Passenger Trains > Lessons learned from chi-Stl hsr based on high speed rail allianc

There is an explanation of why trains are not going over 90 mph in the near future. Basically it takes too many seconds for the computers to coordinate the gps, and radio signals from trains to ensure safe operation above 90 mph.

Increased frequencies to 10 round trips a day requires double tracking entire line with some triple track.

Here’s the link to the hour long video.



Posted from iPhone



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/21 19:39 by steve4031.

No link provided. 

I tried again. If it’s not below I may not know how to do it or I may not be allowed to.

https://youtu.be/YA0VJz_S18w

Posted from iPhone

So compare the scheduled end to end times from the mid 50s to today.    Two at 5:10. one 5:20 on wooden ties w/ jointed rail.    w/ ETT showing 75MPH  MAS

Today,  5:30 or 5:35    CWR on concrete.    That's what $1.85 billion buys us.   
 

We were promised 110 mph over most of the route by 2015 in exchange for the $2+ billion spent.  We got a short lived 110 mph demo stretch between Dwight and Pontiac that for some reason is back down to 79 mph.  We haven't even gotten this unacceptable 90 mph compromise that they now try to sell us.  Why is the line still stuck at 79?

And yet France and other European countries are routinely running trains at 120-180mph. Even the NEC has a 160mph section.

Ditto for Japan. This is not rocket science - it's been around for 30-50 years.

Heck, we used to have the CNW 400's screaming through Highland Park, IL at 100mph back in the 1950's.

-- wzd

I appreciate the High Speed Rail alliances effort, but this webinar is focusing on what little positive there is and is basically ignoring all of the negatives.  Claiming their have been "major benefits" of the $2,000,000,000 spent and that that track was in "terrible" shape before the upgrade are both questionable at best.   Other than safer rail crossings, a smoother ride, and pretty new stations, the average passenger has seen no benefit from the money spent.

kbmiflyer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I appreciate the High Speed Rail alliances effort,
> but this webinar is focusing on what little
> positive there is and is basically ignoring all of
> the negatives.  Claiming their have been "major
> benefits" of the $2,000,000,000 spent and that
> that track was in "terrible" shape before the
> upgrade are both questionable at best.   Other
> than safer rail crossings, a smoother ride, and
> pretty new stations, the average passenger has
> seen no benefit from the money spent.

There’s one passenger, named Pete, that’s seen LOTS of benefit.🥴

Posted from iPhone

.

---

Likewise, what was spent on the Amtrak-owned Pontiac  line, and what did we get out of it (other Penn Central shenanigans) ? 

Does that mean the 90 mph is delayed on Lincoln Service?

Posted from iPhone

steve4031 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is an explanation of why trains are not
> going over 90 mph in the near future. Basically
> it takes too many seconds for the computers to
> coordinate the gps, and radio signals from trains
> to ensure safe operation above 90 mph.
>
> Increased frequencies to 10 round trips a day
> requires double tracking entire line with some
> triple track.
>
> Here’s the link to the hour long video.
> https://youtu.be/YA0VJz_S18w
>
> https://youtu.be/YA0VJz_S18w
>
> Posted from iPhone

So it isn't a conspiracy by Southwest Airlines to keep speeds low, like some on this site have claimed?

"It's a jobs project,
not a transportation project"

The irony of this is that the original President Obama  / Secretary LaHood proposal called for all new corridors, not building on existing rights of way. 

But, the idea of design / build / operate scared a wide range of important constituencies.  Union Pacific, which would lose out on $$$ of federal money to improve its right of way. The Amtrak unions, who saw a new operator as potentially non-union, or not their union. Foreigners!  So, the decision to improve existing right of way was chosen.

Have they made up their minds on what to do in Springfield, IL ? 

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "It's a jobs project,
> not a transportation project"
>
> The irony of this is that the original President
> Obama  / Secretary LaHood proposal called for all
> new corridors, not building on existing rights of
> way. 
>
> But, the idea of design / build / operate scared a
> wide range of important constituencies.  Union
> Pacific, which would lose out on $$$ of federal
> money to improve its right of way. The Amtrak
> unions, who saw a new operator as potentially
> non-union, or not their union. Foreigners!  So,
> the decision to improve existing right of way was
> chosen.

The idea to use existing ROW isn’t the problem, it’s the execution of the project by the Plutocracy thats the problem.

Posted from iPhone

Drknow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "It's a jobs project,
> > not a transportation project"
> >
> > The irony of this is that the original
> President
> > Obama  / Secretary LaHood proposal called for
> all
> > new corridors, not building on existing rights
> of
> > way. 
> >
> > But, the idea of design / build / operate scared
> a
> > wide range of important constituencies.  Union
> > Pacific, which would lose out on $$$ of federal
> > money to improve its right of way. The Amtrak
> > unions, who saw a new operator as potentially
> > non-union, or not their union. Foreigners! 
> So,
> > the decision to improve existing right of way
> was
> > chosen.
>
> The idea to use existing ROW isn’t the problem,
> it’s the execution of the project by the
> Plutocracy thats the problem.
>
> Posted from iPhone

TrainOrders posts from that time highlighted all the problems that subsequently surfaced.

Payments to UP, limits on train activity, etc

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "It's a jobs project, not a transportation project"

It was always about creating high paying constructions jobs, it was never about a better passenger rail system.  Now that the construction is over, there is no incentive for the state, federal government, or UP to actually finish the project.
 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/21 11:33 by kbmiflyer.

Drknow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> The idea to use existing ROW isn’t the problem,
> it’s the execution of the project by the
> Plutocracy thats the problem.
>

Part of which is related to the US no longer having extensive rail knowledge except heavy trains slowly. I have worked on three projects in which experienced professional engineers (I know because some of them have point out that I am not one) have designed (and in two cases built) a new passenger track on a 79 mph railroad diverging through a 50 ,mph turnout.

The US has two university railroad engineering programs, sort of, and a few individual courses here and there. There is only one degree program in railroad engineering. The other is a graduate program in which the student learns the fundamentals of rail transportation in the first years of the Masters program. I have been assigned to work with graduate engineers with no rail experience and, as I was developing the infrastructure and operating plan, had to describe how switches and signals work.

TAW.

What I find remarkable is that while there's been all this hype over Illinois with so little to show for it, Connecticut just quietly upgraded the New Haven - Springfield line to 110 mph ops with little fanfare.  What's their secret?

hsr_fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What I find remarkable is that while there's been
> all this hype over Illinois with so little to show
> for it, Connecticut just quietly upgraded the New
> Haven - Springfield line to 110 mph ops with
> little fanfare.  What's their secret?

Different State, different railroads involved = different Plutocracy.

Posted from iPhone