Doesn't it though? At least at this one choke point, anyway. Amtrak no longer needs to wait if another train crosses in the other direction, and they no longer need to idle across the bridge.
-RBB
-RBB
- 6,118
I don't know that it will make much direct difference to Amtrak, but it will be a big deal for other reasons . . .
In terms of Amtrak I don't believe they use the Merchants with any regularity, and MacArthur doesn't face the same limitations. And even after the rebuild most of the track in and around the gateway will still be restricted speed or little better, as everything between downtown and Alton will still be within switching limits on both possible routes.
However, it will make things better for the freight railroads that, for routing reasons, are obliged to cross Merchants. And it will give us more flexibility. And it will allow work on the MacArthur to go forward without causing disruptions. (To freight.) . . . (I can only imagine what things were like when there were seven tracks crossing the Mississippi in St. Louis and not functionally three. And quite a lot more miles of main-line on both sides of the river to boot. Of course . . . there were regular passenger trains then too. Meaning not Amtrak. And generally more lines going in and out of town to more destinations.)
Bottom line? This is a freight project. Amtrak is not a priority here. They don't have a share in TRRA, and thus they don't even have a vote. And TRRA wasn't (directly) a party to Amtrak and so they don't have the same agreements with them as the freight roads. Amtrak is strictly a tenant. But the freight lines who actually own the TRRA want it so they will get it. And if Amtrak is willing to pay the fees to cross they will be welcome to, just like everyone else.
It might occasionally help them incidentally just a little. But honestly? It also might not, since the freight railroads might just push more traffic through St. Louis as a result. (That is kind of the point.) I expect they have some strategic plans in mind. Railroads don't pay for bridges they don't need. And the freight railroads don't need Amtrak . . .
If only this applied to highway users and builders.symphonicpoet wrote: ↑Jul 17, 2018And if Amtrak is willing to pay the fees to cross they will be welcome to, just like everyone else.
Railroads don't pay for bridges they don't need.
I think the more significant news as it relates to Amtrak's Lincoln Service but not completely sure is Chicago CREATE landed a $132 Federal INFRA grant to push some much needed improvements getting freight trains through Chicago while helping to get METRA/Amtrak trains out of city or vice versa. Same grant program that TRRA applied for.
http://www.createprogram.org/
Update on the effort to bring containers to river vessels:
http://stlouiscnr.com/departments/assoc ... dium=email
http://stlouiscnr.com/departments/assoc ... dium=email
- 1,290
The project summary for 2019 is out.
Only skimmed through it myself (so I don't know if there's much new stuff on there), but it's good to see the progress on a lot of the projects.
Only skimmed through it myself (so I don't know if there's much new stuff on there), but it's good to see the progress on a lot of the projects.
- 6,118
I am genuinely surprised to see the phrase "road diet" included in this. It's . . . probably a good idea, since they're talking about a section of Hall Street that's really way too broad for the amount of traffic it gets but what's there is indeed mostly high in the axle count. Probably much more sensible to make a couple of very good lanes that will last a while rather than a bunch of lighter ones that will go bumpy fast. Not sure how much a bike path is really needed just exactly there since that's two blocks from a pretty spiffy existing one, but I'll tell you what, I would NOT want to ride a bike on Hall with the traffic that's there. Sure, there's plenty of space. But those trucks are big and they book through there. So, yeah, that makes really good sense. Huh! Road diet for a freightway! Neat, huh?
Looks like the region picked up a couple FRA grants that are part of the St. Louis Regional Freightway and a plus for Lincoln Service as well with Lenox interlocking upgrade
http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/20 ... ent-grants
— Illinois: Reconfiguring the Lenox Interlocking in Mitchell, approximately 16 miles northeast of St. Louis, to increase speeds and operating flexibility. Four lines intersect at the site, with six railroads operating approximately 46 trains per day; the project will reduce Amtrak trip times by 3 minutes and reduce freight delays and crossing-gate activation time by more than 2 hours per day (up to $5.08 million)
— Missouri: Replace the Broadway Truss of the Terminal Railway Association of St. Louis’ MacArthur Bridge across the Mississippi River, a more than 100-year-old structure and the nation’s second longest railroad bridge. In addition to avoiding a projected closure of the bridge because of fatigue, the work will increase horizontal clearance, ending the diversion of oversized loads on a 317-mile reroute (up to $7.17 million).
http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/20 ... ent-grants
— Illinois: Reconfiguring the Lenox Interlocking in Mitchell, approximately 16 miles northeast of St. Louis, to increase speeds and operating flexibility. Four lines intersect at the site, with six railroads operating approximately 46 trains per day; the project will reduce Amtrak trip times by 3 minutes and reduce freight delays and crossing-gate activation time by more than 2 hours per day (up to $5.08 million)
— Missouri: Replace the Broadway Truss of the Terminal Railway Association of St. Louis’ MacArthur Bridge across the Mississippi River, a more than 100-year-old structure and the nation’s second longest railroad bridge. In addition to avoiding a projected closure of the bridge because of fatigue, the work will increase horizontal clearance, ending the diversion of oversized loads on a 317-mile reroute (up to $7.17 million).
- 6,118
The loss of Lenox Tower will, of course, make me more than just a bit weepy, but it's good to see investment in crucial infrastructure that will help our city.
Technically I think these are riverine container vessels, not barges. That's probably key to making them faster without pushing your fuel cost through the roof. They're talking about eleven or twelve knots, which is actually a pretty respectable cruising speed for a cargo vessel and fantastic for something on the river. That'll look like it's flying next to the rest of the traffic. Particularly since none of those figures are terribly likely to be taking out the river's current. So I'm expecting that has a decent continuous hull with a real bow and engines permanently attached. There are things called "self propelled barges" but that's probably not one of them. I'm not convinced this will take off, particularly since there are also big port expansion projects on the East Coast. And those will suck up a lot of that container traffic presently being offloaded in Long Beach. But if they can make the numbers work to build the shiplets . . .
From East-West Gateway newsletter:
The St. Louis Region Handled 386 Million Tons of Freight in 2017
"...The Federal Highway Administration estimates that over 386 million tons of freight flowed to, from, or within the region in 2017, an amount that ranks 14th among the peer regions. The total value of these shipments is estimated to be over $353 million, which ranks 15th. These two values are the highest among regions not located in a state with a port for oceangoing vessels."
Full article here:
https://mailchi.mp/66236e18554f/where-d ... 9779acc791
The St. Louis Region Handled 386 Million Tons of Freight in 2017
"...The Federal Highway Administration estimates that over 386 million tons of freight flowed to, from, or within the region in 2017, an amount that ranks 14th among the peer regions. The total value of these shipments is estimated to be over $353 million, which ranks 15th. These two values are the highest among regions not located in a state with a port for oceangoing vessels."
Full article here:
https://mailchi.mp/66236e18554f/where-d ... 9779acc791
- 1,290
Here's hoping that Bi-National cargo terminal actually comes to some meaningful fruition at Lambert.
The pitch is based on the expansion of Gulf and East Coast ports. I’ll try to find the slides of their presentation that covers this.symphonicpoet wrote:Technically I think these are riverine container vessels, not barges. That's probably key to making them faster without pushing your fuel cost through the roof. They're talking about eleven or twelve knots, which is actually a pretty respectable cruising speed for a cargo vessel and fantastic for something on the river. That'll look like it's flying next to the rest of the traffic. Particularly since none of those figures are terribly likely to be taking out the river's current. So I'm expecting that has a decent continuous hull with a real bow and engines permanently attached. There are things called "self propelled barges" but that's probably not one of them. I'm not convinced this will take off, particularly since there are also big port expansion projects on the East Coast. And those will suck up a lot of that container traffic presently being offloaded in Long Beach. But if they can make the numbers work to build the shiplets . . .
- 6,118
It makes sense that it would be based on the expansion of New Orleans, say, and other nearby ports. But there's some large expansions that come up in the news every now and then in New York and New Jersey that I think would arguably offer more direct access to a larger market while keeping the transloading down to a minimum. Now, those might be more expensive places to operate, which could be the saving grace of something like this. I'd certainly love to see it work. I'm just still a tad skeptical. Folks have been trying to make something happen for a long time now. Somewhat related ideas have gotten Post Dispatch column space going back into the 90s, as I recall. I like it. I just don't want to have to make the case for it myself. 
Port expansions on the Gulf and East Coast have been very different in nature. East Coast is more driven by container traffic and a number of ports have built out terminals, added bigger cranes ad are going deeper from NY/NJ & Miami who have completed deepening projects to accommodate bigger ships, Savannah completed its first phase as Charleston has also, Jacksonville is into 2 of 4 contract phases to get deeper and Norfolk/Port of Virginia is just about to commence its first phase to take a deep channel compliments to US largest Navy base to even deeper (53').
Gulf Coast has been about petroleum with deepening projects happening on Texas Coast in Corpus Christi in its oil export boom to Freeport Harbor because of LNG exports, so on. However, Houston, New Orleans and even Mobile are now actively trying to get their deepening projects going to accommodate the post panama containers ships to catch up to the East Coast.
I think you will still see several years before container traffic on the Big Muddy is viable because the one port that makes sense is New Orleans and they are not well positioned relative to other container ports. Plus the Gulf Intercoastal waterway is very different waterway from the Big Muddy from St. Louis on down.
Gulf Coast has been about petroleum with deepening projects happening on Texas Coast in Corpus Christi in its oil export boom to Freeport Harbor because of LNG exports, so on. However, Houston, New Orleans and even Mobile are now actively trying to get their deepening projects going to accommodate the post panama containers ships to catch up to the East Coast.
I think you will still see several years before container traffic on the Big Muddy is viable because the one port that makes sense is New Orleans and they are not well positioned relative to other container ports. Plus the Gulf Intercoastal waterway is very different waterway from the Big Muddy from St. Louis on down.
- 3,428
Living in Kirkwood, I see a lot of trains go through. West to East are dominated by coal trains. East to West mainly empties. Not a huge number of container trains with two stacked containers. Since the economy has become more import export, guess the Midwest isn’t a big player anymore. Do containers go to Chicago through the Great Lakes? Or is the Midwest mainly served by trucks from the coasts?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
^ The only trains I see in Kansas are container trains, usually double stacked. Sometimes I see coal trains along I-35 in JoCo, but most others, including the runs through downtown KC are container trains. My guess is the container trains heading east are going northeast through Missouri along the route that runs from KC to Chicago.
The company behind these river ships wants to build an entirely new port south of New Orleans. It makes a lot of sense for what they are doing but also increases the capital requirements.dredger wrote:Port expansions on the Gulf and East Coast have been very different in nature. East Coast is more driven by container traffic and a number of ports have built out terminals, added bigger cranes ad are going deeper from NY/NJ & Miami who have completed deepening projects to accommodate bigger ships, Savannah completed its first phase as Charleston has also, Jacksonville is into 2 of 4 contract phases to get deeper and Norfolk/Port of Virginia is just about to commence its first phase to take a deep channel compliments to US largest Navy base to even deeper (53').
Gulf Coast has been about petroleum with deepening projects happening on Texas Coast in Corpus Christi in its oil export boom to Freeport Harbor because of LNG exports, so on. However, Houston, New Orleans and even Mobile are now actively trying to get their deepening projects going to accommodate the post panama containers ships to catch up to the East Coast.
I think you will still see several years before container traffic on the Big Muddy is viable because the one port that makes sense is New Orleans and they are not well positioned relative to other container ports. Plus the Gulf Intercoastal waterway is very different waterway from the Big Muddy from St. Louis on down.
^ yep, understand. I will have to see if I can find the link but New Orleans starting to actively pursue another attempt to deepening the channel in two phase approach. First, gulf to some of the larger bulk commodity export terminals & oil refineries below New Orleans and then a second phase into Port of New Orleans. But I believe New Orleans trails Houston, Tampa and maybe even Mobile and the fact that Houston might the only Gulf Coast port in top 10. For the most part containers are being moved mostly west to east or east to west.
So I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the shipping lines are going to the ports where they can get biggest container ships get into. New Orleans is behind the pack instead of leading the pack so the biggest issue for a container shuttle via the river isn't on the river itself but getting enough of the pie to make it work and at this point having New Orleans behind in container volume won't help and might take a few more years to be viable in my opinion.
So I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the shipping lines are going to the ports where they can get biggest container ships get into. New Orleans is behind the pack instead of leading the pack so the biggest issue for a container shuttle via the river isn't on the river itself but getting enough of the pie to make it work and at this point having New Orleans behind in container volume won't help and might take a few more years to be viable in my opinion.
No disagreement here. Just trying to share some information I was given during a meeting with the team behind these ships.dredger wrote:^ yep, understand. I will have to see if I can find the link but New Orleans starting to actively pursue another attempt to deepening the channel in two phase approach. First, gulf to some of the larger bulk commodity export terminals & oil refineries below New Orleans and then a second phase into Port of New Orleans. But I believe New Orleans trails Houston, Tampa and maybe even Mobile and the fact that Houston might the only Gulf Coast port in top 10. For the most part containers are being moved mostly west to east or east to west.
So I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the shipping lines are going to the ports where they can get biggest container ships get into. New Orleans is behind the pack instead of leading the pack so the biggest issue for a container shuttle via the river isn't on the river itself but getting enough of the pie to make it work and at this point having New Orleans behind in container volume won't help and might take a few more years to be viable in my opinion.
I almost see this ship as the Hyperloop of the boating community.
It will interesting how it plays out because I think it is also about direct competition against rail. So does the container moved to New Orleans and then via water to heartland before going on truck to be delivered to Amazon warehouse in Gateway or a auto assembly plant? Or does that container still end up in Los Angeles or say Savannah or Charleston to get on rail to the heartland?
- 6,118
I think that's an artifact of the line you're on. UP runs plenty of container traffic into and out of their terminal at Dupo, but maybe not west over the Jeff City sub. Additionally BNSF, NS, and CSX at a minimum also have major intermodal facilities in town at Lindenwood, Luther, and Rose Lake respectively. Not aware of KCS or CN ramps, but . . . they may have small ones as well. But a lot of all of the above might be local O&D stuff, and it isn't necessarily evenly distributed over all lines. Some are just better for it than others. And traffic patterns shift as costumers change. There are certainly plenty of containers in town, but it might well be that the great bulk of container traffic bypasses St. Louis (and ideally Chicago) entirely. No reason to slow down fast unit trains for the major terminals unless you're stopping there.gary kreie wrote: Living in Kirkwood, I see a lot of trains go through. West to East are dominated by coal trains. East to West mainly empties. Not a huge number of container trains with two stacked containers. Since the economy has become more import export, guess the Midwest isn’t a big player anymore. Do containers go to Chicago through the Great Lakes? Or is the Midwest mainly served by trucks from the coasts?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 2,928
The plan for the river cargo vessels is actually quite viable. I've been following it for a couple of years, and I believe it to be one of the smartest plans possible. The vessels are just now capable because of new technologies key to the design of the ships, from its exoskeleton design to operating on LNG, all at speeds 160% faster than barges while producing the same levels of wake as barges. They will harbor at the Port of Plaquemines, south of NOLA and able to harbor post-Panamax sized ocean freighters (and which recently has been flush with cash and able to commit the capital necessary for the build-out). Herculaneum will be the farthest north their ships can travel (too big to fit under the Jefferson Barracks Bridge in high river conditions), where they will operate a hub-and-spoke business model to further ships to STL and America's Central Port at Granite City (as well as the two Kaskaskia ports), which are the northernmost ports that do not have to deal with locks and dams. This will capitalize greatly upon our region's six Class One railroad terminals and highways, making the region a significant potential hub for national freight shipments and logistics management. Recognizing the increased total development of new warehousing facilities in the Metro East, there are a lot of people bullish on this fully coming into operation in the next 2-3 years.
Should this happen, it will change how freight is shipped nationwide, as this becomes the best alternative to have cargo delivered to the center of the country rather than a coast. Consider that the majority of shipments from Asia arrive at the Port of Long Beach, where cargo is sent on trains to Chicago before dispersing on other trains throughout the US rail network. Now, Long Beach and Chicago can be bypassed to a more centralized location with capacities for increased gross tonnage along the same routes. Cargo from Europe and the Americas will also jump on this, bypassing crowded East Coast harbors for this new route into the central US.
What's key is that this will all result in cost savings of greater than 30% to shippers, and cost rules the logistics industry. STL stands to capitalize on our geographic positioning as well as our lower costs for both development and operations. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see I-255 becoming one of the more significant centers in the US for warehousing, as well as new logistics management companies establishing operations in STL. If this really goes well, it could also lead to increased domestic manufacturing operations coming to the STL region out of a desire for proximity to this new direct route to export markets. I've been keeping my eyes wide open on the related parties behind these efforts as they continue to develop their plans, and I'm rather excited for what they've been putting together. They're the real deal, and this absolutely could be game-changing for the region.
Should this happen, it will change how freight is shipped nationwide, as this becomes the best alternative to have cargo delivered to the center of the country rather than a coast. Consider that the majority of shipments from Asia arrive at the Port of Long Beach, where cargo is sent on trains to Chicago before dispersing on other trains throughout the US rail network. Now, Long Beach and Chicago can be bypassed to a more centralized location with capacities for increased gross tonnage along the same routes. Cargo from Europe and the Americas will also jump on this, bypassing crowded East Coast harbors for this new route into the central US.
What's key is that this will all result in cost savings of greater than 30% to shippers, and cost rules the logistics industry. STL stands to capitalize on our geographic positioning as well as our lower costs for both development and operations. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see I-255 becoming one of the more significant centers in the US for warehousing, as well as new logistics management companies establishing operations in STL. If this really goes well, it could also lead to increased domestic manufacturing operations coming to the STL region out of a desire for proximity to this new direct route to export markets. I've been keeping my eyes wide open on the related parties behind these efforts as they continue to develop their plans, and I'm rather excited for what they've been putting together. They're the real deal, and this absolutely could be game-changing for the region.
