Midwest Regional Rail Initiative

[electricron]

Talgo had a bullet nose design they could have used, but Amtrak didn't want it. The bullet nose had the sole engineer's seat on the centerline, but Amtrak wanted two seats offset from the centerline to facilitate training. Putting two seats abreast in made the bullet nose shape impossible. You get what you ask for. Imagine what an Indy car would look if two, driver and mechanic, had to seat abreast in the car.

As for the Wisconsin livery, adding one blue stripe above or below the red should suffice, and if you believe one stripe unbalances the livery, add the blue strip above and below the red. A red, white, and blue livery will not be a Wisconsin one anymore.

[afiggatt]

Originally Posted by guesswho

Random question, but has there ever been a study to expand high speed rail from Detroit to Toronto?

And I ask with the Chicago - Toronto route in mind. It's only a 7 hour drive in light traffic, and both cities have excellent (when compared to the rest of the Midwest) public urban transit for riders once they arrive - no need for a car really.

For High Speed Rail? Doubt it. However, there have been discussions about restoring Chicago to Michigan to Toronto Amtrak-VIA service. The International Limited which ran on the Blue Water route through Port Huron was canceled in 2004 due to low ridership. Once the track upgrades are completed on the Chicago-Detroit corridor, the trip time improvements and larger ridership base in Michigan may be enough to consider extending service to Toronto. There is a rail tunnel between Detroit and Windsor that might be able to be used, but I don't know the details. I would not expect anything to happen for some years.

Any border crossing is going to be slow because of the customs inspection.

[afiggatt]

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

Very smart move. Add a bigger order and move the factory from Wisconsin to Michigan.

Get a good artist who has spent time studying Japanese HSR end cap paint jobs and the locomotive would actually look rather handsome.

It should be noted that Michigan DOT is only looking for trainsets or replacement rolling stock to be used on an interim basis through the end of 2017. By then, all the corridor bi-level cars being built by Nippon-Sharyo are expected to have been delivered and MIDOT will no longer need the substitute equipment. So, if MIDOT leases the 2 ex-Wisconsin Talgos, there will be no follow-on orders for new Talgos. The 2 Talgos would be used for 3+ years, replacing Horizon trainsets, and then released.

If they can find a way to lash up an interim suitable maintenance facility, it could work out for MI, Talgo, and Washington State. By mid-2017, the upgrades to the Cascades corridor should be completed which will allow the Cascades service to add 2 additional daily frequencies between Seattle and Portland. Washington State DOT has in their plans to acquire at least 1 more Talgo trainset to support the expanded service. So, if they can make it work, the 2 Talgos would run on the Wolverine service through 2017 and then 1 or both of them are sold or leased to Washington State at a thank you Scott Walker discount price for use on the Cascades corridor. Better outcome than letting the 2 Talgos trains rot away in a warehouse.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by guesswho

Random question, but has there ever been a study to expand high speed rail from Detroit to Toronto?

And I ask with the Chicago - Toronto route in mind. It's only a 7 hour drive in light traffic, and both cities have excellent (when compared to the rest of the Midwest) public urban transit for riders once they arrive - no need for a car really.

Even if the border issues (which killed the previous Chicago to Toronto thru-service) could be resolved, it's hard to see the political will coming together for the subsidy.

Aside from such a project involving 4 states, 1 province, and 2 federal governments, it's just hard to see a 110mph rail service being competitive for the ~550 mile trip. There is already very frequent and relatively affordable regional air service between Chicago and Toronto. I picked a random weekday in May in Google Flights, indicating there are 27 non-stops between the cities each way --- pretty good service levels by any measure. And, Porter's flights between MDW and YTZ are specifically marketed as a "quick and easy, city center to city centre" service.

[Innsertnamehere]

Ontario seems interested in building a good chunk of their portion of such a route already.. They just announced plans to build 200mph HSR to London.

Agreed on border issues though.

[LMich]

Looks like someone else has picked up on Michigan tailoring its RFP for Talgo...and he doesn't like it.

Lone bid on high-speed train service raises eyebrows

By Tim Skubick | MLive.com political columnist

May 5, 2014

Who better to blow the whistle on an MDOT train contract than railroad devotee and former state senator Joe Schwarz.

Off the political radar for months, the former GOP politician is back in the game and playing with trains, which he loves to do.

But he’s not in love with the way the state transportation department is handling the bid on high-speed train service between Detroit and Chicago.

The state is poised to offer 110 mph service but it needs some rolling stock to get things going and Mr. Schwarz is critical of the RFP (Request for Proposal) the agency drafted. He contends only one company could meet the requirements and therefore only one bid was received. Or as one P.R. guy alleges, the contract was written for one firm.

Time out, Mr. S. demands.

“This deal is not a good deal,” he explains as he has asked the governor to restart the whole process so other companies can bid - not just Talgo, which is in line to get the job.

He complains Talgo has equipment that cannot withstand Michigan’s grueling winters. He contends their trains would require the rejiggering of the railroad stations that handle Amtrak trains. And another $30 million or so, not in the contract, would be needed to repair the trains.

...

This has been an expensive project with the feds kicking in a cool $338 million to upgrade the tracks between the two cities. Mr. Schwarz believes MDOT did a “superb” job on that, but not so much on the bid.

One-bid contracts do raise eyebrows in this town. It doesn’t necessarily mean anything is wrong but in this case the former lawmaker wants to hit the re-boot button just to make sure and he's hoping the governor will push it.

This guy is a former state senator (and not anti-rail or anything), so he doesn't have any formal power. And I don't know if any of the concerns he raises are true, but this is more a sign that MDOT wants to go after the trains.

[ardecila]

He complains Talgo has equipment that cannot withstand Michigan’s grueling winters. He contends their trains would require the rejiggering of the railroad stations that handle Amtrak trains. And another $30 million or so, not in the contract, would be needed to repair the trains.

I don't know if this is true. Talgo's railcars fit within the clearance envelope. They are smaller in every dimension than the Superliner-style cars that Michigan will be receiving, so there shouldn't be any conflicts.

There may be some issues with platform length, but MDOT should be lengthening platforms anyway and in the meantime, there's nothing stopping Amtrak from only opening certain cars at short platforms (Metra does this all the time, which I hate).

[Mister Uptempo]

Presser from the INDOT website -

[INDOT] Four Competing Proposals Submitted for Hoosier State Passenger Rail

Start Date:5/5/2014 Start Time:12:00 AM
End Date: 5/5/2014

INDIANAPOLIS – The Indiana Department of Transportation and its local community partners announce receipt of four proposals to improve the Hoosier State passenger rail service between Indianapolis and Chicago. The proposals submitted are, in alphabetical order: (1) Corridor Capital LLC, (2) Herzog Transit Services Inc. and Passenger Transportation Specialists Inc., (3) Iowa Pacific Holdings Inc. and (4) Railmark Holdings Inc.

Amtrak is the incumbent provider of the service and previously submitted a proposal for 2014-2015.

-SNIP-

INDOT and the communities seek to improve the Hoosier State passenger experience, increase the number of passengers on the train and decrease train operating costs by opening the operation of the train to competition from private operators in addition to Amtrak. It is anticipated that the selected proposal will be announced this summer.

[ardecila]

Any of these proposals will need to address the massive clusterfuck that is Dolton Junction... IIRC it is the source of most delays on the Hoosier State and Cardinal. Either they reroute the train or invest capital dollars in the junction. Really they should just build a flyover... Metra will definitely need this for SouthEast Service eventually anyway.

In the short term it may be cheaper to re-route using the Metra Electric corridor, although this requires a new (flat) connection at Thornton Junction.

[natiboy]

Association begins Cincinnati-Chicago passenger rail campaign

Following the election of Derek Bauman to the All Aboard Ohio board as Southwest Regional Director, the nonprofit educational association commenced a campaign to educate stakeholders on the benefits of improving rail infrastructure and passenger rail services between Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Lafayette and Chicago with proposed Ohio stops at Cincinnati Union Terminal, I-275 park-n-ride, Hamilton and Oxford. Mr. Bauman is co-chair of Cincinnatians for Progress which has been a strong backer of local public transit, including the streetcar in Cincinnati.

Source: http://allaboardohio.org/2014/05/19/...rail-campaign/

[sammyg]

Does anyone know how far along the Twin Cities-Rochester high speed plan is? Is it still in the planning stages, or is it close to approval and construction?

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I don't know if this is true. Talgo's railcars fit within the clearance envelope. They are smaller in every dimension than the Superliner-style cars that Michigan will be receiving, so there shouldn't be any conflicts.

There may be some issues with platform length, but MDOT should be lengthening platforms anyway and in the meantime, there's nothing stopping Amtrak from only opening certain cars at short platforms (Metra does this all the time, which I hate).

Sorry for the time lapse.

The Russians are trying the Talgo. If the Russian winters can be handled by the Talgo, Michigan's winters ought to be a snap.

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/t...rst-talgo.html

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by natiboy

Association begins Cincinnati-Chicago passenger rail campaign


Source: http://allaboardohio.org/2014/05/19/...rail-campaign/

The US, north of the Ohio River, and, east of the Mississippi was peppered with rail lines.

Ohio should look into rebuilding an old right-of-way and make the rail line passenger only.

There are so many former right-of-ways in Ohio you can see them from 40,000 feet!

[ardecila]

There was never a concern about the winter being a problem.

It's just one train-nut legislator that is offended by the idea of Michigan buying "used" trains, even though they've never actually been used.

[Mister Uptempo]

From Businessweek.com

AP News

Work set to begin on clogged Indiana railways

May 28, 2014

HAMMOND, Ind. (AP) — Work is scheduled to begin on a $71.4 million project aimed at speeding up traffic through northwestern Indiana's congested railroad corridors.

Gov. Mike Pence and representatives from Amtrak, the Federal Rail Administration and Norfolk Southern are scheduled to appear in Hammond on Thursday to mark the beginning of the Indiana Gateway project. The project is expected to include track relocations, high-speed crossovers and upgraded signal systems.

Officials have estimated the Indiana Gateway project, along with other improvements in Illinois and Michigan, will shave 30 minutes off a Chicago-to-Detroit Amtrak ride.

The project will include the construction of a siding at the town of Porter, identified by the state transportation department as one of the most congestion-prone rail junctions in the county.

picture source - Hoosier Environmental Council

[electricron]

What's the usual speed for a passenger train taking a #20 crossover?
From a Wiki article:
An AREMA (American Railway Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association) design number 20 turnout has a diverging speed limit of 45 miles per hour (72.4 km/h).[4][5] Federal Railroad Administration published the speed limits for higher-speed turnouts with #26.5 turnout that has speed limit of 60 miles per hour (96.6 km/h) and #32.7 with speed limit of 80 miles per hour (128.7 km/h).

If Amtrak plans on running several trains at a maximum speed of 110 mph on this corridor between Chicago and Michigan, why install #20 crossovers that require the trains to slow down to 45 mph if diverging, wouldn't it be better to install #26.5 or #32.7 crossovers?
This only makes sense if just freight trains use the crossovers to get out of Amtrak's way, not for Amtrak using them to pass slower freight trains.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by electricron

This only makes sense if just freight trains use the crossovers to get out of Amtrak's way, not for Amtrak using them to pass slower freight trains.

I'm thinking the former must be correct. You'd have to have some real imbeciles running the show if the intent was to maximize Amtrak speeds by passing slower freights but requiring them to slow down to a practical crawl in order to do so.

[ardecila]

Can this track even support 110mph service without reconstruction like the UP is getting on the St. Louis line? I know it was the former Pennsy mainline so it should be well-built at least (the Standard Railroad of the World and all that).

[afiggatt]

Originally Posted by electricron

If Amtrak plans on running several trains at a maximum speed of 110 mph on this corridor between Chicago and Michigan, why install #20 crossovers that require the trains to slow down to 45 mph if diverging, wouldn't it be better to install #26.5 or #32.7 crossovers?
This only makes sense if just freight trains use the crossovers to get out of Amtrak's way, not for Amtrak using them to pass slower freight trains.

These crossovers are not being installed on 110 mph track. The project components, except for #2, are on Norfolk Southern track in Indiana which is a busy main freight line with 79 mph max speeds for passenger trains. The crossovers and 3rd track segments will allow the Michigan service, the Capitol Limited, the Lake Shore Limited trains to pass by and weave their way through the NS freight traffic. Should result in reduced trip times and improved on-time performance.

The 110 mph track on the Chicago to Detroit corridor will all be in Michigan. Well, until the South of the Lake route is selected, funded, and built which could take many years.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Interesting. I wonder if the colors are more than just a rendering sample. Green would match the Cascades paint scheme, blue the Amtrak California and Red the (hypothetical) MWRRI scheme, as seen on the Wisconsin Talgos.

That would explain the positioning of the trains in the rendering too, where the Midwest is the majority of the locomotive order.

Looks like I was right, larger version of the rendering confirms it. Unfortunately I cannot see the paint scheme for the side of the Midwest version, but it's probably not final anyway.

http://www.siemens.com/press/pool/de...-01_300dpi.jpg

I love the little LED destination signs. I hope those are part of the final proposal and not just a rendering flourish... they are pretty rare on commuter/intercity trains, but I can't tell you how often I've sat on a Metra platform with the schedules all messed up and had to identify which train I was boarding (express? local? etc)