New Start/West Lake Route

With regard to the west lake route, there's been suggestions that the route will not be electrified beyond current wires on CSS mains, and also rumors that GTW will be used to Valpo. Looking at my handly ILDot rail map, it seems the CFER from Tolleston to Valpo is a lightly-trafficked route that could handle commuter trains without any additional tracks - by eliminating the cost of adding tracks, could that allow wires to be strung along a valpo route? Further, this would still allow these new trains to stop at Clark road, in anticipation of Gary Airport being used as a third or fourth Chicago airport.

Edit: there's about a half-mile of trackage between CFER home rails on ex-PRR and the CSS - this half-mile was cleaned up by CR or CSX, the two immediately prior owners. It's single track, recently refurbished, and unused. My post above assumes CSX would not have a problem allowing NICTD to buy/use their small stretch of unused track.

Oook, tough choice. GTW, or electric. If the boarding's gonna be alllevel and they want a fast start, the GTW is the way to go.

If you've not ridden on the RiverLINE, next time you're in the NYC area, do it. The GTW 2/6 is pretty much the only diesel I've ever ridden that I can say is truely 'just like an electric'. They're near EMU noise levels, they've got darn near the same punch. The onboard engine noise level is very low (though I found the track noise is a bit high for my tastes, nothing that couldn't be fixed). Austin is using an expanded version (GTW 2/8 or GTW 4/8?). It'll be an eye opener down there.

The first time you see / hear one in action, your jaw will drop. They're <b>that</b> impressive. And they have been pretty reliable from what I've heard.

It's slated to run on a rebuilt right-of-way south from the current South Shore line at Burnham to Air Line Junction. From there it will run over Canadian National to Valpraiso and south on CSX to Lowell. This would combine the two non-electrifed operations on one route for part of the trip.

were they thinking of running onto IC tracks in like usual into chicago or another route?

It was my impression it was to be a Randolph-based line just like the traditional CSS route. However, we'll need electrics or DM's to operate north of Van Buren. Which is why I suggest using the Tolleston-CFE-Valpo routing rather than GTW. I bet CFE doesn't run more than four trains per day on that route, while GTW is BUSY. It just makes much more sense than rebuilding a abandoned Monon and somehow finding more track capacity on a busy GTW.

It also comes quite close to Hobart, Merrilville, Valpo, etc...

Also - I think DM's are a crummy idea. There isn't a DM locomotive on the market anymore, which means reinventing the wheel. As for MU's. the wheel hasn't been invented yet as far as DM diesel/electric MUs. They have enough trouble designing the M8 out in New York, which operates on two different voltages. It's just bad news - spend the development money on catenary, and keep it simple at Shops.

Oh, heh, I was confused there - I thought you were referring to the GTW 2/6 type DMU that NJT use (which is <b>not</b> a dual mode), as opposed to the routing over the GTW :/

Dual modes suck, they always have, always will. But if they're hung up on not wiring, there's a LOT of really nice DMU cars out there. But then, how much are we talking? The SS catenary looks like it's pretty darn low budget (as opposed to NY area overkill), and if it's a few miles....

But then, people oppose this logic for SEPTA, insisting that new diesel shops, slower service, and a nonexistant locomotive would somehow be cheaper than adding a few miles of castenary. Go figure.

Sokay, I meant Grand Trunk Western in regards to routing.

I heard it's actually cheaper to string NEC-style catenary because there's less substations, etc... to be set up, but I'm not much of an expert on substations. Either way, we've got proven single and double deck equipment suitable for the existing 1500v DC system. We don't have a diesel shop on line, and any diesel equipment would have to be dual-mode due to the tunnel north of Van Buren street. Indiana needs to determine we're going to do this project right the first time or just not do it.

See now if we take the wire down, put up 3rd rail..then pick up some FL9's..

Okay Terry C


now post about seven pics of FL9's doctored for south shore paint...
and ask how it would be feasible to re-wire them for 1500vdc operation (which the guys at shops could handle in a weekend - they've tackled far bigger projects)

I'm not sure really if NEC style wiring is THAT much cheaper - how close are subs on the South Shore anyway? I'm guessing 2 or so miles?

Then again, the SS's catenary style could probbably work at 12kv anyway, with the right insultators. That's the kind of stuff that doesn't affect really how thick the cat poles are, or the wire hanging methods, etc.

How long is this proposed extension anyway? If it's < 25 miles, it's a no brainer to just electrify...

Nasadowsk wrote:how close are subs on the South Shore anyway? I'm guessing 2 or so miles?

They're spaced roughly at 10-mile intervals.

10 miles? You're not gonna do any better with AC, really. DC subs are so common anyway, that I'd guess you could pick 'em up pretty cheap - the change from 750 to 1.5kv isn't much - I believe that some LRT systems now are 1.5kv anyway.

I'm guessing it's just stupid preconceptions about electrics that are making them think diesel. Really, that stuff isn't that expensive if you do it sanely, and the SS's catenary fits into that catagory - it's far simpler and lighter than what we see out here, even on LRT lines.

dual mode diesels have been done, I recall some f9's or F7's having 3rd rail pickups.

If they're going to expand the service, don't waste time on incompatibilities and compromises, the South Shore has survived because..it has.
just get out and do it right the first time.

dinwitty wrote:dual mode diesels have been done, I recall some f9's or F7's having 3rd rail pickups.

You're thinking of the FL9s. Amtrak has replacements for them from GE; P32AC-DMs #700-717.