Continuing the discussion from the "Terminal capacity" thread, didn't want that one to drift too much...
--Dorian--
Railroad Forums
MetraBNSF wrote:Splitting off 1251 would most likely require a brand new set and crew so its unlikely to happen, at least anytime soon. Splitting off 1243 can realistically be done, as in the case this Friday and on other special occasions. The last time I rode 1243 was at a time there was a 3:50pm Naperville/59 express scheduled and in spite of delays, both trains were at or near capacity.And that set could conceivably be used to split 1251; a mock schedule could be that it departs CUS between about 4:30 or so, run express to Naperville/Rte 59, then head back downtown and turn to SW 831. 831's schedule may have to be moved back 5-10 minutes to compensate for the deadhead time. Among the issues with this is that 831's equipment is 7 cars (I think; Kyle, correct me if that's wrong), and if so, this set may need at least another 2-3 cars added to it to guard against overcrowding. I don't know where the extra cars would come from, one possibility is to take a car off of 1251's current set. Or they might have to repurchase those old Burlington cars that's currently sitting in Wisconsin somewhere, since buying new equipment isn't an option right now. Crew considerations will also need to be addressed; this situation may have to involve a pool of engineers that are qualified on both districts, so that's another thing to think about.
Since SWS trains are pooled in with BNSF, I wonder if BNSF has ever considered borrowing a SWS set on days when there is extra early afternoon service. I know there is one SWS set that's at 14th St. until at least 6:00pm or so.
metraRI wrote:If changes are made to the current 1253, another set would have to be used for 1292 which 1253 turns to. Also if 1255 adds stops, it would have to fit so 1261 would not be delayed.. not to mention adding stops to a LaGrange express probably wouldn't make 1255 passengers very happyOk, then how about this: Follow the plan as outlined in my previous post, plus the following changes:
metraRI wrote: Better yet... Something like this could work:That's doable, but I'm kinda leery about adding another deadhead opposite of peak direction here. It would only take a late running Amtrak 4 or 6 coming in from the west coast, or a hotshot freight that BNSF is trying to squeeze in at this time of day to cause delays on the commuter side in both directions, especially when dispatchers in Fort Worth borrow the middle track temporarily between Lisle and LaGrange to get these eastbounds through. It doesn't happen often, but we all know this isn't unprecedented.
Times might have to be adjusted to deadhead to fit with 1274/1276.
NEW 1243
3:54 3:58 (CUS)
----- 4:23 (Main)
----- 4:27 (Belmont)
----- 4:32 (Lisle)
4:26 ----- (Naperville)
4:34 ----- (Rt. 59)
4:45 ----- (Aurora)
NEW = 7/8 Cars, reduced from 11 (Current 1243 Set)
1243 = 7 Cars
NEW turns to 1288, cut at Aurora no longer needed.
1243 turns to DH.
1288 DH
5:20 ----- (Aurora)
5:38 4:40 (Lisle)
6:42 5:10 (CUS)
1288 turns to 1289
DH turns to 1271
MetraBNSF wrote:I do like how the new Naperville express is scheduled. One problem with the current 1243 aside from it being at capacity is should it run late for any reason, the subsequent turn to 1288 gets delayed, or worse, cancelled. From what I see, 1288 already runs late in route as it is. From 1243's 4:56pm Aurora arrival time, to cutting the rear 5 cars, a crew change, and prepping the front 6 cars to run the rest of the evening must be really time consumingI would say so. But with a 10 minute cushion built into its schedule on the east end, I'd wager it's OTP is still pretty decent. And if the equipment for the new Naperville express is used for 1288 without a cut, then it'll have a better chance at keeping its schedule.
MetraBNSF wrote:I think the people at Metra should seriously read this board when they think about possible schedule modifications for any of the lines. They do onboard passenger surveys from time to time, but great information gets posted here. And having higher-ups actually ride the trains. Aside from BNSF officials that occasionally ride that line's trains, I've heard in the past that a Metra spokesperson lives in the west suburbs and uses the BNSFI doubt if any of them actually read this board, or would be inclined to, but I agree, it wouldn't hurt. I think they'd be surprised at the information here, and using this info combined with the surveys would increase the odds of the changes being for the better.
MetraBNSF wrote:I'm drumming up some ideas on how to improve the UP-W based on current conditions. Metra has said it themselves, improving the UP-W will benefit that line and BNSF.Before any changes can take place on UP/W, improving the OTP of the current service on UP/W should be top priority; delays due to freight train interference are still too common. Case in point: Twice this week, a dispatcher in Omaha lined up a freight just ahead of 52, which is supposed to get downtown at 3:47. As a result, 52 was already 5 minutes down when it arrived Wheaton, and 15 minutes down by the time it got to OTC because it had to run at restricted speed with the freight ahead of it in the next block all the way to Elmhurst, when the freight went into Proviso. Granted, 52 isn't always affected, but it happens to enough trains (particularly inbounds) often enough to the point where the OTP is still suffering, and remains among the lowest on Metra's system. Let's get that fixed first before we start talking about upgrades...
MetraBNSF wrote:I think the people at Metra should seriously read this board when they think about possible schedule modifications for any of the lines.Haha, I wish they would.. I would be posting proposed changes all the time. I don't know how many RI schedules I have made over the years to fix the current issues.
doepack wrote:That's doable, but I'm kinda leery about adding another deadhead opposite of peak direction here. It would only take a late running Amtrak 4 or 6 coming in from the west coast, or a hotshot freight that BNSF is trying to squeeze in at this time of day to cause delays on the commuter side in both directions...Well of course there will always be the "what if" scenario, but this happens now. I have seen deadheads go center track between the gaps to get around freights before. The only issue with what I have is that 1274 doesn't get downtown until 5:23.. with 1271 departing at 5:32, the deadhead would have to get around that train, but best bet is 1274 arrives early anyway... 13 minutes is not needed from Halsted to CUS.
metraRI wrote:True, delays can and will happen, and depending on the magnitude, it can bring even the most fine-tuned operation to a standstill. I'm just saying that if there's a chance service can be expanded without creating more deadhead traffic, those ideas should be explored first. It would be even better if you could convert two or three of those deadheads into revenue locals east of DG, then the late afternoon trains that originate in Aurora could run express DG-CUS. Right now, only 1280 provides this service, and there's no way under the current configuration to upgrade 1288 & 1292's schedule in a like manner, but should the money ever become available to extend the fourth track west from Cicero to say, Hinsdale, it could be worth a look...MetraBNSF wrote:I think the people at Metra should seriously read this board when they think about possible schedule modifications for any of the lines.Haha, I wish they would.. I would be posting proposed changes all the time. I don't know how many RI schedules I have made over the years to fix the current issues.
doepack wrote:That's doable, but I'm kinda leery about adding another deadhead opposite of peak direction here. It would only take a late running Amtrak 4 or 6 coming in from the west coast, or a hotshot freight that BNSF is trying to squeeze in at this time of day to cause delays on the commuter side in both directions...Well of course there will always be the "what if" scenario, but this happens now. I have seen deadheads go center track between the gaps to get around freights before. The only issue with what I have is that 1274 doesn't get downtown until 5:23.. with 1271 departing at 5:32, the deadhead would have to get around that train, but best bet is 1274 arrives early anyway... 13 minutes is not needed from Halsted to CUS.
MetraBNSF wrote:I was thinking about how BNSF train 1251 had 11 cars about a month ago since that train boards from track 12 at CUS. I guess track 12 is capable of holding a train of that length.Do the 11-car Naperville expresses still load from track 2 during the evening rush? If so, then I wonder if it would be a better idea to move those runs to track 12. I think It would greatly improve passenger flow through the concourse at that time of day, so folks getting off inbounds won't have to fight through the mob of people heading home. It gets pretty crazy down there with everyone scattering about in all different directions...