urbanSTL

BellaVilla wrote:^thank you for the correction. 

A few additional corrections:

You can go in 3 directions out of St. Louis on Amtrak - to KC, Chicago and San Antonio - not 2.

Also, what makes you think this, “Chicago moves in 7 directions that acutally split into 9 directions. None of which it does profitably.” ?

Last year Amtrak reported an operating profit on the Chicago-St.Louis, Hiawatha, Illinois Zephyr and Illini routes. The KC-STL route also had an operating profit. If you set aside the long-distance routes out of Chi, all of the regional/intrastate routes taken together posted a net operating profit last year.

The albatross around Amtrak’s neck is the long distance cross country routes that travel through a lot of nowhere. The routes linking KC, STL, CHI, Milwaukee, Detroit do comparatively well, though nothing like the hugely profitable Northeast Corridor.

Allocations from taxpayers are still needed for capital investments (new bridges, sidings, improvements for higher speeds, improved crossings, new equipment, modernized track systems, etc...), but the regional routes are not the operational money pits you make them out to be.

Additionally, should Amtrak even be expected to make money? Every other form of transportation in this country is heavily subsidized by tax dollars, why should passenger rail be any exception?

Yep. I’d like to see a return of the STL to Indy to Columbus to Pittsburg route shown on the 1970 route map.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looks like Blomington- Normal uptown train station picked up BUILD grant to improve access.  $13 million dollar grant on $22 million dollar project to create underpass.   Link to fact sheet for all grants awarded/announced today by Feds.  

https://www.transportation.gov/sites/do ... et2019.pdf

Chicago to St. Louis breaks record:

Somewhat more impressive, though, is ridership on the much longer line to St. Louis, via Bloomington/Normal and Springfield.

State and federal governments have invested hundreds of millions of dollars of funds in the past decade to cut travel times on the line, which carries both Texas Eagle and Lincoln service, and the investment finally appears to be paying off.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg-hi ... ouis-lines

That’s great news that the investments are starting to pay off. For a little more detail, in FY2019 Lincoln Service added 41,433 riders for an 7.1% increase.

I’m surprised the Chicago-St.Louis route (Lincoln Service and Texas Eagle combined) now has over 85% of the ridership of Hiawatha Service (Chicago to Milwaukee). Obviously Lincoln/Texas Eagle serves more locations (Joliet, Bloomington, Springfield) and a much larger city (St. Louis). Still, just given the distances (1.5 vs. 5.5 hours) and frequency (7 vs. 5) it’s impressive Lincoln/Texas Eagle is that high in comparison.

Unfortunately, the Missouri River Runner lost 15,052 riders for a 8.9% decrease. Which is the 4th largest percentage decline for all routes. Perhaps the flooding played a role?

wabash wrote: ↑

Nov 18, 2019

Unfortunately, the Missouri River Runner lost 15,052 riders for a 8.9% decrease. Which is the 4th largest percentage decline for all routes. Perhaps the flooding played a role?

Flooding did play a role in the decline. I had to change all my travel arrangements from train to a car during that time period which was quite annoying since it was several weeks long and I was traveling to KC weekly. 
Article for information on that: https://www.kctv5.com/news/amtrak-suspe ... 1a618.html

Two things on the Amtrak:
- I thought the goal was to reduce time to Chicago to more like 4.5 hours.  Is that still possible/in plans?
- They bought new trains/coaches for the Midwest routes correct?  Are those in use or when will they be?

^The new Siemens locomotives have been rolling in for a while. I don't think there was anything drastic planned for the rolling stock. Just basic fleet maintenance stuff; replacing aging and damaged cars, essentially. The higher speeds along the route were always more about track geometry than equipment; a couple of high speed turnouts here and a grade separation project there. Even the older GE locomotives can probably handle the higher speeds anticipated, but the new locomotives supposedly accelerate more quickly. (And the Genesis units are not well loved by their crews as I hear it.) I believe they also meet newer emissions standards and probably use less fuel. (Always a bonus.) Ought to ask around and see how the new units handle. Like they're on rails, I expect.

The new rail cars will start getting delivered in 2020. The 90 per hour speeds will be implemented from Alton to Springfield in the next few months, which much of the rest of the line up to Joliet going to 90mph by the end of 2020. That should take the time down to 5hr 15mins. There’s no official timeline for achieving the full 110mph goal - which would take it to 4hr 30mins.

Pretty sure it’s been said here before, but introducing an express train eliminating the stops at Carlinville, Lincoln, Pontiac and Dwight would be a great way to get down closer to 4:30 pretty easily.

wabash wrote: ↑

Nov 18, 2019

Pretty sure it’s been said here before, but introducing an express train eliminating the stops at Carlinville, Lincoln, Pontiac and Dwight would be a great way to get down closer to 4:30 pretty easily.

Train 301, the first S/B departure from Chicago skips Summit, Dwight, Lincoln and Carlinville. I'm not sure why there's not a N/B equivalent.
Even disregarding time savings, that train is a way better trip just because it cuts down on a bunch of the near-constant stream of announcements.

Interesting. And funny about the announcements.

Not quite the time savings I would have anticipated, but once they get much of the line (basically Alton to Joliet) up to 90mph it could bring train 301 down to 5 hours flat. Which is at least a step in the right direction.

I would be much more likely to use the train if it only took 4-4.5 hours to get to Chicago instead fo the current 5.5-6.  Hopefully we can continue speeding up this line. 

mjbais1489 wrote: ↑

Nov 18, 2019

Two things on the Amtrak:
- I thought the goal was to reduce time to Chicago to more like 4.5 hours.  Is that still possible/in plans?
- They bought new trains/coaches for the Midwest routes correct?  Are those in use or when will they be?

the new bi-level coaches/trainsets were supposed to be built under a high speed grant in Illinois using a new design for the higher speed, 110 mph.  Believe current bi-level cars in the states are qualified at 90 mph.   That effort crashed and burned in a huge fire ball when the Japanese couldn't get the prototype car to pass the crash testing requirements.   If not mistaken, what is going to be delivered instead is Siemens single level cars based on what has been proven for 110 mph and design that is in use on the Virgin Florida trains (formerly Brightline)
Plus side, Siemens saved the contract.  Down side in my book is future capacity probably took a hit by not having the bi-levels & therefore seeing a great opportunity to add seats with current schedule.   Hopefully Siemens or someone can put something together  

^Forgot about the crash test crash and burn. Yes, saving the contract at least keeps the opportunity for improved future bilevels open.

News Tribune - State owes Amtrak millions

MoDOT has convinced the Legislature to appropriate $9.1 million to pay the contract since 2017, and it asked for the same core funding this year. In that time, the contract has risen along with operating costs and inflation from $10.6 million in 2017 to $12 million next year.

"You generally don't continue to get services you don't pay for," he said.

Another bill hangs over the state if it gets to that point. The Legislature agreed in 2014 to take $50 million from the federal government to make improvements to stations along the Missouri River Runner line, McKenna said. In exchange for the funding, the state agreed to keep the line operating for 20 years. If the state defunded and shut down the service this year, the state would have to pay back a prorated $36 million, McKenna said.

https://www.newstribune.com/news/local/ ... ns/813795/

The limits of high speed rail
https://mappingignorance.org/2020/01/22 ... peed-rail/

chris fuller wrote:The limits of high speed rail
https://mappingignorance.org/2020/01/22 ... peed-rail/

This was fascinating to read. As an engineer, I was getting into the things you don’t think about. Such as the wave set up in the overhead power wire.

In downtown Kirkwood, we hear the screeching of the wheel flanges guiding the train cars around the curve. On these high speed trains they re-shape the actual rail on curves as I understand to keep the wheel centered on the track around a curve with minimal flange contact. I always wondered if trains would someday design precision positioning of the wheel on the center of the rail such that the flange was not even needed except for backup safety.

I also noticed the chart on energy usage vs number of stops. The 4 train run types they referenced were all-stop, skip-stop, large-stop, & non-stop. How fast could a train get to Chicago if it was non-stop once per day?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

.

"St. Louis to Chicago" is pretty meaningless until they fix "St. Louis to Alton". 

 https://www.kmov.com/news/amtrak-passen ... RRYtpyH0aQ

^ True!

My partner has done Chicago to STL 2x a week for 8 months. Yesterday was his first delay! Pretty good record.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was delayed over 6 hours on the Lincoln Service once and I didn't get free snacks! 

Why The US Has No High-Speed Rail