Top Speed of CSS and NICTD MU's

Anybody know what top speed is/was for the orange fleet and today's fleet? I've heard 75, but I know that's not true from personal experience on today's fleet.

79 mph is the current maxiumum authorized speed.

79 MPH is also the listed maximum speed for the new bi-levels. The single level cars have a maximum speed of 75 MPH (per the Nippon-Sharyo website).

justalurker66 wrote:79 MPH is also the listed maximum speed for the new bi-levels. The single level cars have a maximum speed of 75 MPH (per the Nippon-Sharyo website).

Not entirely true....the single level cars will most certainly reach 79 MPH...and even a little higher.

jb9152 wrote:

justalurker66 wrote:79 MPH is also the listed maximum speed for the new bi-levels. The single level cars have a maximum speed of 75 MPH (per the Nippon-Sharyo website).

Not entirely true....the single level cars will most certainly reach 79 MPH...and even a little higher.

The error is Nippon-Sharyo's. The 75 MPH is listed on their site (as noted). Did the AC traction rebuild help with speed?

justalurker66 wrote:

jb9152 wrote:

justalurker66 wrote:79 MPH is also the listed maximum speed for the new bi-levels. The single level cars have a maximum speed of 75 MPH (per the Nippon-Sharyo website).

Not entirely true....the single level cars will most certainly reach 79 MPH...and even a little higher.

The error is Nippon-Sharyo's. The 75 MPH is listed on their site (as noted). Did the AC traction rebuild help with speed?

Not necessarily "speed", but with acceleration...getting up to a given speed in less time. I agree - the NS website is likely mistaken.

I am reminded the 1934 Milwaukee Hiawatha with 4-4-2 cranked 127mph pinned on their runs....

Somewhere in time this 79mph restriction came into existance, I am reminded the North Shore was not unusual to hit 80mph.

There are plenty of reasons for the restriction safety the number one, raising it causes changes in crossing gate timings, reaction times, overall crossing protection designs, so its apparrant to me about the limit. Back then we didnt have all the cars and crossings.

I'm curious, though, if there is empirical evidence that the 79mph limit actually lowered injury/fatality rates. Seems to me like the fatalities happen when people go around gates, not when gates take too long to lower.

The 79 mph limit goes way back to 1947. Following the spectacular CB&Q wreck in Naperville on 1946, it was mandated by the federal government that if one wanted to run trains at 80 mph or above, they needed cab signaling to do so. This was based on the (legitimate) concern that at speeds above 79, wayside signals would become harder to ascertain by the engineer. Bigger railroads were also required to install a cab signaling system on one of its mainlines, as a "forced incentive" to get their feet wet in the technology, increasing the likelihood of putting it on other mainlines (I'm not sure how "smaller class 1s" got away without doing this, like the CNS&M).

The end result is that 79 mph became the standard passenger train top speed throughout much of the US. Of course, with the PTC mandate coming online in 2015, this will no longer be the limit. At that time it maybe possible to run diesel-powered Metra consists at 90 mph (limit for rolling stock with tread brakes) and CSS&SB & METX MUs up to at least 90 (if the motors are sufficiently ventilated at that speed) given that those cars have disc brakes.

Tadman wrote:I'm curious, though, if there is empirical evidence that the 79mph limit actually lowered injury/fatality rates. Seems to me like the fatalities happen when people go around gates, not when gates take too long to lower.

The gates will have to be retimed for faster trains ... and unless a uniform time warning system is used mixing slower trains with faster trains can provide too much warning for the slow trains (giving people enough time to think about trying to beat the train).

dinwitty wrote:There are plenty of reasons for the restriction safety the number one, raising it causes changes in crossing gate timings, reaction times, overall crossing protection designs, so its apparrant to me about the limit. Back then we didnt have all the cars and crossings.

Less cars ... but crossings have certainly improved. The roadway approaching the crossings have changed from dirt and gravel to asphalt and concrete and the actual crossing material is better allowing cars to clear the ROW at greater speed. Over the years crossings have been closed, consolidated and grade separated. Specific to the South Shore, most street running has been eliminated (although other than eliminating street running, most of the original grade crossings on the South Shore remain). So I'd say less cars and more crossings 80 years ago than today.

There are also less trains ... which I'm not sure helps or hurts. With most driving situations the more experience one has with a specific challenge the better they react when facing that challenge. It would follow that the increased experience would improve behavior around trains. Less trains running mean less to be hit by but in an impatient society some consider avoiding a short wait worth risking their life. It seems to be a constant challenge to serve the needs of railroads and the drivers that cross them.

So much has changed ... active warning devices with better lights and gates. Quad gates. Lane separation to help prevent going around gates. It would be hard to look at statistics before and after the speed limit drop and attribute it 100% to any upgrade. As long as crossings are getting safer and the trains still run it seems like a win.