Railroad Forums 

  • Illinois Amtrak Service

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1290772  by Matt Johnson
 
Woody wrote:
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?

See previous posts. That is the case on the current short 110 mph stretch and will remain the case even when the full 110 mph operation begins. To me, riding the Eagle at 79 mph on that route would be even more frustrating than riding a NJ Transit Arrow III at 80 mph on a Princeton Junction express! ;)
 #1290773  by electricron
 
Matt Johnson wrote:See previous posts. That is the case on the current short 110 mph stretch and will remain the case even when the full 110 mph operation begins. To me, riding the Eagle at 79 mph on that route would be even more frustrating than riding a NJ Transit Arrow III at 80 mph on a Princeton Junction express! ;)
Why, for most of the TE's route it speeds around at 60 mph? Going 79 mph in IL will seem relatively fast.
 #1290819  by Woody
 
Matt Johnson wrote:
Woody wrote:
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?
See previous posts. That is the case on the current short 110 mph stretch and will remain the case even when the full 110 mph operation begins. To me, riding the Eagle at 79 mph on that route would be even more frustrating than riding a NJ Transit Arrow III at 80 mph on a Princeton Junction express! ;)
Well, O.K., if you say so. But I'd hate to generalize from anything happening on that "short 110 mph stretch". That segment is a glorified P.R. stunt. As I read it, the trainload of pols and press accelerated to 110 mph, everyone celebrated, and immediately the train began to slow down because it was reaching the end of the showpiece section. There was no cruising along at the maximum speed. So now if the Eagle is not participating in this energy-intensive stunt every day, I'm O.K. with that.

If the three or four fast trains limit is renegotiated to allow more fast train frequencies, a fast(er) slot could be found for the Texas Eagle. But maybe not. I'd say the UP actually has legitimate concerns about arranging a fast slot for the Eagle, given the LD trains frequent lateness and inability to keep to schedule. We're all frustrated by those issues now, and speeding up St-Louis-Chicago won't prevent such problems accumulating San Antonio-St Louis.

But I still think the Eagle will greatly benefit from these upgrades. The by-pass sidings and better signaling should almost eliminate lateness problems arising on this northern St Louis-Chicago part of the route. This should somewhat reduce the incidence of lateness. Somewhat. LOL.
 #1290897  by GWoodle
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote:
afiggatt wrote: Because of the agreement signed by IL with UP some 10? years ago
That had to be predecessor Chicago and Alton vice UP.

Something may date from the 1989 purchase of the old Alton by Southern Pacific? Some agreements to restore the track to decent speeds? Even more agreements with trackwork & new signals since the Union Pacific merger?
 #1290968  by dowlingm
 
If UP's problem with Eagle going 110 is solely about slot allocation (it's probably isn't, but play along anyway), and at the same time there is a wish to reinforce the service over the CN-IC, what about
  • rerouting Eagle STL-CHI via the CN-IC and
    instead of sending a corridor train over that line, send it over UP in a 110mph slot?
On a quick check of Google Maps, Eagle is timetabled for 5h38 southbound to STL. CONO is timetabled for 2h29 to Champaign, 3h32 to Effingham and 4hr20 to Centralia. Assuming that (as noted above) there isn't a second showstopper to overcome, the question moves to the existence of a viable STL-CHA route which combines the attributes of acceptable track speed, geometry, owner willingness to play ball, and considered to cover enough of the IC-CN to constitute an acceptable reinforcement to that line's boosters - starting with Senator Durbin.
 #1291460  by Thunder
 
News flash. CNIC will not be playing ball with Amtrak. Durbin and a few others are already talking of routing the trains on the Joliet Sub over the Rock. Not to mention they are starting to blather about " High speed rail" over that section of the Rock.Dont know how and dont know where the state is getting the money,but it will be fun to watch.
 #1293094  by gokeefe
 
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?
Mr. Norman,

While I think "otherwise" may be a possibility if an "R" gets elected Governor of Illinois it is worth keeping in mind that such candidate better be ahead by a lot more than 1% on election day if he wishes to beat the Chicago machine! Although the race may be close I simply cannot believe that a Republican is going to win a statewide race in Illinois with less than a 5% lead going in to election day.

Election mechanics aside I agree with others who claim that the constituencies behind rail expansion in Illinois are non-partisan and broadly based both geographically and philosophically.
 #1293098  by Tadman
 
A very good question. It reminds me of my time in Kansas, a very conservative state. At the time, Kathleen Sebelius was our governor before she went on to serve in the cabinet. Despite serving in the cabinet of a far more liberal democrat than the prior (Clinton) and championing a national healthcare initiative, Gov. Sebelius had to maintain a fairly moderate/conservative democrat mindset to get elected in Kansas. She was certainly no Barney Frank if you know what I mean. I say this because it strikes me that any Illinois Republican must be fairly moderate to get elected - certainly not a place you'd see Sarah Palin or Rush get on the ballot.

Safe to say this is going to be an interesting year.
 #1293199  by eee123
 
Hello all,
Longtime lurker. First-time poster.

Can anyone shed some light on the bustitutions going on now from STL-Springfield? I was booked to take the train next week from STL to CHI, but they canceled it at some point last week. Looks to be an ongoing thing, at least for a few weeks.
 #1293284  by StLouSteve
 
Trackwork outside St Louis. Trains newswire has details. UP single track line only signaled in one direction, parallel KCS is old jointed rail only good for 30 mph or so. Sounds like KCS finally getting needed maintenance.
 #1301677  by Gilbert B Norman
 
One must wonder to what extent will the strong passenger train initiative originated and continued by two Democratic governors is in jeopardy under Republican Governor Rauner.

Lest we not forget his campaign slogan: "shake up Springfield".
 #1301679  by CHTT1
 
Yes, it will be interesting to see what happen to the rail program under Rauner. He wasn't specific on any of his actual plans during the campaign, so we will have to wait to see what he plans to do, if he even knows about Amtrak Illinois. Since the trains are popular with both Democrats and Republicans (and a case can be made that they are more important to the downstate Republican areas than they are to the Chicago area), he may not want to mess with them, setting his sights on the bigger fiscal problems like pensions and education.
 #1301701  by Station Aficionado
 
I'd be surprised if there were any negative consequence for the existing services. Even for Quad Cities and Rockford (nee Dubuque)--services for which much was promised over the last 5+ years, but little delivered--I suspect it will be the same story. I think for any project that received federal funds, such would likely have to be repaid if the project did not go forward. Also, I think there's still a heavy pro-rail majority in the legislature. And maybe the new governor will be like Gov. Snyder in Michigan when it comes to passenger trains. That said, I repeat a point I have made before--work on building/instituting/increasing/improving passenger service should be pushed ahead quickly when the political winds are favorable, as you never know when (or how strongly) they will turn.
 #1307440  by gokeefe
 
Reading through some recent coverage of Amtrak in Illinois a particular passage from an article in The Western Courier, newspaper of Western Illinois University struck me:

First the "per rules" fairuse quote:
Amtrak and the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) have added extra routes for holiday travelers.
Amtrak will offer an additional round-trip for Sunday, Nov. 30 on the daily Chicago-Quincy corridor, which is an everyday route. The company offers morning and evening round-trips via the Carl Sandburg and Illinois Zephyr trains.
The added trip departing Nov. 30, which will be on train 383 (Illinois Zephyr) will leave Union Station in Chicago “20 minutes (11:30 a.m.) later than usual and operate on a modified timetable to Quincy that day only,” according to a company news release.
And here is the sentence that I was impressed by (second of the two):
Because of the way finals are scheduled, students often leave at different times. Regardless, most depend on the railroad to travel.
I can never recall reading such a statement in reference to contemporary travel patterns anywhere in the United States.

I am not referencing mass transit use in urban areas or commuter rail, just intercity travel. To see this situation arise as a "matter of fact" seems to me extraordinary.
 #1307442  by gokeefe
 
Perhaps with TIGER VII in mind Metra has undertaken a PR effort to secure further funding for the 75th Street Capital Improvement Corridor.
Metra and freight railroad officials were preaching to the choir Friday when they touted the benefits to come from a $1 billion project aimed to straighten out a train bottleneck on the South Side of Chicago.

The audience they hoped to reach beyond the Metra boardroom is in Springfield and Washington, D.C. Right now, there's a dearth of funding for the project.


"We need to make sure everyone hears about the 75th Street CIP (capital improvement corridor)," Metra Executive Director Don Orseno said. "The squeaky wheel gets the grease."

Metra trains and multiple freight trains, including Union Pacific, CSX and Norfolk Southern railroads, converge at three separate crossings located in the area of 75th Street between the Dan Ryan Expressway and Kedzie Avenue.
  • 1
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 108