Passenger Trains > Is Amtrak Rethinking 110mph in the Midwest?

Time to plant the seed... I know we spend billions for 110mph operations, but...... Is it necessary? Maglari has started to spin!

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/oakland/2020/02/24/amtrak-blames-freight-trains-passenger-delays-getting-worse/4851468002/

Amtrak’s website says the system’s engineers are ready to unleash faster trains with new locomotives. But for now, Amtrak would be happy simply to reverse its worsening slide in on-time performance. To do that, it needs a mandate from passengers, the general public and Congress, Amtrak’s Magliari said.

"We don’t have to be going 110 m.p.h. to give you a much better experience than driving,” he said, in a telephone interview he gave while riding from Chicago to St. Louis last month.

PC1974 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Time to plant the seed... I know we spend
> billions for 110mph operations, but...... Is it
> necessary? Maglari has started to spin!
>
> https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/oa
> kland/2020/02/24/amtrak-blames-freight-trains-pass
> enger-delays-getting-worse/4851468002/
>
> Amtrak’s website says the system’s engineers
> are ready to unleash faster trains with new
> locomotives. But for now, Amtrak would be happy
> simply to reverse its worsening slide in on-time
> performance. To do that, it needs a mandate from
> passengers, the general public and Congress,
> Amtrak’s Magliari said.

1. US railroads don't know how to run trains on time
2. This is another reason for nondiscriminatory open access (after the implementation of which the industry will be dragged kicking and screaming to school to learn how).

TAW

Well if Amtrak wants to reach 110MPH, they better lay down their own rails, because none of the class 1's can handle it outside of the NE corridor. Good luck, won't see it anytime soon. The days of class 1's supporting passenger service happened before Amtrak and the freeway systems and air travel.

 "We don’t have to be going 110 m.p.h. to give you a much better experience than driving,” he said, in a telephone interview he gave while riding from Chicago to St. Louis last month. All we have to be is reliable, with attractive fares and schedules that make sense. It’s within reach,” he said."

Now he tells us. 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/20 08:12 by joemvcnj.

Midwest 110 isn't a Class 1 issue, it's a grade crossing issue. Grade crossing accidents put the kibosh on 1930's lightweight trainsets and today its the complex crossing protection system that are delaying the services once the tracks have been upgraded.  It's still more achievable than other forms of HSR, especially if one can accept the risk of crossing accidents.

mbrotzman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Midwest 110 isn't a Class 1 issue, it's a grade
> crossing issue. Grade crossing accidents put the
> kibosh on 1930's lightweight trainsets and today
> its the complex crossing protection system that
> are delaying the services once the tracks have
> been upgraded.  It's still more achievable than
> other forms of HSR, especially if one can accept
> the risk of crossing accidents.

This is a very important point to make. If idiot American drivers didn't have such a propensity for getting on the wrong side of crossing gates when trains are coming, train speeds could be a lot higher. At current speeds, crossing crashes rarely cause much damage to the trains, but at 150 mph such crashes could be catastrophic.

As I understand it, the advanced PTC system that incorporated the grade crossing protection and allowed 110 MPH speeds has been abandoned on the Chicago-St. Louis route and is or will be replaced with a conventional cab signals and PTC system that will only allow a maximum speed of 90 MPH.   BSB  

Well, various government agencies paid to raise the speed of various stretches
of midwest railroads to 110 mph.  Much of it on the Union Pacific between 
Joliet and East St. Louis in Illinois.  UP even signed a contract supporting 
a number of 110 mph trains each way a day. 



EL-SD45-3632 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well if Amtrak wants to reach 110MPH, they better
> lay down their own rails, because none of the
> class 1's can handle it outside of the NE
> corridor. Good luck, won't see it anytime soon.
> The days of class 1's supporting passenger service
> happened before Amtrak and the freeway systems and
> air travel.

Grade crossings are not an issue.  Drive I-55 along the Chicago-St. Louis high speed
line and look at all the 4 quadrant gates at farm crossings.   No less an authority than
Joseph Szabo, then head of the FRA, rightly pronounced in public that almost all of 
the midwest routes would be 110 mph by 2017.  I am sure he would not have said that 
if the FRA had not already blessed the grade crossing issue.

mbrotzman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Midwest 110 isn't a Class 1 issue, it's a grade
> crossing issue. Grade crossing accidents put the
> kibosh on 1930's lightweight trainsets and today
> its the complex crossing protection system that
> are delaying the services once the tracks have
> been upgraded.  It's still more achievable than
> other forms of HSR, especially if one can accept
> the risk of crossing accidents.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/20 17:22 by Englewood.

Quinn, LaHood and Durbin in a 110 mph circle j... on the way to St. Lou!

---

People in glass houses should not throw stones.

Once the Amtrak mouthpiece can show us that Amtrak can 
consistently get trains off their own 1.5 mile CUS railroad on time,
he can freely throw stones at the class 1's.

And Mag ol' buddy on-time Chicago departure means more than just 
the decades old "show out on time when the train pulls from the bumping post".
It means clearing South Branch Bridge without sitting on the main for hours at 14th St.
while mechanical fixes what should have been fixed while the half the car dept. was
sleeping overnight in the warm coaches or engine cabs.

And how could Amtrak trains be delayed on the NS when Durbin, LaHood, Szabo, et al,
assured us that the Englewood Flyover would untangle the entire mess?  And what about
all the money spent on the NS in northwest Indiana to cure Amtrak delays?  
Enquiring minds want to know !!!

PC1974 Wrote:

>
> Amtrak’s website says the system’s engineers
> are ready to unleash faster trains with new
> locomotives. But for now, Amtrak would be happy
> simply to reverse its worsening slide in on-time
> performance. To do that, it needs a mandate from
> passengers, the general public and Congress,
> Amtrak’s Magliari said.
>
> "We don’t have to be going 110 m.p.h. to give
> you a much better experience than driving,” he
> said, in a telephone interview he gave while
> riding from Chicago to St. Louis last month.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/20 10:53 by Englewood.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>  "We don’t have to be going 110 m.p.h. to give
> you a much better experience than driving,” he
> said, in a telephone interview he gave while
> riding from Chicago to St. Louis last month. All
> we have to be is reliable, with attractive fares
> and schedules that make sense. It’s within
> reach,” he said."
>
> Now he tells us. 

It doesn't matter.  Once people see they can't change their plans if they buy saver fares, they will just drive, regardless of how fast the trains go.  At least that is what the TO "experts" tell us....

PC1974 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Quinn, LaHood and Durbin in a 110 mph circle j...
> on the way to St. Louis

Pat is eyeing that speedometer reading 111 mph.
Probably brings back memories of younger days when drunken journeys on the GM&O
State Fair "Democrat Day" Specials were an annual affair for Chicago politicians.
When the GM&O actually provided High Speed Passenger Rail to Illinois and when
railroads had equipment to run special trains to special events.

Either that or he sees the train is speeding on the first trip.  Next move would be to look
for that big red handle.  Too bad he wasn't on one of the Amtrak curve overspeed disasters.
His attention to the speedometer might have saved the day.  

Or perhaps he thinks "111" is the proof of the alcohol to be served.  "I'll take whatever that Szabo guy is drinking.  
110 mph throughout the Midwest, Ha,Ha,Ha.  Once the contractors putting up hundreds of miles of ROW 
fencing get paid, we couldn't care less if a train ever runs.  Hey Senator Dick, have you computed how many votes this
high speed scam earned us?  9 votes from railfans?  $5 Billion well spent.  Is that private plane waiting for us when
we get off this thing?"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/20 10:56 by Englewood.

PC1974 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maglari has started to spin!
>

Let's be honest: Magliari has never stopped spinning. He spins so hard that days get shorter or longer depending on which direction he's facing. 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/20 10:43 by F7sForever.

Amtrak trains regularly run 110 MPH between Porter and Kalamazoo.  110 MPH is certainly not dead.

​Corporate spokespersons ALWAYS spin. It's their job.

Amtrak trains are regularly delayed on the NS between 21st Street and Porter by shoddy operations and requirements that the UTCS dispatching system line trains up instead of Train Dispatchers (it does not work) or that freight trains are regularly allowed to operate right in front of passenger trains for no reason - i.e. I watched A352 delayed at CP 513 the other day - as Amtrak was approaching Englewood, a freight train was allowed to depart Park Manor at CP 513, causing an unnecessary delay. Down the road near Hammond, the freight was moved out the of the way for Amtrak, but the damage was already done. Had the freight been held for an extra 5 minutes, Amtrak would have been gone and still on time and the freight would probably have received the same amount of delay than it did waiting 6 miles down the road.
 

EL-SD45-3632 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well if Amtrak wants to reach 110MPH, they better
> lay down their own rails, because none of the
> class 1's can handle it outside of the NE
> corridor. Good luck, won't see it anytime soon.
> The days of class 1's supporting passenger service
> happened before Amtrak and the freeway systems and
> air travel.

When one speaks about things they do not know about, they end up looking foolish.

https://www.dot.state.mn.us/passengerrail/mwrri/
https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,4479730,4479730#msg-4479730
https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,4382920,4383358#msg-4383358
https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,4097181,4097181#msg-4097181
https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,3847456,3847989#msg-3847989

The worst part is they were running at 110 mph in recent history but aren't anymore. And nobody can offer a good answer as to why.

Steamers, is there anyway at all Amtrak does right according to TrainOrders?

Posted from iPhone

Quote: "...is there anyway at all Amtrak does right according to TrainOrders?.."

Irrelevant.. See what the General Accounting Office (GAO) has to say. There a big list of others to contact when you get back with your answer from the GAO.

PC1974 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Quote: "...is there anyway at all Amtrak does
> right according to TrainOrders?.."
>
> Irrelevant.. See what the General Accounting
> Office (GAO) has to say. There a big list of
> others to contact when you get back with your
> answer from the GAO.

Well, I'm interested in what the steamers think.