A train from Omaha to Lincoln.

[74Hunter]

It sounds great in theory, but logistically it may not be that feasible. And it would be quite expensive.

 

Also, just imagine that there is a derailment or some sort of equipment/infastructure failure on the way to the game. Would you really want an entire trainload (or multiple trainloads) of fans to miss part or all of the game?

[ZRod]

It sounds great in theory, but logistically it may not be that feasible. And it would be quite expensive.

 

Also, just imagine that there is a derailment or some sort of equipment/infastructure failure on the way to the game. Would you really want an entire trainload (or multiple trainloads) of fans to miss part or all of the game?

Who's to say that won't happen on I-80? Plus I bet a good majority of the people that come down may not actually go to the game anyways, socializing at tailgates is more of a draw for some people.

[ShawnWatson]

New Mexico has the Roadrunner, a high speed train linking the cities would be hugely popular.

[Omaha-Husker]

There has been a lot of talk about an Omaha to Chicago passenger line that would have 5 trips a day. Iowa is the one driving it as they think it could be a big economic boost to the state and the cities that it would stop in. If Omaha and Lincoln were smart they would get state funds assembled to extend the line from Omaha to Lincoln. It would be great for gamedays, but it would be huge for the Omaha/Lincoln region.

[teachercd]

I guess it could derail but it's not something that would stop me from taking it once a season

[WAHusker]

Being stuck in a crammed train with most of you drinking all day? No thanks, I will drive!

[74Hunter]

It sounds great in theory, but logistically it may not be that feasible. And it would be quite expensive.

 

Also, just imagine that there is a derailment or some sort of equipment/infastructure failure on the way to the game. Would you really want an entire trainload (or multiple trainloads) of fans to miss part or all of the game?

Who's to say that won't happen on I-80? Plus I bet a good majority of the people that come down may not actually go to the game anyways, socializing at tailgates is more of a draw for some people.

All true, but if there is an accident on 1-80, you can easily turn cars around and/or reroute them on 6, 2, or O-street. Not to get into a diatribe (trust me, I could), but you can't do that with a train. You also need to factor in getting trackage rights from BNSF and have to deal with their freight traffic. It's much, much, much more complicated than you might realize.

 

If it was just a simple passenger train from the O to the L, I would have to assume that engines and cars alone (for one train) would run tens of millions of dollars in not more. If you wanted multiple trains on game day........Also, if it is light rail you would be looking at hundreds of millions to billions of dollars just to build track.

 

You would be better off chartering buses to run back and forth on game day.

[ZRod]

Right that's all covered in the article, the biggest obstacle would be getting the freight companies to let you use the line. I'm just saying that (and I'm guessing here) train travel is probably much safer than car travel statistically.

 

Sometimes I wonder if they should have built a light rail in the middle when they expanded I-80, but that would probably be a project better suited for 20 or 30 years from now.

[Omaha-Husker]

There are thousands and thousands of miles of track that are used every single day across the world that don't have trouble. Should NYC or Chicago cut their rail service because the train might stall in a tunnel once every thousand trips? Should UP switch to trucking because one of their trains might run into issues every once in a while? The worry of what could go wrong in an entirely reliable option is a straight ridiculous reason to not do something. It is travel by rail, not space flight...

 

And just as an aside I was headed west this past weekend on I-80 and in the east lanes there was a SUV with a 5th wheel on its side blocking two entire lanes of the interstate. Traffic was backed up at least 3 miles bumper to bumper between Omaha and Lincoln. They couldn't exit the interstate because we have exits once every 10 miles between cities.

 

So there can be issues with every mode of transit, that is why people should have options.

 

The real issues to talk about would be the costs to set up and run and getting the rights to use the rail lines.

[74Hunter]

Right that's all covered in the article, the biggest obstacle would be getting the freight companies to let you use the line.

I would guess that trackage rights wouldn't be particularly tough, especially if Uncle Sugar stepped in. But train traffic along that stretch would be pretty high.

 

I'm just saying that (and I'm guessing here) train travel is probably much safer than car travel statistically.

You are correct.

 

Sometimes I wonder if they should have built a light rail in the middle when they expanded I-80, but that would probably be a project better suited for 20 or 30 years from now.

It is certainly an interesting and ambitious project, and at this point I'm not sure that the benefits would outweigh the costs. IMO, if it was going to be done, it would be better to do it now while all of the re-construction is occurring, and considering the infrastructure/engineering cost will likely be much higher 20-30 years from now.

 

But alas, I can't imagine that it is in the works.

[74Hunter]

There are thousands and thousands of miles of track that are used every single day across the world that don't have trouble. Should NYC or Chicago cut their rail service because the train might stall in a tunnel once every thousand trips? Should UP switch to trucking because one of their trains might run into issues every once in a while? The worry of what could go wrong in an entirely reliable option is a straight ridiculous reason to not do something. It is travel by rail, not space flight...

No, but it really is much more complicated than the average person understands. Now that 80 is 3 lanes most of the way and we have alternate routes between the cities, auto travel is the better option.

 

And, to be quite honest, travel by air is much easier to route than by rail.

[Omaha-Husker]

There are thousands and thousands of miles of track that are used every single day across the world that don't have trouble. Should NYC or Chicago cut their rail service because the train might stall in a tunnel once every thousand trips? Should UP switch to trucking because one of their trains might run into issues every once in a while? The worry of what could go wrong in an entirely reliable option is a straight ridiculous reason to not do something. It is travel by rail, not space flight...

No, but it really is much more complicated than the average person understands. Now that 80 is 3 lanes most of the way and we have alternate routes between the cities, auto travel is the better option.

 

And, to be quite honest, travel by air is much easier to route than by rail.

 

It might be a better option for most people, but when gas is $5 a gallon how much better is that option? What about in another 25 years when we have to sink another billion to fix the crumbling concrete and widen it yet again?

 

Rail has much higher up front costs, but it lasts longer and is much easier to add capacity to than poured concrete.

 

This is an incredibly dynamic equation, but it is very short sighted to simply sink all your eggs in one basket that happens to be most popular right now. Especially when rail popularity is growing nationwide.

[teachercd]

I'm starting to get scared about driving and riding the rails!

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

Talk to Union Pacific and have them use their steam locomotive. They already have the train and it would be great advertising for them. They use this for promotions all year long so it doesn't need to make money on 7 days out of the year and left to do nothing the rest of the time.

[RedDenver]

The "Red Train" occurred last year for everyone that rode the train from Chicago to Evanston for the NW game. I only saw one NW fan on the entire train when we got off.

 

If someone is really looking for a business venture, then something similar to Megabus is much easier to do. Pick people up in parking lots around Omaha, drive the bus to the game. Repeat for the return trip. Multiple routes between Lincoln and Omaha provide easy rerouting if necessary. No negotiations with freight lines. Pick-up and drop-off in places MUCH better than the Omaha Amtrak station. Easy to have multiple pick-up and drop-off times as well as locations. Can easily change the capacity based on how many tickets bought in advance.

 

I think the major problem with mass transit is cost and timing. If more than 1 person is in a car (which I'm willing to bet is the vast majority of people going to games), then gas cost per person is going to be less than almost any mass transit option. Timing is important as someone mentioned because you have to get to the pick-up location early in both directions, which adds anywhere from 20 minutes to an hour to the total travel time. Also, timing is important when people aren't on a strict schedule. A lot of people head down to Lincoln and then stay after the game tailgating, dining, drinking, etc. and don't leave until those events are over. Having to "catch the train" can be inconvenient.