urbanSTL

5.5 hours. The train I was on last Monday arrived a few minutes early.

A poster on railroad,net keeps track of on-time percentage and delays

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 6&t=165878

quincunx wrote: ↑

Aug 20, 2017

5.5 hours. The train I was on last Monday arrived a few minutes early.

A poster on railroad,net keeps track of on-time percentage and delays

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 6&t=165878

That's not too bad. I want to say it was around seven hours ten years ago when last I checked. Should be better, but not terrible.

And the train does reach 110 mph (sometimes anyway). It did on my trip in early June from SPI to CHI for the return leg up north of Pontiac and south of Joliet somewhere. Very cool if they could reach that speed for the whole trip between stops, that would be enough to reduce terminating air traffic between St. Louis and Chicago a lot, I'd think.

Until they eliminate the bottlenecks between Alton and STL, this whole St. Louis to Chicago thing is pointless.

framer wrote: ↑

Aug 22, 2017

Until they eliminate the bottlenecks between Alton and STL, this whole St. Louis to Chicago thing is pointless.

You could probably say the same for Joliet into downtown Chicago. The easy investment between Joliet and Alton has gone at a snails pace and any commitment to improve Alton to St. Louis has been non-existent. At least Chicago has a plan and some incremental improvement in CREATE. Metro east doesn't need as grand plan but would be nice to see a way or plan forward to improve Alton to St. Louis.

In the meantime, Lincoln Service like River Runner should be getting new bi-level cars would offer increased capacity to existing schedule and capable of 110 turned out to be an utter complete failure just as the locomotives are coming together.

I don't think Chicago to Detroit service has fared much better after initial burst & investment on track and some station work. Another midwest corridor that should strong with frequent 110 mph auto competitive train service.

framer wrote:Until they eliminate the bottlenecks between Alton and STL, this whole St. Louis to Chicago thing is pointless.

Yeah I agree. The bottlenecks need to go, period. Even after looking at that website there is still too much of a possibility for significant delays. I hate wasting time when traveling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The new Siemens Charger locomotives are being phased in to many routes out of Chicago and the Missouri River Runner (Texas Eagle, California Zephyr, and Southwest Chief are not included so I'm guessing they're not yet suited for BiLevel cars or long distance routes). According to a Chicago Tribune article, the greatest impact will be seen on the Lincoln Service but all routes will see improved service.

The new Siemens Charger Locomotives:
4,400 horsepower, up from the old GE 4,250 hp locomotives.
Speed limits of 110 mph but capable of 125 mph
90% reduction in emissions (!!!!)
16% reduction in fuel consumption
Dynamic braking with energy recovery
Better acceleration, better braking, and greater overall reliability.

Grand finale: They're aiming for 4.5 Hours from St. Louis to Chicago by January. Down one hour from today.

This is almost entirely due to more 110 mph legs between Alton and Joliet, getting into Chicago around the freight trains is still the trickiest part. Another factor is (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here) Positive Train Control which allows trains to know where other trains are, run closer together, and organize themselves better on crowded tracks around Chicago.

Currently, I believe the MO River Runner tops out at 80 mph, an increase to 110 mph would require bridge and crossing improvements funded by the Missouri Legislature.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... story.html

http://siemensusa.synapticdigital.com/F ... 35c7fec16d

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_Charger

Screen Shot 2017-08-30 at 1.06.42 PM by Alex Price, on Flickr

Screen Shot 2017-08-30 at 1.07.08 PM by Alex Price, on Flickr

aprice wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2017

The new Siemens Charger locomotives are being phased in to many routes out of Chicago and the Missouri River Runner (Texas Eagle, California Zephyr, and Southwest Chief are not included so I'm guessing they're not yet suited for BiLevel cars or long distance routes).

If I understand correctly, they are owned by the states of Illinois, Missouri, Michigan and Wisconsin. They can therefore only be used on the midwest state-supported short-haul routes.

eee123 wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2017

If I understand correctly, they are owned by the states of Illinois, Missouri, Michigan and Wisconsin. They can therefore only be used on the midwest state-supported short-haul routes.

Ah, that makes sense. So hopefully Feds will buy some later (I'm an optimistic man).
I've never thought about it but that's probably why the Lincoln Service and Missouri River Runner are two different routes, that and different frequencies.
I'm going up to Chicago on Oct 13th, hopefully we'll have the new locomotive but I seriously doubt it will be much faster than the current 5.5 hours.

aprice wrote:The new Siemens Charger locomotives are being phased in to many routes out of Chicago and the Missouri River Runner (Texas Eagle, California Zephyr, and Southwest Chief are not included so I'm guessing they're not yet suited for BiLevel cars or long distance routes). According to a Chicago Tribune article, the greatest impact will be seen on the Lincoln Service but all routes will see improved service.

The new Siemens Charger Locomotives:
4,400 horsepower, up from the old GE 4,250 hp locomotives.
Speed limits of 110 mph but capable of 125 mph
90% reduction in emissions (!!!!)
16% reduction in fuel consumption
Dynamic braking with energy recovery
Better acceleration, better braking, and greater overall reliability.

Grand finale: They're aiming for 4.5 Hours from St. Louis to Chicago by January. Down one hour from today.

This is almost entirely due to more 110 mph legs between Alton and Joliet, getting into Chicago around the freight trains is still the trickiest part. Another factor is (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here) Positive Train Control which allows trains to know where other trains are, run closer together, and organize themselves better on crowded tracks around Chicago.

Currently, I believe the MO River Runner tops out at 80 mph, an increase to 110 mph would require bridge and crossing improvements funded by the Missouri Legislature.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... story.html

http://siemensusa.synapticdigital.com/F ... 35c7fec16d

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_Charger

Screen Shot 2017-08-30 at 1.06.42 PM by Alex Price, on Flickr

Screen Shot 2017-08-30 at 1.07.08 PM by Alex Price, on Flickr

Getting closer. I'd like to see it take less than 4 hours. Actually closer to 3.5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

matguy70 wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2017

There was one at Gateway Station Downtown today.

Do you remember if it was the only locomotive or accompanied by an old GE locomotive? The nextSTL photos on twitter showed two, one of each, on the Lincoln Service.

I seem to recall they did the same thing with the Genesis units when they were new. They'd usually have one Genesis and one F40PH. I assumed they were ironing out the kinks, but that was a long time ago. Seems sensible, anyway. Also makes sense to spread the new equipment around the system as much as you can so everyone feels like they're getting something. And that likely means the old equipment will persist for quite some time. Anyway . . . it will be interesting to see how they work out. That emission reduction is quite a big promise. And that also explains why they're so heavy even if the engine is smallish. They must have a heck of a battery in there. Saving the electricity from your dynamics would very much be the way to go. That . . . explains a lot, really. Just so long as the prime movers work out all right these could be pretty neat.

How much time would the trip save if it made no stops between St. Louis and Chicago. The London to Paris route is almost exactly the same distance, but it doesn't stop.

The channel is just a small part of the trip. The train goes past lots of pretty big looking towns that, I'm sure, wanted it to stop at all of them. But it doesn't. Not the Eurostar I took anyway.

So assuming non-stop is politically impossible, academically, how much time would it save to go non-stop? I guess nobody has ever wondered about that before now.

matguy70 wrote: ↑

Sep 01, 2017

Do you remember if it was the only locomotive or accompanied by an old GE locomotive? The nextSTL photos on twitter showed two, one of each, on the Lincoln Service

Accompanied. 2nd engine

Dang. I'm headed to Chicago in October, hopefully it will be just the Charger by then. I doubt I'll be lucky enough to get to Chicago any faster though. It would probably require a schedule change along the entire route.

RiverBender.com - Alton Regional Multimodal Station opens

https://www.riverbender.com/articles/de ... -23490.cfm

Looks like the Bi-Level car order in part for midwest to be built out in Rochelle IL has changed . Instead of California and Illinois led Midwest getting bi-levels it will be single level cars with production starting next year out of Siemens Sacramento facility. I believe Siemens has expanded the facility lately to meet its transit backlog. One of the comments referenced the fact that Caltrans already has bi-level and why not maintain as such

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/p ... act--53252

Caltrans' contract amendment replaces Nippon Sharyo with Siemens to fulfill the delayed order. Under the contract's original terms, Sumitomo subcontracted with Nippon Sharyo of Japan to build the cars in Rochelle, Illinois.

The newly finalized contract will supply 137 single-level passenger railcars — 49 to Caltrans and 88 to the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), according to a Caltrans press release.

gone corporate wrote: ↑

Dec 19, 2017

Post-Dispatch: $1.95 billion high-speed rail project in final phase in Illinois

Good to hear. Thanks for the update.

Thanks for the update as well.
Seriously, why say "up to 90 mph" and "speed limit of 90 mph" and then flat out say that there's a stretch with 110 mph. Not sure about you guys but every time I've taken this route, the train has reached at least 108 mph at some point. I've heard that from others as well. Anyway, I seriously doubt they'll cease the 110 mph sections. Unless they can drastically speed up other parts of the trip and/or 90 mph is that much more fuel efficient. From my understanding, they were actually going to add more 110 mph sections.

So $2,000,000,000 spent on something that trains in Europe and Asia crossed off their list in the 60s?