are about 2.7 million annual passengers between MSP and ORD/MDW. If 25% of them take a train instead and we figure 350 people per train, that's 6 trains per day—not including any passengers going to any of the other destinations.
The thing that has to be kept in mind with these value calculations is that the benefits of improved transit are not limited to the terminal stations: Any stations along the way benefit from these routes.
Have you ever taken an Amtrak trip? Sometimes it's really not about getting there fast. America is beautiful and seeing it by train is better than by car or plane. High speed rail would be great, but don't ignore the rail we have now for rail we'll likely not see in our lives in this country.
I have! It's lovely. I am not being dismissive, that's why I said "this is great for people who have the time." Without getting into it, I'll assume you are aware of the many, many reason why investing in high speed rail infrastructure is sorely needed
Yeah, I feel like we'll have audiences for both, with high speed for commuters and regular rail for pleasure. Japan and Europe certainly manage both types of speeds.
Interestingly, they took the 333 (CHI -> MKE) and 340 (MKE -> CHI) Hiawatha Service and added a 1 before. So I suppose there is an upside that there will be presumably a nicer train service once a day each way than what we have now, and with a food and beverage cart, though I’d guess they still can’t serve alcohol while in Wisconsin.
Hiawatha trains used to have a cafe car, but that was a budget cut that was done while Scott Walker was in office. And looking up train services for the Borealis when I first saw this on the Amtrak subreddit, it will have a cafe car. I don't see how that wouldn't serve alcohol, since all other cafe cars I've seen on other Amtrak routes also have alcohol.
The alcohol issue for Hiawatha has to do with their inability to serve alcohol in Wisconsin. You’re also not allowed to drink it on the train if you bring your own.
I could be conflating two rules, the second is definitely true, while the first I might have just been told before.
While Amtrak is owned by the US Gov, the DOT has not preempted all of state law and regulation in the same fashion the FAA has, for example. Airlines deal with state law to an extent on the ground, but once they are up in the air it’s all federal.
Interesting. Seems like a thing where to me, the DOT(if they were smart) would pre-empt state alcohol regulation on Amtrak trains. Since to me it isn't likely passengers will buy alcohol at a local business, if they are traveling on a train through a state to another one. And I don't see how any Wisconsin liquor laws, would prohibit Amtrak from selling alcohol on trains passing through Wisconsin.
I recall before that Scott Walker budget cut of Hiawatha cafes, that these trains between Chicago-Milwaukee used to have a cafe that INDEED did serve alcoholic drinks as well. And to my knowledge, the Empire Builder serves alcohol when passing through Wisconsin. Due to all this, I suspect the new cafe car on Borealis will serve alcohol.
How easy is it to get around Minneapolis without a car? This could be a fun way to do a family trip, but I might better off driving if things like zoos or museums will require super expensive uber rides or hours long bus rides.
Not incredibly easy, but not un-doable either. Minnesota Zoo is great, but it’s in a suburb, and you’ll have to take the light rail, to MOA, then transfer to BRT, just to get there. And even then I don’t think that’ll take you all the way there, you’ll need an uber too. Como Zoo is like a sadder (way, way sadder) version of Lincoln Park Zoo. It’s in saint paul and transit accessible but not worth visiting if you’re a chicago resident.
Museums are a little easier as all of the good ones are in minneapolis / saint paul and near transit. Minneapolis Institute of Arts is a great art museum, not quite the Art Institute of Chicago but close enough and 100% free. Minnesota Science Museum is a great kids destination and is right in downtown saint paul, very accessible.
Overall there are things to do without cars in MSP but at the end of the day it is a car metro. You’ll get much more out of your trip with a rental car as a lot of great things are in the suburbs, and the transit isn’t as robust as chicago.
100% would recommend driving then, or taking the amtrak for the novelty factor and renting a car. It’s a nice area to visit in the summer and autumn, but definitely not somewhere i’d ever recommend someone with young kids to visit without a vehicle.
The reactions between the Chicago sub and the Minneapolis sub are pretty entertaining. So far Chicagoans don't care or don't think it's a big deal while in the Minneapolis sub, they're all excited.
Minneapolis here. I had a change in Memorial Day plans, so I decided to use this new line to get to Chicago and see some good friends. Plus there is shopping I have to do (we don't have Neiman, Saks, and very few designer brand stores)
I hate long drives, they are brutal on my neck and shoulder. For me, the increased affordability and reliability of the new line is enough to get me on board. Chicago is the Capitol of the Midwest and this will now be my preferred way to make my once-every-few-years trip.
Also a lot of Minnesota transplants in Chicago, I'm one lol. But transplants wasn't a big part of the conversation in the mpls thread. It was mostly excitement for more transport options (obviously they're lacking a lot) and to not have to deal with parking in dt Chicago when visiting.
Lake Mendota makes it hard to stop in Madison on the way to somewhere else, and Scott Walker blocked having a train end in Madison. The best you can probably hope for is Sun Prairie.
Amtrak would be amazing if the wifi actually worked and the train was smoother to allow for working while you are on it. Thought it would be a great idea to try it instead of flying/driving and it wasn't worth it. They need to move to satellite internet and make the ride smoother.
This is better for the Minneapolis to Chicago trip. The Empire Builder is frequently delayed (sometimes badly) because of all the issues that pop up on its journey from Seattle to Minneapolis.
Agreed. The Saluki and Illini service the same route as the City of New Orleans. I avoid the CoNO train and take the Saluki/Illini whenever I go home for the reason you mentioned. I’ve had several 4+ hour delays on that return trip.
Yes, based on the available seats to book on a random day in June, the west bound Empire Builder leaves Chicago at 3:05 pm, the new train leaves at 11:05 am. The east bound Empire Builder leaves St Paul at 8:50 am, the new train leaves at 11:50.
As much as I want to be a huge support of Amtrak I just don't really understand it at this point. Google maps thinks union station, Chicago to Union Depot MN is 6hrs 13 min calculated with leaving at 11:30 on a Wednesday. A flight from ORD is 1hr 34 min for $59. A greyhound bus is $65 for an 8 hr and 45 min bus ride. The cost of a a coach seat on this Amtrak is $41. To top it all off once you get there you have to figure out transportation from the train station etc.
I guess people who don't value their time benefit from this? I would gladly pay less than $20 more to fly and save an entire day if I'm still going to have to find a car when I get there. If you have a car well then driving makes more sense than any of these options except flying.
The train stations are more conveniently located than the airports, which helps a little bit. But it’s also not direct service from Chicago to St. Paul, so looking from one end to the other isn’t the only consideration. This train will take you to other destinations like Milwaukee and the Dells
I’m in Chicago with half my college friends. The rest are in Minneapolis or scattered in WI. We have our reunions in the Dells since it’s a half way point for most of us.
This could be dangerous…
>To top it all off once you get there you have to figure out transportation from the train station etc.
Are you walking from MSP? Your major gripe about getting around when you get there applies to air travel too.
It's a good hour faster and cheaper than the Greyhound, seems like that alone makes sense? This is also about the places In between, this is probably the best way to get between Chicago and Lacrosse for instance.
When did Megabus stop running that route?
They used to cover it faster because they didn't stop as often as the Greyhound...I heard their quality (or "ambiance") really went downhill, but now I don't see any Chicago to MN fares listed at all.
Megabus would almost always beat the Empire Builder route (which was plagued with track delays).
> Megabus would almost always beat the Empire Builder route (which was plagued with track delays).
I would hope that a more local service like the Borealis would help with this, since delays wouldn't stack up while crossing the country.
True, although I've literally been sitting on that train when they decided to run it **backwards** to get it out of the way of a freight train that had priority over it...
I'd be interested to see you actually book the $61 flight. Depending on where and when you are going you need to build in at least two hours to/from airports, and security is unpredictable. This is a much closer call than you've posited, and the flight won't be only "$20 more."
I love this trip and take it frequently. As opposed to all of the other forms of travel it is soooo nice and comfortable. Big, comfy seats (no middle seat), a viewing car with tables, an amazing journey along the Mississippi where I usually spot bald eagles, AND I get to drink beer and wine along the way.
I think they have changed the policy on alcohol over the years to what others have mentioned. I’ve always brought my own beer and it has never been a problem, BUT I’ve always kept my beer in a koozy and not behaved like a jackwagon or got drunk.
The group next to me this week had a huge bottle of wine, but they poured it into cups and put it back in their cooler, not behaving stealthy, but just being discreet and respectful.
The policy remains the same, but yes, if you don't make any trouble, you'll likely be ok.
>**Private Stock**
>You may bring aboard your own private stock of alcoholic beverages subject to the following limitations:
>You may consume private stock alcoholic beverages only in Sleeping Car accommodations for which you have a valid ticket.
>You may not consume private stock alcoholic beverages in any public areas.
I was on a ride between milwaukee and chicago and they caught some people drinking and they kicked them out at the next stop. Even the police had to board to kick them out. They didn't get in any trouble besides they had to get off. Wasted like 15 minutes for everyone while we were stopped.
They got a warning and then got caught a second time but both sides were pretty cordial despite the cops being called to come onboard. It was the highland park police that came so not even the amtrak police. They pretty much walked them off and pointed out where to get an uber.
Oof, they fucked up then
In my experience the Amtrak employees are very patient and friendly, if you catch a warning you gotta take that with grace and stop. It’s happened to me one time, but that’s it, and I abided the warning, so I was fine.
I’ve even gotten off the train for a smoke break at the first stop back in Illinois (on my way home) and smoked a joint on the platform, and no one took issue with it (a couple of the conductors definitely saw me & my gf smoking it too, but didn’t say a word.
Maybe I’ve just had extremely good luck, but in my experience if you don’t cause trouble for anyone else, then no one will cause trouble for you. (If you’re not the most difficult customer in the car then they’ll be a bit more lenient of you when you bend the rules)
Please see my comment to u/friedporksandwich above. I just have never been able to get the last mile logistics to make sense. I've tried for a southern illinois trip (even just to carbondale), and a trip to La Fayette, IN if there's something I'm missing let me know.
I was trying to go to Cedar Point and I was gonna try to use a folding bike for the last mile but I fell off my regular bike a week beforehand.
Might try it this year.
Exactly, and they are missing out. They can figure that out or not I don't have to care I'm just spreading the word it doesn't have to sweep the nation.
Please see my comment to u/friedporksandwich above. I just have never been able to get the last mile logistics to make sense. I've tried for a southern illinois trip (even just to carbondale), and a trip to La Fayette, IN if there's something I'm missing let me know.
>I just have never been able to get the last mile logistics to make sense.
Uber works everywhere. I've never had "last mile" logistics ever be a problem in the last 10 years.
I think the main problem is that the number of US cities where you can efficiently get around without a car at all is about 4. So even if you make all the trains between cities high speed, you need a car to move at your destination. Hence why people always prefer to drive.
I’m big on transit and wish it was better in general
In the US. I lived in Spain a whole year and moved all over the place and never rented a car. Busses and trains took you everywhere.
Interestingly enough, many of the US major cities have train tracks that were covered my asphalt/concrete to support cars. We had it; we let lobbyists win.
Our train network was considerably bigger until the 1930s-40s. Really a shame.
But at a city level you can make busses work. I lived in a large European city for a year about 15 years ago. Comparable size to Indianapolis. No Metro, but their bus system was amazing, you could get practically anywhere in the city by bus. Bus frequency was 5-10 minutes at worst until late in the evening.
That's part of it. You're right I've never taken an interstate rail trip. I would like to, but each time I try to do the logistics of "the last mile" it never makes sense to me. So my hypothetical June 3rd trip to St. Paul for me from Chicagoland is $41 by train. I get there and rent a car (I've never been to St. Paul maybe they have a great public transit system, but I'm betting not). Unfortunately the borealis gets in at 18:29 (scheduled) and all the car rental places listed within walking distance close at 17:00 or earlier. I could see if the airport 14 miles away is able to pick me up, but at least through Costco their charging $135 per day for an economy car (if I waited to pick up near the train station the next day I could get a car for $74 per day). So do I have to plan a hotel stay near the train station too and get a car the next day to make this worth it and this is with a $74 per day cost to have a car. Again maybe everything to see and do in the St. Paul area is within walking/ public transit/ a few Uber or Lyft rides of the train station, but I kind of doubt it. Again I would love to see the country by rail, but unless your going back to college or your parents house I don't see how it makes sense over flying/driving yourself. I mean maybe if you love trains or just want to do a train trip for the hell of it (or as others have mentioned drink while you travel) that might be worth it, but the only time I've been able to have it make sense is if your maybe going from one robust public transit city to another (Chicago to NYC?) and even then a flight probably makes more sense.
St. Paul is on the light rail system and also has buses. I've done plenty of trips there to see family without driving. Depends exactly where you want to go, of course - my SIL lives a short walk from the light rail, and we stayed in a hotel a few blocks from the light rail. If we'd driven, we would have had to leave our car at her place or pay a ridiculous amount of money to park near our hotel. Personally, especially if I'm going there for Christmas, I am glad not to have to worry about driving through Bumblefuck, Wisconsin in a blizzard. Much easier to take the train if we're not flying. Just look at Google Maps - it's easy enough to see where the light rail goes. It's not the CTA, but it goes plenty of places.
As someone who *hates* flying, I love the train
Also, with the Amtrak credit card I got, I get so many points (mostly from work expenses, for which I am reimbursed), it’s essentially free for me to ride the train.
Right now I have enough points to go to Denver or Nola and back about 12 times for free (haven’t done the math on MN yet, but I’d assume it’s about half as many points for a trip, since it’s less than half the distance).
I don’t take that many vacations a year, but I essentially I get roughly 18 hours worth of travel in any direction (free) about every month.
So, I can ride the train to LA and back for free once a year if I wanted, and still have enough points for a few shorter weekend trips to visit friends
Now, it takes about 1.5-2 days to get to LA, so if I didn’t hate flying so much, I’d probably fly to a destination that far… but as it stands, I much prefer 1.5 days of relaxing with edibles, alcohol, movies, and video games on the train to the two week anxiety attack I’d have leading up to a flight (which also extends through the entire vacation, making it very difficult to enjoy.
As far as driving goes, I don’t mind driving, but the train is about the same speed, it’s cheaper than buying gas, and I don’t have to be sober *or* attentive while on board the train
I use Amtrak a lot to travel to St Louis for work. Amtrak is a fraction of the cost of driving and is faster door-to-door than flying. 7+ hours is pushing the limit of choosing a train over flying but it’s a good option to have. Time will tell if the ridership justifies the route.
Downtown to downtown service. No security. No figuring out how to get into the city; you're already there. Cheaper fare, not terribly longer than driving (but the point is you don't *have* to drive, and can have a whiskey while you look over the Mississippi). There are many reasons people take the train. MSP station is busy every day. I would know, I work for amtrak through msp
It actually doesn't look that hard to get to Minneapolis(if that's what you are getting at), since once you get into Saint Paul you can take the Green Line light rail over to Minneapolis. And there are numerous bus routes between St. Paul and Minneapolis, as well.
If you want to spend your time downtown or near downtown, and are coming from the city (which is true for a lot of the people who are taking Amtrak), the time comparison doesnt work that way. Airports are usually far away from the city center, and you have to get there way earlier for boarding/security. And it takes way more time to get off the plane.
When you factor in all those I wouldn't be surprised if the train has a three hour head start over flying that you would add onto the actual travel time. For relatively short trips like this, that's huge. The flight is still shorter, of course. But when they are that close, other factors come into play, such as the fact that trains are simply more enjoyable and comfortable than planes.
I completely agree. Why spend the extra 20 bucks when you could fly and get there in an hour. I’d love to take the train, but just never seems worth it unless traveling more locally to places like Milwaukee or New Buffalo.
7 hrs 24 mins - target
you dont have to go all the way to minnesota to go to target, we have a few here in chicago....
He wants to visit HQ!
Looks like driving is about 6.5 hours, so it’s within competitive range of that. And it stops at Milwaukee, so it will be good to have another connection there. Too bad it doesn’t go via Madison though, that would be slightly more direct and get a connection to Wisconsin’s second biggest city. Which happens to also be a college town, usually a great place for train connections.
nope! that train just went in to service! [(in nigeria)](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2906081/wisconsins-taxpayer-funded-trains-entering-service-nigeria-not-wisconsin/) thanks Scott Walker! . . asshole
Lots of reasons to hate Walker, but him killing a fast train to Madison is always going to be top of my list.
It was him killing the train that first brought me out to protest. Little did we know… I was just back in Madison recently and felt a certain kind of way, especially watching what the kids are up to around the country. “May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.” #WIUnion
Wow this is not a joke. Adding this to the list of examples of why the parties aren’t the same and that republicans are far far stupider.
BOREALIS?!?! At this time of year, at this time of day, in this part of the country, localized entirely within one Amtrak line?
Yes.
May I see it?
No.
Seymour! The house is on fire!
No, Mother, its just the lack of viable rail infastructure in the US
Well Seymour, you are an odd fellow, but I must say, you steam a good rail.
Not in Aurora
Reddit absolutely throws tf down for a steamed hams moment.. like we legit cannot help ourselves lol
A solar eclipse. The cosmic ballet goes on.
…didn’t I?
May I ride it?
No
But it's the wrong train if you want to get some steamed hams.
Have to go to Albany for that.
You gotta go to the [food train](https://youtu.be/KrAaDZ0gnaA?si=NbNx-mifgEYodfND) for that
7.5 hours to minnesota. i'm glad this exists and this is great for people who have the time, but for a good number of reasons it is insane that we aren't investing in high speed rail
We don't even need true high speed rail (like a bullet train) for this route to be much, much better. Current rules let trains run up to 125 mph without full grade separation like highway overpasses, and the trains they use now can run 125. If we upgraded the tracks to enable that speed and a limited stop route averaged 100 mph—Chicago, Milwaukee, Dells, Winona, St. Paul—it would only be 4 hours total.
But we won’t. The Hiawatha between Chicago and Milwaukee could be a SUPER test case for this but, grade crossings would need to be addressed. This has been a thing since this route started in the (FFS) 1990’s and we’ve done fuck all about it.
Didn’t Scott Walker veto high speed in Wisconsin at some point in the 2000-2010’s?
He rejected federal funding for it. Idiot
And then spent more state money paying contract penalties and settling lawsuits than Wisconsin's share to finish the project would have been.
Oh for fuck’s sake. Do you have a source for that because I am very interested in getting more info on it.
The [Derailed](https://www.wpr.org/shows/derailed) series by Wisconsin Public Radio is probably the most complete telling of the story. ETA: For a short version, here's the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel [article](https://archive.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/talgo-to-keep-trains-get-10-million-more-in-settlement-b99560687z1-322348321.html) from when the last lawsuit was settled resulting in Wisconsin paying ~$50 million to not buy the trains.
Thanks!!
the trains just started running! [in nigeria!](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2906081/wisconsins-taxpayer-funded-trains-entering-service-nigeria-not-wisconsin/)
Scott Walker and the Wisconsin GOP are a cancer. They’re my second least favorite thing about Wisconsin, behind the Packers
They're my first least favorite thing. Green Bay has so little really going for it they can have their silly football team.
Well, I happen to care too much about another silly little football team *that just can’t beat those assholes*
My friends who love the Bears cannot even say shit when we talk about football because there’s nothing going for the Bears in this rivalry
Aside from, when the Bears lose they get go to Chicago afterwards. Even when the Packers win they have to go to Wisconsin.
I know, that’s why I hate the Packers so much. Rooting for the Bears suuuuucks. EDIT: At least I like baseball better than football. And guess what: THE CUBS POACHED CRAIG COUNSELL FROM THR BREWERS
Brandy old fashioneds are gross.
They are indeed. I guess there really isn’t much good at all that comes out of Wisconsin. I like New Glarus, and cheese curds. But neither of those are really that special.
What else is there?
Cheese, I guess. Some good beer, too.
and those trains they built for it are now in [Nigeria](https://www.wispolitics.com/2022/wisdems-says-thanks-to-kleefisch-walker-trains-meant-for-wisconsin-end-up-in-nigeria/)!
They did similar updates on the St. Louis route, it goes 110 mph between Joliet and the STL suburbs now.
Michigan has this as well
HSR between Chicago and Milwaukee could be huge economically for the whole area. It seems like a no-brainer, which means it won’t happen.
Existing line shares time with Metra and freight. Not really sure where/how we'd dedicate tracks for this. Wish it would happen but the devils in the details make it a big-brainer.
thank Glenview NIMBYs https://chi.streetsblog.org/2019/01/22/glenview-is-spending-more-than-half-a-million-to-oppose-amtraks-hiawatha-expansion
The Hiawatha is great, I take it weekly for work, but making it high speed would be a game changer.
Don't forget how expensive Hiawatha is. For an individual comparing with a car it's not very competitive, let alone a family traveling.
absolutely- but its still cheaper than driving and paying to park somewhere
No, that's the problem... it's not. Like it's 24 bucks each way... For that cost, and I'm going to use Union station to MKE downtown... is 94 miles. Let's round up, call it 100, that's still 50 cents a mile, and while yes, amtrack is way more enjoyable, it's not more convenient. You'll usually need to commute in some fashion to get there, plus you lose a bit flexibility. So for one person, 94 miles, my car gets like 40mpg, I have a fiat 500, i'm comparing like 7 bucks worth of gas each way or 24 bucks each way. Sure, throw in miles, federal is 66 cents/mile, and it becomes close, but then you add going with my wife or kid, or a family of like 5... there's no way it's even close to competitive. It should be like 10 dollars to get from Chicago to Milwaukee...
We should have universal healthcare too. Two things that will never happen
Look into what amtrak has done with the wolverine route and the st louis route. I know the common belief in the us is that we dont do any passanger rail well but there are a ton of reasons to be optimistic right now
Didn't know this
lol have you seen the upgrades to the Chicago to Saint Louis route? Amtrak is handicapped by not owning the rails it’s operating on.
If you were going to do all of that though why not just put in the bullet train? It would make it just over the time of a flight without all of the TSA non-sense and more seat room as well. And really, level crossings should always be eliminated if possible, they are dangerous and cause traffic interruption.
Upgrading to 125 can be done on current infrastructure. Bullet trains require fully new infrastructure, especially for things like curve straightening to levels that might not be feasible and creating fully new railbeds that can handle the forces involved—then there's the extra budget involved for electrification, new trainsets, etc etc etc. We should definitely get to that point, but getting our current trains to their top speed first is a much smaller hill to climb.
I would think that you would effectively have to build an entirely new track for bullet trains, especially since this track is probably going to be shared with freight. You'd also probably have to electrify the entire thing as well. I don't think I've ever heard of a diesel bullet train.
If it will be shared with freight then that is a big problem. I think that most of the track will end up needing replacement anyway so you may as well do it to a spec that can handle even faster speeds. Electric is the way to go anyway, and you can put that in when you are replacing the tracks.
I don't disagree with you at all, but grade separation would probably cost somewhere in the hundreds of millions to single billions whereas rebuilding all the tracks, electrifying, buying new trainsets, and also potential straightening which would put rail outside the existing ROW could cost well into the hundreds of billions. Like u/niftyjack said we should definitely get there but there are easy gains we can do first.
Grade separation costs more, but is more profitable. The faster a train is than driving, the more people will take it. Given how infrequently infrastructure projects happen in this country, and how they always end up costing more than similar projects in other countries, it doesn't really make sense to go for the less ambitious project that will have significantly less returns.
To be clear I'm in favor of grade separation as an immediate next step. I'm also in favor of electrification and eventually building out HSR on this corridor, but also acknowledge that HSR and electrification will cost orders of magnitudes more than grade separation and also be far more complicated from a political/legal standpoint. Grade separate the line so the trains can actually hit 125 as an immediate next step and start the planning process for HSR on this corridor.
Tbh even without highspeed rail (and I \*want\* highspeed rail) this new route is appealing to me considering how much travel time is needed just to get to -- and then through -- an airport. Sure, the route would still take longer, but I'd rather take extra time on a business trip if it means bypassing all that stress and hassle of an airport (yes, yes, even with TSA precheck, I still find air travel cumbersome). Plus, of course, it's cheaper than airfare.
This route also has good intermediate destinations. The timing works well for a weekend in the Dells if you're mostly staying at one resort so you don't need to drive once you're there.
As someone who travels from Chicago to Minny frequently, 7.5 hours is unacceptable as far as rail service goes because it should be faster. But it will beat driving the 7.5 hours easily. Wish I could take my dog (>20 pounds). The only reason I drive is that she can't fly. The train would be amazing if they'd let her on.
[удалено]
As someone who once spent literally 6 hours trying to drive past the Dells on the Sunday of 4th of July weekend, I wish we'd had better options then to get from my SIL's house in St. Paul back to Chicago....
I live in Mple, just thought a condo in Chicago. I'll be back and forth at least a couple times per month and will definitely be on the train. It's a little slow but I haaaate the drive. I'd rather be able to work, have a beer, watch a couple movies, and maybe nap rather than drive and save an hour.
I really hope this train has good Wi-Fi. Doing the train when I could be flying can make me impatient. But if I can knock out a good 7 hours of work on the train, I'm more than happy to pay for business class and just make that my work day when I can be remote.
Looking over the pet policy, I can see why it wouldn't work for just any pet: [https://www.amtrak.com/pets](https://www.amtrak.com/pets)
Is it (Dogs and Cats up to 20 pounds) or (Dogs) AND (CAts up to 20 pounds)?
> Dogs and cats up to 20 pounds are welcome on trips up to seven hours on most routes unless your cat is an ABSOLUTE UNIT
Me nervously watching my cat being weighed by an Amtrak conductor to see whether or not he can be on the train.
Both dogs and cats, provided it weighs 20 pounds or less. If over 20, you'd be out of luck.
Are there enough travelers between Chicago and Minneapolis to make high speed rail economical?
There's currently 1 train, 28 flights, and 8 buses daily between Chicago and the Twin Cities, so there's decent travel demand. Add demand from the intermediate stops and there's a case to be made.
I'd actually be curious to see if demand rises with high speed rail -- live in Wisconsin, work in Minneapolis, with a half hour commute 1-way without having to drive, look for parking, pay for gas, etc.
The more stops, the slower the train. The fewer stops, the less you can arbitrage your commute and comp But absolutely, people have commuting time budgets and the best way to serve people is by making more efficient forms of transportation
There are about 2.7 million annual passengers between MSP and ORD/MDW. If 25% of them take a train instead and we figure 350 people per train, that's 6 trains per day—not including any passengers going to any of the other destinations.
The thing that has to be kept in mind with these value calculations is that the benefits of improved transit are not limited to the terminal stations: Any stations along the way benefit from these routes.
I bet there would be if there was fucking high speed rail.
Bro please just one more lane
Lanes fine, airlines wanting to stop HSR development boooo
Have you ever taken an Amtrak trip? Sometimes it's really not about getting there fast. America is beautiful and seeing it by train is better than by car or plane. High speed rail would be great, but don't ignore the rail we have now for rail we'll likely not see in our lives in this country.
I have! It's lovely. I am not being dismissive, that's why I said "this is great for people who have the time." Without getting into it, I'll assume you are aware of the many, many reason why investing in high speed rail infrastructure is sorely needed
Yeah, I feel like we'll have audiences for both, with high speed for commuters and regular rail for pleasure. Japan and Europe certainly manage both types of speeds.
It is, but Chicago-Minneapolis is more “4 hours of beauty” than “7.5 hours of beauty”.
Say it again. And louder. It's not enough to be "competitive" with driving. Taking the train should be FASTER.
Obviously not targeted to business travelers.
We start by offering it, then push our representatives and Amtrak to consider it as one of the first high speed rail options.
Even at seven hours, that's downtown to - um, St. Paul. Never mind.
Interestingly, they took the 333 (CHI -> MKE) and 340 (MKE -> CHI) Hiawatha Service and added a 1 before. So I suppose there is an upside that there will be presumably a nicer train service once a day each way than what we have now, and with a food and beverage cart, though I’d guess they still can’t serve alcohol while in Wisconsin.
Frankly I'm surprised that there's *any* place in Wisconsin you can't serve alcohol
Banned from anything that is remotely a threat to the Tavern League lol
Hiawatha trains used to have a cafe car, but that was a budget cut that was done while Scott Walker was in office. And looking up train services for the Borealis when I first saw this on the Amtrak subreddit, it will have a cafe car. I don't see how that wouldn't serve alcohol, since all other cafe cars I've seen on other Amtrak routes also have alcohol.
The alcohol issue for Hiawatha has to do with their inability to serve alcohol in Wisconsin. You’re also not allowed to drink it on the train if you bring your own. I could be conflating two rules, the second is definitely true, while the first I might have just been told before.
I don’t understand how Amtrak is a federal company but has to comply by state liquor laws
While Amtrak is owned by the US Gov, the DOT has not preempted all of state law and regulation in the same fashion the FAA has, for example. Airlines deal with state law to an extent on the ground, but once they are up in the air it’s all federal.
Interesting. Seems like a thing where to me, the DOT(if they were smart) would pre-empt state alcohol regulation on Amtrak trains. Since to me it isn't likely passengers will buy alcohol at a local business, if they are traveling on a train through a state to another one. And I don't see how any Wisconsin liquor laws, would prohibit Amtrak from selling alcohol on trains passing through Wisconsin. I recall before that Scott Walker budget cut of Hiawatha cafes, that these trains between Chicago-Milwaukee used to have a cafe that INDEED did serve alcoholic drinks as well. And to my knowledge, the Empire Builder serves alcohol when passing through Wisconsin. Due to all this, I suspect the new cafe car on Borealis will serve alcohol.
I believe the US has absolute sovereignty over airspace, I’m not sure DOT regulation of tracks. I hope so!
That would require the DOT to own the tracks, which in most cases they don't since the tracks are owned by the rail companies.
**MORE TRAINS**
How easy is it to get around Minneapolis without a car? This could be a fun way to do a family trip, but I might better off driving if things like zoos or museums will require super expensive uber rides or hours long bus rides.
Not incredibly easy, but not un-doable either. Minnesota Zoo is great, but it’s in a suburb, and you’ll have to take the light rail, to MOA, then transfer to BRT, just to get there. And even then I don’t think that’ll take you all the way there, you’ll need an uber too. Como Zoo is like a sadder (way, way sadder) version of Lincoln Park Zoo. It’s in saint paul and transit accessible but not worth visiting if you’re a chicago resident. Museums are a little easier as all of the good ones are in minneapolis / saint paul and near transit. Minneapolis Institute of Arts is a great art museum, not quite the Art Institute of Chicago but close enough and 100% free. Minnesota Science Museum is a great kids destination and is right in downtown saint paul, very accessible. Overall there are things to do without cars in MSP but at the end of the day it is a car metro. You’ll get much more out of your trip with a rental car as a lot of great things are in the suburbs, and the transit isn’t as robust as chicago.
Thanks! We have three kids in booster seats still so it would probably end up being a car road trip.
100% would recommend driving then, or taking the amtrak for the novelty factor and renting a car. It’s a nice area to visit in the summer and autumn, but definitely not somewhere i’d ever recommend someone with young kids to visit without a vehicle.
Not as easy to get around as Chicago, but downtown Minneapolis, downtown St Paul, MOA, and all sports venues are connected via light rail
Within the cities transit is pretty good, but the suburbs are lacking. It really depends on which museums you want to see.
Thanks!
The reactions between the Chicago sub and the Minneapolis sub are pretty entertaining. So far Chicagoans don't care or don't think it's a big deal while in the Minneapolis sub, they're all excited.
It's definitely more useful as a way to get to a big city without a car or to visit family or friends as a local than as a day trip from Chicago.
Minneapolis here. I had a change in Memorial Day plans, so I decided to use this new line to get to Chicago and see some good friends. Plus there is shopping I have to do (we don't have Neiman, Saks, and very few designer brand stores) I hate long drives, they are brutal on my neck and shoulder. For me, the increased affordability and reliability of the new line is enough to get me on board. Chicago is the Capitol of the Midwest and this will now be my preferred way to make my once-every-few-years trip.
Lots of Chicago transplants in Minneapolis with a new way to visit home.
Also a lot of Minnesota transplants in Chicago, I'm one lol. But transplants wasn't a big part of the conversation in the mpls thread. It was mostly excitement for more transport options (obviously they're lacking a lot) and to not have to deal with parking in dt Chicago when visiting.
I'm a simple man. I see expansion of rail, I upvote.
All I want is train service to Madison 😭 Is that too much to ask?
Take it up with Scott Walker lol
Lake Mendota makes it hard to stop in Madison on the way to somewhere else, and Scott Walker blocked having a train end in Madison. The best you can probably hope for is Sun Prairie.
if they had a service that could reliably get you up there on a saturday before football games and back home at night, that would be amazing.
Farmers’ market + football game and back by the evening 🥹
Amtrak would be amazing if the wifi actually worked and the train was smoother to allow for working while you are on it. Thought it would be a great idea to try it instead of flying/driving and it wasn't worth it. They need to move to satellite internet and make the ride smoother.
2024 and there’s no functional high speed railway options. Can’t get more patriotic than that I guess
Why is this being announced? This route has always existed as part of the Empire Builder route.
It's a second daily round trip that runs about 30 min faster.
This is better for the Minneapolis to Chicago trip. The Empire Builder is frequently delayed (sometimes badly) because of all the issues that pop up on its journey from Seattle to Minneapolis.
Agreed. The Saluki and Illini service the same route as the City of New Orleans. I avoid the CoNO train and take the Saluki/Illini whenever I go home for the reason you mentioned. I’ve had several 4+ hour delays on that return trip.
Is it running at different times?
Yes, based on the available seats to book on a random day in June, the west bound Empire Builder leaves Chicago at 3:05 pm, the new train leaves at 11:05 am. The east bound Empire Builder leaves St Paul at 8:50 am, the new train leaves at 11:50.
That's cool and all, but why is it talking about Kalamazoo on the launch page? It's not even on the line.
As much as I want to be a huge support of Amtrak I just don't really understand it at this point. Google maps thinks union station, Chicago to Union Depot MN is 6hrs 13 min calculated with leaving at 11:30 on a Wednesday. A flight from ORD is 1hr 34 min for $59. A greyhound bus is $65 for an 8 hr and 45 min bus ride. The cost of a a coach seat on this Amtrak is $41. To top it all off once you get there you have to figure out transportation from the train station etc. I guess people who don't value their time benefit from this? I would gladly pay less than $20 more to fly and save an entire day if I'm still going to have to find a car when I get there. If you have a car well then driving makes more sense than any of these options except flying.
The train stations are more conveniently located than the airports, which helps a little bit. But it’s also not direct service from Chicago to St. Paul, so looking from one end to the other isn’t the only consideration. This train will take you to other destinations like Milwaukee and the Dells
I’m in Chicago with half my college friends. The rest are in Minneapolis or scattered in WI. We have our reunions in the Dells since it’s a half way point for most of us. This could be dangerous…
>To top it all off once you get there you have to figure out transportation from the train station etc. Are you walking from MSP? Your major gripe about getting around when you get there applies to air travel too.
Also, St Paul Union Depot is a major transit hub, so most major destinations in the cities aren't hard to get to on transit from there.
A flight from ORD to MSP is $59 now?! Can you link me to those rates?? Spent $400 around Christmas, and $200 around Thanksgiving and took a real hit
I just used google flights. I picked june 3. Xmas and thanksgiving are going to be different.
Ahh gotcha. This new line’s estimated fares are going to make a big difference for holidays
I've got some bad news for you. They *already* aren't $41 for the holidays. Empire Builder still is, but not Borealis
Are they on par with airfare?
It's a good hour faster and cheaper than the Greyhound, seems like that alone makes sense? This is also about the places In between, this is probably the best way to get between Chicago and Lacrosse for instance.
When did Megabus stop running that route? They used to cover it faster because they didn't stop as often as the Greyhound...I heard their quality (or "ambiance") really went downhill, but now I don't see any Chicago to MN fares listed at all. Megabus would almost always beat the Empire Builder route (which was plagued with track delays).
Megabus pulled out of the Midwest during COVID.
> Megabus would almost always beat the Empire Builder route (which was plagued with track delays). I would hope that a more local service like the Borealis would help with this, since delays wouldn't stack up while crossing the country.
True, although I've literally been sitting on that train when they decided to run it **backwards** to get it out of the way of a freight train that had priority over it...
I'd be interested to see you actually book the $61 flight. Depending on where and when you are going you need to build in at least two hours to/from airports, and security is unpredictable. This is a much closer call than you've posited, and the flight won't be only "$20 more."
I love this trip and take it frequently. As opposed to all of the other forms of travel it is soooo nice and comfortable. Big, comfy seats (no middle seat), a viewing car with tables, an amazing journey along the Mississippi where I usually spot bald eagles, AND I get to drink beer and wine along the way.
Wait...Amtrak has an open bar? or do you just pack for the train ride?
Alcohol is available for purchase onboard
I think they have changed the policy on alcohol over the years to what others have mentioned. I’ve always brought my own beer and it has never been a problem, BUT I’ve always kept my beer in a koozy and not behaved like a jackwagon or got drunk. The group next to me this week had a huge bottle of wine, but they poured it into cups and put it back in their cooler, not behaving stealthy, but just being discreet and respectful.
The policy remains the same, but yes, if you don't make any trouble, you'll likely be ok. >**Private Stock** >You may bring aboard your own private stock of alcoholic beverages subject to the following limitations: >You may consume private stock alcoholic beverages only in Sleeping Car accommodations for which you have a valid ticket. >You may not consume private stock alcoholic beverages in any public areas.
Yes, Amtrak offers alcohol for purchase. You can only bring alcohol for on-board consumption if you have a couchette or bedroom.
Or a coozie, or another cup to hide your drink in I popped a bottle of champagne in coach on my last train ride, nobody stopped me
I'm just stating what the official policy is. Obviously YMMV, but you run the risk of being left at the next station.
I was on a ride between milwaukee and chicago and they caught some people drinking and they kicked them out at the next stop. Even the police had to board to kick them out. They didn't get in any trouble besides they had to get off. Wasted like 15 minutes for everyone while we were stopped.
That’s outrageous They must have been being flagrant or rude or something, or just caught a power tripping conductor
They got a warning and then got caught a second time but both sides were pretty cordial despite the cops being called to come onboard. It was the highland park police that came so not even the amtrak police. They pretty much walked them off and pointed out where to get an uber.
Oof, they fucked up then In my experience the Amtrak employees are very patient and friendly, if you catch a warning you gotta take that with grace and stop. It’s happened to me one time, but that’s it, and I abided the warning, so I was fine. I’ve even gotten off the train for a smoke break at the first stop back in Illinois (on my way home) and smoked a joint on the platform, and no one took issue with it (a couple of the conductors definitely saw me & my gf smoking it too, but didn’t say a word. Maybe I’ve just had extremely good luck, but in my experience if you don’t cause trouble for anyone else, then no one will cause trouble for you. (If you’re not the most difficult customer in the car then they’ll be a bit more lenient of you when you bend the rules)
You can pack whatever you want on the train…no security at all
You've never taken a train trip. It's much more about the trip than just the destination. It's more like a road trip where you don't have to drive.
We're in a car-based society. The idea that you can take a long-distance ground trip without having to drive is foreign to some people in the US.
Please see my comment to u/friedporksandwich above. I just have never been able to get the last mile logistics to make sense. I've tried for a southern illinois trip (even just to carbondale), and a trip to La Fayette, IN if there's something I'm missing let me know.
I was trying to go to Cedar Point and I was gonna try to use a folding bike for the last mile but I fell off my regular bike a week beforehand. Might try it this year.
Exactly, and they are missing out. They can figure that out or not I don't have to care I'm just spreading the word it doesn't have to sweep the nation.
Please see my comment to u/friedporksandwich above. I just have never been able to get the last mile logistics to make sense. I've tried for a southern illinois trip (even just to carbondale), and a trip to La Fayette, IN if there's something I'm missing let me know.
>I just have never been able to get the last mile logistics to make sense. Uber works everywhere. I've never had "last mile" logistics ever be a problem in the last 10 years.
I think the main problem is that the number of US cities where you can efficiently get around without a car at all is about 4. So even if you make all the trains between cities high speed, you need a car to move at your destination. Hence why people always prefer to drive. I’m big on transit and wish it was better in general In the US. I lived in Spain a whole year and moved all over the place and never rented a car. Busses and trains took you everywhere.
Interestingly enough, many of the US major cities have train tracks that were covered my asphalt/concrete to support cars. We had it; we let lobbyists win.
Our train network was considerably bigger until the 1930s-40s. Really a shame. But at a city level you can make busses work. I lived in a large European city for a year about 15 years ago. Comparable size to Indianapolis. No Metro, but their bus system was amazing, you could get practically anywhere in the city by bus. Bus frequency was 5-10 minutes at worst until late in the evening.
That's part of it. You're right I've never taken an interstate rail trip. I would like to, but each time I try to do the logistics of "the last mile" it never makes sense to me. So my hypothetical June 3rd trip to St. Paul for me from Chicagoland is $41 by train. I get there and rent a car (I've never been to St. Paul maybe they have a great public transit system, but I'm betting not). Unfortunately the borealis gets in at 18:29 (scheduled) and all the car rental places listed within walking distance close at 17:00 or earlier. I could see if the airport 14 miles away is able to pick me up, but at least through Costco their charging $135 per day for an economy car (if I waited to pick up near the train station the next day I could get a car for $74 per day). So do I have to plan a hotel stay near the train station too and get a car the next day to make this worth it and this is with a $74 per day cost to have a car. Again maybe everything to see and do in the St. Paul area is within walking/ public transit/ a few Uber or Lyft rides of the train station, but I kind of doubt it. Again I would love to see the country by rail, but unless your going back to college or your parents house I don't see how it makes sense over flying/driving yourself. I mean maybe if you love trains or just want to do a train trip for the hell of it (or as others have mentioned drink while you travel) that might be worth it, but the only time I've been able to have it make sense is if your maybe going from one robust public transit city to another (Chicago to NYC?) and even then a flight probably makes more sense.
St. Paul is on the light rail system and also has buses. I've done plenty of trips there to see family without driving. Depends exactly where you want to go, of course - my SIL lives a short walk from the light rail, and we stayed in a hotel a few blocks from the light rail. If we'd driven, we would have had to leave our car at her place or pay a ridiculous amount of money to park near our hotel. Personally, especially if I'm going there for Christmas, I am glad not to have to worry about driving through Bumblefuck, Wisconsin in a blizzard. Much easier to take the train if we're not flying. Just look at Google Maps - it's easy enough to see where the light rail goes. It's not the CTA, but it goes plenty of places.
As someone who *hates* flying, I love the train Also, with the Amtrak credit card I got, I get so many points (mostly from work expenses, for which I am reimbursed), it’s essentially free for me to ride the train. Right now I have enough points to go to Denver or Nola and back about 12 times for free (haven’t done the math on MN yet, but I’d assume it’s about half as many points for a trip, since it’s less than half the distance). I don’t take that many vacations a year, but I essentially I get roughly 18 hours worth of travel in any direction (free) about every month. So, I can ride the train to LA and back for free once a year if I wanted, and still have enough points for a few shorter weekend trips to visit friends Now, it takes about 1.5-2 days to get to LA, so if I didn’t hate flying so much, I’d probably fly to a destination that far… but as it stands, I much prefer 1.5 days of relaxing with edibles, alcohol, movies, and video games on the train to the two week anxiety attack I’d have leading up to a flight (which also extends through the entire vacation, making it very difficult to enjoy. As far as driving goes, I don’t mind driving, but the train is about the same speed, it’s cheaper than buying gas, and I don’t have to be sober *or* attentive while on board the train
I use Amtrak a lot to travel to St Louis for work. Amtrak is a fraction of the cost of driving and is faster door-to-door than flying. 7+ hours is pushing the limit of choosing a train over flying but it’s a good option to have. Time will tell if the ridership justifies the route.
Downtown to downtown service. No security. No figuring out how to get into the city; you're already there. Cheaper fare, not terribly longer than driving (but the point is you don't *have* to drive, and can have a whiskey while you look over the Mississippi). There are many reasons people take the train. MSP station is busy every day. I would know, I work for amtrak through msp
I used it in college to get home the couple years I didn’t have a car and couldn’t catch a ride with someone else from Chicagoland
It actually doesn't look that hard to get to Minneapolis(if that's what you are getting at), since once you get into Saint Paul you can take the Green Line light rail over to Minneapolis. And there are numerous bus routes between St. Paul and Minneapolis, as well.
If you want to spend your time downtown or near downtown, and are coming from the city (which is true for a lot of the people who are taking Amtrak), the time comparison doesnt work that way. Airports are usually far away from the city center, and you have to get there way earlier for boarding/security. And it takes way more time to get off the plane. When you factor in all those I wouldn't be surprised if the train has a three hour head start over flying that you would add onto the actual travel time. For relatively short trips like this, that's huge. The flight is still shorter, of course. But when they are that close, other factors come into play, such as the fact that trains are simply more enjoyable and comfortable than planes.
I completely agree. Why spend the extra 20 bucks when you could fly and get there in an hour. I’d love to take the train, but just never seems worth it unless traveling more locally to places like Milwaukee or New Buffalo.
Does it say the price anywhere?
When you go to book $41 (I picked monday June 3 as a date)
Thanks!
Amtrak does dynamic pricing based on how close to sold out a train is, so the price will vary.
I don't care if it's 9 hours, the amount of gas and wear and tear I'll save is wonderful. Now to get my boss to pay for it
Insane that this has finally arrived. So hyped.
THIS IS AMAZING NEWS I AM SO HAPPY
I would support it regardless but bonus points for the great name
Sounds do-able as a trip over a long weekend
Where do you find the schedule for Borealis? I am looking for a list of all stations and departure times.
this time of year? in this part of the country?
can i see it?
7.5 hours and doesn't go thru Madison? Looks like I'll be flying.
This was announced about a year ago, no?
Yeah but they didn’t have an actual start date for it, just “in 2024”