• Amtrak Hiawatha Discussion: Chicago - Milwaukee

  • 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

  by eolesen
 
This is smart, if it indeed removes freight from running thru the downtown station.

However..... this should have been funded by CPKC.
  by scratchyX1
 
eolesen wrote: Wed Oct 30, 2024 9:11 pm This is smart, if it indeed removes freight from running thru the downtown station.

However..... this should have been funded by CPKC.
It looks like they partly funded it, but yeah, it's private company using public money, to improve public service.
  by electricron
 
Jeff Smith wrote: Wed Oct 30, 2024 5:02 am Senator Tammy Baldwin announced Monday morning that a $72.8 million federal grant was awarded that will fund a critical freight bypass near the Milwaukee Intermodal Station. It’s a lynchpin to increasing the frequency of the Amtrak Hiawatha Service passenger train between Milwaukee and Chicago.
But she said CPKC had agreed to a key provision: once the state secured the funding, it could advance an eighth-daily roundtrip on the Amtrak Hiawatha Service.
Yes, once this new bypass is built an eight Hiawatha train between Milwaukee and Chicago could begin.
That does not mean an additional Borealis train between St. Paul and Chicago.
  by eolesen
 
Well, it's a private company using public funds to build something they probably wanted, and found a way to make it happen under the guise of improving public service....

CP shouldn't have been using that track as mainline to begin with. My understanding is that prior to ripping up the yard and tearing out the Shops, the MILW's main went thru the yard and up to Grand Avenue.
  by west point
 
The past changes did not anticipate anything as many passenger trains ever operating again. IMO CP has been very open to allowing more trains before all their demands for upgrading are complete. Compare that to the intransigence of NS & CSX for Mobile.
  by eolesen
 
True, but I still don't buy that CP is doing anyone a favor by moving their trains thru the yard instead of thru the downtown station.

If ownership of the station leads were to change to WisDOT, at least the public would be getting something tangible in exchange.
  by RandallW
 
I'm in Virginia, so I don't have any ground truth, but a review of OpenRailwayMap makes it seem that currently a single 1/2 mile freight train can effectively force Amtrak to single platform operations in Milwaukee, so while having those freights use the yards doesn't eliminate the possibility of two passenger trains having conflicting moves trying to get around the freight south of the point where the yard diverges from the main, it does mean that a freight won't block access to platforms and sidings within the station.

The WisDOT project includes a presentation with more detail, including trackage changes.
  by Tadman
 
Is the station the constraint or the draw bridge just south of the station? Because the station has five tracks, just three are stubs opening to the west. It seems you could connect the east end to the east leads and create a lot of capacity with 200yards of track. But there is no way to add a third or fourth track over the river, and that's a very tight curve - think inbounds to Pittsburgh - so any freight probably crawls through the station.

The bridge would make a lot of sense to me as the real choke point.

Also this should be a Metra train.
  by scratchyX1
 
Tadman wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2024 10:19 am Is the station the constraint or the draw bridge just south of the station? Because the station has five tracks, just three are stubs opening to the west. It seems you could connect the east end to the east leads and create a lot of capacity with 200yards of track. But there is no way to add a third or fourth track over the river, and that's a very tight curve - think inbounds to Pittsburgh - so any freight probably crawls through the station.

The bridge would make a lot of sense to me as the real choke point.

Also this should be a Metra train.
Before the station, how many tracks were in that area? Openrailwaymap shows 5 runthrough tracks in milwaukee intermodal. While you are right about the curve forcing trains to slow down, aaat least inbound ones are already slowing to stop, so it's not a big deal.
I'm missing the historical angle, where did the Amtrak passenger trains stop before that station was built?
And did the CP forerunner always send freight over the watertown sub, instead of through the yard?

Why should it be metra, instead of amtrak?
  by Tadman
 
MILW built the station in 1965 to replace an ancient station, and C&NW moved in shorty after in order to dump their ancient station on the lake. It really is a decent mid-size city station for 5-10 trains per day plus intercity bus. Amtrak has never had another station. MILW was a few blocks west, and C&NW was way north on the lake by downtown.

Of those five tracks, only two go east. All five go west. One stub is used for private cars. But there are open ends for tracks 3 and 4, and if they can make the radius onto the bridge, they can be connected to the east. But I think the problem is long road freights going through on tracks 1 or 2 probably move very slowly between the bridge, curve, and station. In other words, this station could have 20 tracks and a slow moving freight on track 2 blocks most everything for 20 minutes and ruins the timekeeping of a 90 minute Chicago run.

As for Metra, this is a 90 minute run that mostly carries commuters. But Amtrak thinks it is the 20th Century limited, so you have to line up for boarding and go through all the officious crap, then march to the train, use one of two open doors (of the ten available doors). Amtrak does not notice that two track over, Metra boards 1000 passengers per train without any closed doors or marching games. I detest the Amtrak games one has to play. If this were a Metra operation it would be so much simpler (and more capacity in bilevels) to operate.
  by scratchyX1
 
Tadman wrote: Fri Nov 01, 2024 11:44 am MILW built the station in 1965 to replace an ancient station, and C&NW moved in shorty after in order to dump their ancient station on the lake. It really is a decent mid-size city station for 5-10 trains per day plus intercity bus. Amtrak has never had another station. MILW was a few blocks west, and C&NW was way north on the lake by downtown.

Of those five tracks, only two go east. All five go west. One stub is used for private cars. But there are open ends for tracks 3 and 4, and if they can make the radius onto the bridge, they can be connected to the east. But I think the problem is long road freights going through on tracks 1 or 2 probably move very slowly between the bridge, curve, and station. In other words, this station could have 20 tracks and a slow moving freight on track 2 blocks most everything for 20 minutes and ruins the timekeeping of a 90 minute Chicago run.

Openrailwaymap is wrong, then. And getting freights out entirely would be a good thing.

As for Metra, this is a 90 minute run that mostly carries commuters. But Amtrak thinks it is the 20th Century limited, so you have to line up for boarding and go through all the officious crap, then march to the train, use one of two open doors (of the ten available doors). Amtrak does not notice that two track over, Metra boards 1000 passengers per train without any closed doors or marching games. I detest the Amtrak games one has to play. If this were a Metra operation it would be so much simpler (and more capacity in bilevels) to operate.
I didn't know that it was all low platforms. I'm surprised that the next phase isn't at least one high level, for hiawatha service, with all doors used.
And of course, there's renewed interest in that KRM commuter operation.
  by Tadman
 
All of it. Every station. But the catch is that the equipment all has traps, and they use a dedicated track in Chicago and could use a dedicated track in MKE, so why they don't have high platform is baffling to me. Of course as of today in MKE that would mean the freights and Builder have to use track 2 if the Hiawatha uses 1, or they would have to connect 3 or 4 to the east end.

Also, if they ever got the money to build a gauntlet in MKA airport, you really only need to do the southbound track. It's not likely that many flyers are riding downtown on the Hiawatha.
  by eolesen
 
The problem with connecting the stub tracks to head south/east might be the Post Office building supports.

Totally agree that handing this operation off to Metra would be a better option, especially with the overage of Alstom cars they'll have. But apparently, neither Pritzker or Evers worry much about the costs or efficiency. They just want the prestige of having higher speed rail service. Meanwhile, Indiana has electrified higher speed service from South Bend, which is a slightly longer run than Chicago-Milwaukee....

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

  by STrRedWolf
 
eolesen wrote: Sun Nov 03, 2024 8:31 pm The problem with connecting the stub tracks to head south/east might be the Post Office building supports.

Totally agree that handing this operation off to Metra would be a better option, especially with the overage of Alstom cars they'll have. But apparently, neither Pritzker or Evers worry much about the costs or efficiency. They just want the prestige of having higher speed rail service. Meanwhile, Indiana has electrified higher speed service from South Bend, which is a slightly longer run than Chicago-Milwaukee....
The thing is, Metra contracts out running the trains depending on what line it is, so it may end up back in Amtrak hands, or maybe with Alstom's operations division depending on what the rail owner does.
  • 1
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16