Illinois Amtrak Service

gokeefe wrote:A half a billion dollars worth of passenger rail investment over the next 5 years in Illinois alone? Good luck finding a historical equivalent to that......

Real estate values in Chicago are going to be on the upswing for years to come.

I'm not saying having better train service to in-state destinations (and one immediately across the border) is a bad thing, but real estate values in Chicago don't depend to any great extent on the ease of accessibility from Rock Island nor even St. Louis.

Real estate values will rise or fall on the basis of whether the schools improve and whether this mayor or another one decides to bite the bullet and start funding pension debt that can't be avoided except through bankruptcy, rather than continuing to let the principle build up while pretending there is a way to ditch pensions that are constitutionally guaranteed.

Quinn announces $102 million investment for high-speed rail
Sun, 08/31/2014 - 1:59pm
....
A key swath of the high-speed rail line between Chicago and St. Louis is set to get $102 million in upgrades, Gov. Pat Quinn announced on Sunday.

Officials plan to build a second set of tracks between downstate Mazonia and Elwood and a new bridge over the Kankakee River between Joliet and Dwight.

The article is nothing but a regurgitation of the Governor's press release: Governor Quinn Invests $102 Million in High-Speed Rail Upgrades on Chicago-St. Louis Line. In these type of announcements, it is useful to read the original press release as the mass media news source often mangle or skip over technically important details.

Checking the track diagrams and documents for the CHI-STL project, this appears to actually be additional double tracking, not taking credit for double tracking already funded and planned. The $186 million FY2010 Joliet to Dwight project is to double track around 8 miles from Joliet to Elwood and add a passing siding at Braidwood. This additional state funding appears to extend the double tracking from Elwood to south of the planned passing siding at Braidwood, so it might turn the siding into part of the extended double track segment. Expensive double tracking segment, though.

The question is whether this extended double track segment along with the other improvements will be enough to allow expansion of service frequencies to at least 1 additional daily Lincoln service train. Get all the Lincoln service trains running at 110 mph, not just restricted to 3 a day. If the state is putting in an additional $102 million of its own money as follow-on, they should get lean hard on UP for concessions for more daily trains. Idiotic to spend this much money and not be able to expand service frequency by at least 1 daily train. Even if the Texas Eagle is still limited to 79 mph max speeds, it should have trip time reductions from the track improvements.

gokeefe wrote:A half a billion dollars worth of passenger rail investment over the next 5 years in Illinois alone? Good luck finding a historical equivalent to that......

Real estate values in Chicago are going to be on the upswing for years to come.

Virginia is spending around $100 million a year on passenger and freight rail projects. Over 5 years, that is half a billion. California, of course, is spending a lot more on passenger rail over the next 5 years, even when the HSR project is not included. CA has allocated $350 million alone for the run-through tracks at LA Union Station project (now called the Southern California Regional Interconnector Project which is as bland and non-descriptive project name as you get.) NY state is spending a lot of money on passenger rail, in terms of regional rail, it is just mostly being spent on the East Side Access project which is getting into Big Dig territory on delays and cost increases. IL is not the only state spending that much money on passenger rail projects.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:While it is a Forum "understanding" that overtly political statements are not to be made, it is very difficult to keep such "out of mind" when addressing any program involving public funding.

To what extent such will have effect upon the strong passenger train initiative moving forth in Illinois, I know not, but there is all too much the chance that the incumbent Governor, Pat Quinn, will lose the seat to the Republican challenger, Bruce Rauner, who is campaigning on the line of "shake up Springfield". Presently, Mr. Rauner holds a slight lead in the polls, but the race is of the "too close to call" varietal. His campaign is to a great extent self-funded, and he has "outspent" Mr. Quinn to date.

Also, while likely still to be the victor, the challenge against US Senator Richard Durbin has been stronger than expected.

While of course Illinois has had State funded routes practically since A-Day, the strong initiative did not start until the Democrats took control of the Governorship.

Concerns unfounded, or otherwise?

+1. Mr. Rauner's views on Illinois's state-supported Amtrak remain unclear (at least to me). Political environments change. While transportation budgets shouldn't be tied to each election cycle, I still think it's important to actually get things done when the political winds are at your back rather than in your face. We've seen lots of announcements from Gov. Quinn of late, but actual improvements seem have been limited to some (very useful) projects for the Lincoln Service. QC service, OTOH, has supposedly been on the way for nearly 6 years, with essentially nothing accomplished. (When work begins on the bypass tracks at Eola Yard, that will be IIRC the first spade of dirt turned on the project.) Who knows, perhaps Rauner could import some efficiency to Illinois DOT, and actually get the connection at Wyanet built.

Why would the Texas Eagle be restricted to 79 m.p.h. in 110 m.p.h. territory?

gokeefe wrote:A half a billion dollars worth of passenger rail investment over the next 5 years in Illinois alone? Good luck finding a historical equivalent to that......

Real estate values in Chicago are going to be on the upswing for years to come.

You're being too modest, leaving out roughly $1 billion being spent St Louis-Chicago,
plus some hundreds of millions on new bi-levels and next generation locomotives, plus
isn't it $300 million on the Englewood Flyover, plus planning work for the remaining 25%
of the St Louis-Chicago corridor, part of the South of the Lake studies, and more.

A cynic could note how Illinois passenger rail enjoyed a perfect storm, politically, with
Dick Durbin the Senate Deputy Majority Leader, President Obama, Ray La Hood as
the head of the DOT for four years, Joe Szabo at the Federal Railroad Administration,
and Pat Quinn as a very very rail-friendly governor.

Good timing, too, that serious planning had begun much earlier under the Midwest
high speed rail initiative, the CREATE program was in place, and then came the
Stimulus piñata that made for a very successful party, with fun for all.

Of course, I think they'll need another piñata to keep the party going. They need
another billion or two for the Chicago-Joliet/thru Springfield/Alton-St Louis segments
remaining to be done on the Lincoln Corridor. Chicago-Des Moines-Omaha has a
long long way to go. Chicago-Memphis is like the first wink in a long flirtation.
And sadly Chicago-Minneapolis, Chicago-Cleveland-Pittsburgh, Chicago-Indianapois-
Cincinnati/Louisville, Chicago-Columbus, Chicago-Green Bay, those dreams haven't
moved closer at all. Even CREATE seems to be short a billion or two from completion.

Still, I'm sure you are right that this investment now underway will be transformative
for Chicago, and for much of Downstate as well. And an inspiration to rail advocates
all around the nation.

JimBoylan wrote:Why would the Texas Eagle be restricted to 79 m.p.h. in 110 m.p.h. territory?

Because of the agreement signed by IL with UP some 10? years ago. That agreement, which was done when there were 3 daily Lincoln service trains, not 4, allowed for only 3 round-trip trains to operate at 110 mph given certain track upgrades. That restriction has been listed in the environmental assessment and planning documents since IL got the initial $1.2 billion for the corridor. With additional double track and siding upgrades, IL, the FRA, and UP may be negotiating to allow more trains to run at allowed track speed, but there has been little to no public discussion of any such negotiations that I am aware of.

The max speed for the Superliners is 100 mph anyway, so the TE won't be running at 110 mph regardless.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: To what extent such will have effect upon the strong passenger train initiative moving forth in Illinois, I know not, but there is all too much the chance that the incumbent Governor, Pat Quinn, will lose the seat to the Republican challenger, Bruce Rauner, who is campaigning on the line of "shake up Springfield". Presently, Mr. Rauner holds a slight lead in the polls, but the race is of the "too close to call" varietal. His campaign is to a great extent self-funded, and he has "outspent" Mr. Quinn to date.

Also, while likely still to be the victor, the challenge against US Senator Richard Durbin has been stronger than expected.

While of course Illinois has had State funded routes practically since A-Day, the strong initiative did not start until the Democrats took control of the Governorship.

Concerns unfounded, or otherwise?

Illinois is such a rail dependent state with Chicago playing an oversized role in state politics, I doubt that a Gov. Rauner. whatever his position on rail, would pull a Christie and stop or block the currently funded projects. Or if he did, that the state legislature and local stakeholders with construction jobs at risk would not let him. So the projects that are underway would continue. However given the state's financial situation, under a new Governor, a major slowdown in spending on new intercity rail projects or additional improvements to the CHI-STL or other corridors could very well take place. But what is already in the (federal and state funded) pipeline will result in significant service improvements through 2018.

That said, there are a number of CREATE and METRA related projects in the environmental review and preliminary design stage. Many of those projects also have benefits for better and more reliable Amtrak service in and out of Chicago. What is Gov. Rauner 's (real) position on the CREATE projects? Would there be a dropoff in the state funding share for CREATE which would delay or stall projects as they complete the EIS phase?

afiggatt wrote:

JimBoylan wrote:Why would the Texas Eagle be restricted to 79 m.p.h. in 110 m.p.h. territory?

Because of the agreement signed by IL with UP some 10? years ago. ...

The max speed for the Superliners is 100 mph anyway, so the TE won't be running at 110 mph regardless.

If the Eagle gets up to a top speed of 89 mph, or dare we
hope, 99 mph, that will be a huge improvement. Few passengers
will know that the train is going 10 or 20 mph slower than
the maximum speed. They'll all know the Eagle is flying along.

The big benefit to the Texas Eagle will probably come from
the spots of double-tracking and the added passing sidings,
the new signaling, the improved tracks, and so forth that should
speed up all trains, even UP's freights.

Eliminating those "being held for a passing freight train" moments
could markedly improve the customer satisfaction scores. And
anything to improve the on-time performance.

Seems kinda dumb that they can't even get the Eagle up to 90 or 100, and will be stuck running at 79 on the 110 mph railroad. Even if they left the schedule alone, it'd allow the train to make up some time when needed.

Matt Johnson wrote:Seems kinda dumb that they can't even get the Eagle up to 90 or 100, and will be stuck running at 79 on the 110 mph railroad. Even if they left the schedule alone, it'd allow the train to make up some time when needed.

This is mere speculation, but one of the constraints in the Michigan Line is having ICTS-equipped locomotives. It's my understanding that there's a semi-captive set of P42s operating there. If that's the case and that constraint applies on the Chicago-St. Louis line, then you wouldn't want one of those P42s operating through to San Antonio or Los Angeles on the Eagle.

Matt Johnson wrote:Seems kinda dumb that they can't even get the Eagle up to 90 or 100, and will be stuck running at 79 on the 110 mph railroad. Even if they left the schedule alone, it'd allow the train to make up some time when needed.

What will be more interesting is if the new diesels pulling the new bilevels will get up to 110 mph.
I still think its a big ask .

Matt Johnson wrote:Seems kinda dumb that they can't even get the Eagle up to 90 or 100, and will be stuck running at 79 on the 110 mph railroad. ...

Who said they can't get 90 or 99?

The Superliners are rated for 100 mph tops, while the new bi-level equipment should be rated for 110 mph. How could that mean the Eagles are "stuck" at 79?

I say that with the better tracks, new signaling, more sidings, etc they probably can get the Eagle's top speed up from 79 to 99 mph. The Eagle will be faster, with a smoother ride, less plagued by freight delays, and showing a better on-time performance. So never mind if it can't get all the way up to 110.