Passenger Trains > Illinois High Speed Rail

Does anyone have an end-to-end table, St Louis to Union Station, showing the passenger speeds when current phase is complete, like an Employee Timetable?
("The Illinios Department of Transportation (IDOT) is working to have infrastructure improvements in place to support speeds of up to 110mph on the Dwight-Alton portion of the Chicago-St. Louis corridor by the end of 2015.")
I presume there will still be slower spots here and there.

Don't think anybody is holding their breath for timetable changes anytime soon. In theory we can do the math..."if a train leaves the station at....and travels..?..mph...it will arrive at its destination ___________minutes earlier."

In practice there is not enough distance involved for any appreciable gain in time. The current class of aged locomotives cannot do it, and the current dispatching on the Union Pacific will not allow it. So, when new locomotives arrive in a few years, perhaps some gains will occur. At that time some new sidings and some dispatching improvements may knock 30 minutes off of the current St. Louis - Chicago times.

In the meantime, the upgraded sections should be safer than they once were, if that is any consolation.

Southbound trains frequently 10 to 15 minutes into St. Louis now. Need that 15 out of Chicago to Joliet. A crewman told me last week more double tracking coming this summer. No bussing required.

I calculated Joliet to Alton assuming that all that was now available for 110 MPH. Comparing currently scheduled times to 79 MPH and then to 110 MPH, a savings for 45 minutes came up. The problem is how and when CUS to Joliet and Alton to STL is solved. I live in Bloomington, half way between (roughly) CHI and STL. I live about 150 yards for the UP. I hear all 10 Amtraks every day and maybe three or four other movements. UP dispatching shouldn't be an issue, there isn't enough traffic to make it one. Dispatching gets to be a problem only when a train doesn't leave Joliet or Alton close to on-time. Then the infrequent sidings, sometimes back in and out, becomes more of a problem.

It's disappointing to realize that before this corridor is finished; something like $3 Billion and 7 years effort will have been exerted---and we're still just talking about "Joliet to Alton"

I have news for Illinois officials---"Joliet-Alton" does NOT constitute a Chicago-St. Louis corridor rebuild. And, knocking off only 45" running time is not much better than the old GM&O of 60 years ago. And while I'm at it; moving the route away from downtown Springfield is a colossal blunder.

So, unless somebody comes to their senses; it looks like Chicago-St.Louis is going to be a big screw up of a great opportunity.

Joe

floridajoe2001 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's disappointing to realize that before this
> corridor is finished; something like $3 Billion
> and 7 years effort will have been exerted---and
> we're still just talking about "Joliet to Alton"
>
> I have news for Illinois
> officials---"Joliet-Alton" does NOT constitute a
> Chicago-St. Louis corridor rebuild. And, knocking
> off only 45" running time is not much better than
> the old GM&O of 60 years ago. And while I'm at
> it; moving the route away from downtown
> Springfield is a colossal blunder.
>
> So, unless somebody comes to their senses; it
> looks like Chicago-St.Louis is going to be a big
> screw up of a great opportunity.
>
> Joe

I'm sure Ray LaHood and his Illinois buddies don't see it as a screw up. The money went to pay contractors, architects, designers, suppliers, etc all of whom are now in high clover. That there isn't very much new railroad to show for it isn't really the point.

Last time around, LaHood was a congressman shepherding a hundred million dollar railroad improvement. Presto, the money disappeared and very little in the way of improvement appeared.

In contrast, the money being spent at Porter seems to be going to a real and measurable benefit. Amtrak and the freight railroads will get relief from a vexing problem. Travel time will be cut, dispatching will be simplified. And, contractors etc will be paid, and people in the community will have a share of the construction jobs.

I am not going to be that negative as some above but from what I could see and maybe the fellow from Bloomington can reject or agree there is lots of padding right now. All but one train I saw in Springfield sat around even with the slow loading. Loading I saw at Normal was just as slow. Look at the St Louis arrival times even after killing time on the way down. I think right now they could knock off 30 minutes.

Padding is OK but can become a crutch for poor operations.

As far as those slow areas, I think you could speed that up a lot with incremental improvements, it does not have to be 110 or even 90 to knock off 15 minutes at each end.

But we are in this name game, HSR 110 mph, Europe has it. Pat Quinn sat in the cab and looked at the meter. Oh look at that 111 mph, talk about a bag of rocks.

And then there is not even a station in Bloomington, Uptown Normal??, convenient for students but I wonder what their biggest priority is?

Just some random thoughts.

Bob

cutboy2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Southbound trains frequently 10 to 15 minutes into
> St. Louis now. Need that 15 out of Chicago to
> Joliet. A crewman told me last week more double
> tracking coming this summer. No bussing required.


I believe the double track that is going in is the six miles or so immediately south of Joliet. It seems to me that last year they were talking about the double track being completed in 2012. I guess I misunderstood or plans were changed. Also not sure about the "more" double track comment as I don't think they have added any so far.

Last time they upgraded the line for high speed service everything was fine the first year or two, then the tracks started to deteriorate because after the initial rebuild no one spent any money to keep them in that condition. Is there a budget this time around to keep the 110 mph line in good shape?

Padding is an issue and crutch, no question. NB trains out of STL to Alton are hobbled by track that has not been redone. Trains in both direction north of Joliet seem to be at the mercy CN dispatchers who accommodate Amtrak as long as it doesn't inconvenience the freight operation. If a SB train leaves Joliet on-time it will likely stay so unless a NB train is delayed out of Alton. The lack of double track hinders even the best dispatchers from keeping either train on-time. A "...high-speed" rail system that depends on timetable meets at certain sidings will never consistently deliver what the traveling public wants and needs to leave the cars at home and use the train. The comment about keeping the track in shape is most appropriate. Even modern welded rail has to be regularly monitored and maintained if it is to provide the speed and safety demanded of it.

I did not want to get into a big discussion, I was looking for the numbers so I could build an accurate time space diagram.
Such a construct would help address issues about where improvements like double track could be made.

thanks in advance for any detailed help.

robj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Padding is OK but can become a crutch for poor
> operations.

The first law of scheduling is that operational running time always expands to exceed any schedule that is set, so that some trains are late no matter how slow the schedule is.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm sure Ray LaHood and his Illinois buddies don't
> see it as a screw up. The money went to pay
> contractors, architects, designers, suppliers, etc
> all of whom are now in high clover. That there
> isn't very much new railroad to show for it isn't
> really the point.

20% of the money is being funneled directly to consultants acting as "Design Engineers", "Construction Management" and "Contract Administration", apparently because the US Government cannot simply give money to Union Pacific under a contract and tell them to build something with their own forces to accomplish a set time-reduction goal in Amtrak operations. More ARRA money is being diverted to other parts of the project. The actual construction value of the work to UP is around 50%+ of the total dollars being spent.

This is similar to the NECIP Program in the 1977-1982 timeframe, when 1500 consultants were designing and overseeing work for 1000 MOW personnel. Guess where a lot of that money went.

The State of Illinois has just had its credit rating downgraded (again) from "A" to "A -". This is the worst credit rating in the nation.

[ ]

The State has a $94 Billion shortfall in pension funding -- a subject its legislature has refused to address for years.

With its newly lowered credit rating any money the state borrows in the future will cost more due to higher interest.

In short, the State of illinois is a fiscal mess with no sign that it's doing anything to clean it up.

Just like California, which is going forward with its HSR program to connect "Nowhere" with "Who Cares?" -- while simultaneously running up Greece-like State debt, Illinois (and people in here) are worrying the details of a H(er)SR for the Chicago-St. Louis route with what appears to be minimal concern for the much greater issues of its cost and where the money's supposed to come from for it.

Fritz in HSV

To: navy5717th

All of the points you made regarding the State of Illinois have nothing to do with the rail project under discussion.

All the rail money for rebuilding Chicago-St. Louis was a Federal grant (i.e. gift) to Illinois under the Federal Stimulus Program.

My wish would be that someone make the Illinois DOT in Springfield explain why they chose to only upgrade the middle of this corridor.

Joe

floridajoe2001 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To: navy5717th
>
> All of the points you made regarding the State of
> Illinois have nothing to do with the rail project
> under discussion.
>
> All the rail money for rebuilding Chicago-St.
> Louis was a Federal grant (i.e. gift) to Illinois
> under the Federal Stimulus Program.
>
> My wish would be that someone make the Illinois
> DOT in Springfield explain why they chose to only
> upgrade the middle of this corridor.
>
> Joe

Joe:

How much of the Federal "Stimulus" Program grant has already been spent?
More to the point, how much of has been spent on actually doing something and how much has been spent on "studying the problem".
My points are valid, because unless the administration in Washington manages to get another "Stimulus" program funded -- good luck with that -- the rebuilding program all come to a stop. Illinois has no funding for it and it isn't likely to be able to borrow more.

I'm not arguing with you. Just trying to expand on my point.

Fritz in HSV

abyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I'm sure Ray LaHood and his Illinois buddies
> don't
> > see it as a screw up. The money went to pay
> > contractors, architects, designers, suppliers,
> etc
> > all of whom are now in high clover. That there
> > isn't very much new railroad to show for it
> isn't
> > really the point.
>
> 20% of the money is being funneled directly to
> consultants acting as "Design Engineers",
> "Construction Management" and "Contract
> Administration", apparently because the US
> Government cannot simply give money to Union
> Pacific under a contract and tell them to build
> something with their own forces to accomplish a
> set time-reduction goal in Amtrak operations.
> More ARRA money is being diverted to other parts
> of the project. The actual construction value of
> the work to UP is around 50%+ of the total dollars
> being spent.
>
> This is similar to the NECIP Program in the
> 1977-1982 timeframe, when 1500 consultants were
> designing and overseeing work for 1000 MOW
> personnel. Guess where a lot of that money went.

Thank you.

It would be interesting to see what the UP would have charged to do the job / be the project manager / etc themselves. I suspect it would have been faster, and maybe cheaper.

The Design+Build+Operate concept was one of the premises of the original High Speed Initiative proposed by President Obama. Various coalitions of builders and potential service operators would bid on the new services. That didn't sit well with Amtrak (seeing competitors operating rail services), or the politicians (losing control over the nuts and bolts of issuing contracts).

navy5717th Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> floridajoe2001 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > To: navy5717th
> >
> > All of the points you made regarding the State
> of
> > Illinois have nothing to do with the rail
> project
> > under discussion.
> >
> > All the rail money for rebuilding Chicago-St.
> > Louis was a Federal grant (i.e. gift) to
> Illinois
> > under the Federal Stimulus Program.
> >
> > My wish would be that someone make the Illinois
> > DOT in Springfield explain why they chose to
> only
> > upgrade the middle of this corridor.
> >
> > Joe
>
> Joe:
>
> How much of the Federal "Stimulus" Program grant
> has already been spent?
> More to the point, how much of has been spent on
> actually doing something and how much has been
> spent on "studying the problem".
> My points are valid, because unless the
> administration in Washington manages to get
> another "Stimulus" program funded -- good luck
> with that -- the rebuilding program all come to a
> stop. Illinois has no funding for it and it isn't
> likely to be able to borrow more.
>
> I'm not arguing with you. Just trying to expand on
> my point.
>
> Fritz in HSV

It wasn't all a "gift".
http://www.idothsr.org/about/funding.aspx

"In addition to the ARRA funding, the Illinois Capitol Bill has appropriated $400 million for high-speed rail"

To: Typohoon

OK, if you insist, let's call it "Mainly a gift".

The bigger point being missed is; Illinois received a lot of money (including some Fla., money), yet is not addressing the end-point business on this 300 mile run at all.

Joe

PS: if you think about it; the Union Pacific is the real winner here; because the only portion of the route to be upgraded will be exactly where the UP will operate most of it's freight trains (approx. Joliet-Aton--or to be precise, a few miles farther south to the A&S at Mitchell).

floridajoe2001 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PS: if you think about it; the Union Pacific is
> the real winner here; because the only portion of
> the route to be upgraded will be exactly where the
> UP will operate most of it's freight trains
> (approx. Joliet-Aton--or to be precise, a few
> miles farther south to the A&S at Mitchell).

Plus UP has limit on the number of passenger trains that can be run when the project is fully built out. I believe that number is eight roundtrips plus the Texas Eagle. If the project is not fully built out, the number of roundtrips allowed is smaller.

Yep, UP is benefiting.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> floridajoe2001 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > PS: if you think about it; the Union Pacific
> is
> > the real winner here; because the only portion
> of
> > the route to be upgraded will be exactly where
> the
> > UP will operate most of it's freight trains
> > (approx. Joliet-Aton--or to be precise, a few
> > miles farther south to the A&S at Mitchell).
>
> Plus UP has limit on the number of passenger
> trains that can be run when the project is fully
> built out. I believe that number is eight
> roundtrips plus the Texas Eagle. If the project is
> not fully built out, the number of roundtrips
> allowed is smaller.
>
> Yep, UP is benefiting.

You and others correctly anticipated this outcome on TrainOrders several years ago. Lots of money has been spent, but the final segment to St. Louis remains a ways off...