Midwest Regional Rail Initiative - Page 32

Standpoor · #**621** Posted **Mar 25, 2011, 4:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by min-chi-cbus

I can see Indianapolis as being a higher priority, but probably not higher than St. Louis. In my mind's eye, I see the priority as Chicago to:

St. Louis
Detroit
Indianapolis
Minneapolis
Cleveland
Milwaukee (only this low because it has an existing connection)

My understanding was that there is a serious B2B connection to Detroit, St. Louis and even Minneapolis before Indy, but Indy's proximity to Chicago makes it more appealing. Not to mention that Indianapolis (metro) is kind of the poster-child for Midwestern metro growth. It's certainly got a bright future and I don't think the past decade or two were anomalies -- I see Indy continuing at 14%-18% decennial growth.

I totally agree with your priority list. St. Louis-Chicago seems great because of the end pairs. Not much in the middle, unless your a politician heading to the State house but still incredibly useful and necessary.

I would use the Detroit corridor the most though, so that is the one that I would want to see developed. However, unlike the two routes I just mentioned, I think the Detroit route is different and should stop a lot in between the two cities. I think there are too many people in between the two and not enough people in Detroit to justify super express trains. There should be one stop in Northwest Indiana, Niles/South Bend, Kalamazoo, Battle Creek (that is a tough one because they are so close together), Jackson, Ann Arbor, West Suburb stop(Dearborn or wherever), and a downtown Detroit stop. None of this Midtown crap. If you are going to pay all that money have it stop downtown. I think it should work more like a regional train as opposed to an express train. You can make it as fast as possible, 150 mph top speed but just have more stops.

My desire for the Chicago-Lafayette-Indianapolis-Cincinnati route is based entirely on the distances. Chicago-124 miles-Lafayette-62 miles-Indianapolis-112 miles-Cincinnati. With nothing in between. It just screams for a HSR route.

Beta_Magellan · #**622** Posted **Mar 25, 2011, 5:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Standpoor

I would use the Detroit corridor the most though, so that is the one that I would want to see developed. However, unlike the two routes I just mentioned, I think the Detroit route is different and should stop a lot in between the two cities. I think there are too many people in between the two and not enough people in Detroit to justify super express trains. There should be one stop in Northwest Indiana, Niles/South Bend, Kalamazoo, Battle Creek (that is a tough one because they are so close together), Jackson, Ann Arbor, West Suburb stop(Dearborn or wherever), and a downtown Detroit stop.

As much of a blowhard as I’ve been about sub-TGV rail the past couple of days, this is a great example of a corridor where it really does make sense. And better yet, it’s actually happening.

Standpoor · #**623** Posted **Mar 25, 2011, 8:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta_Magellan

As much of a blowhard as I’ve been about sub-TGV rail the past couple of days, this is a great example of a corridor where it really does make sense. And better yet, it’s actually happening.

As much as I have stood up for sub-TGV rail, 90 mph average service is not going to do much and faster service needs to happen. This corridor makes so much sense. Having a government entity own from Porter to Dearborn would be fantastic. If Michigan tries to pass on this opportunity, does anyone think someone else can take advantage of the federal grant. Can Amtrak spend $37 million dollars to get $150 million dollars. Shoot, Illinois should spend the money if Michigan cannot.

Beta_Magellan · #**624** Posted **Mar 25, 2011, 6:33 PM**

The main issue there is station spacing—the Wolverine’s major Michigan stops are less than 50 miles apart, which makes getting to higher speeds less important. Briefly glancing at the Czech Republic and Portugal’s Pendolino-running lines on wikipedia, they all have at least one gap of around 90-100 miles.

A secondary issue would be the freight RR’s wanting to keep things at 90 mph—any chance of Michigan coaxing them upwards?

afiggatt · #**625** Posted **Mar 25, 2011, 10:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta_Magellan

The main issue there is station spacing—the Wolverine’s major Michigan stops are less than 50 miles apart, which makes getting to higher speeds less important. Briefly glancing at the Czech Republic and Portugal’s Pendolino-running lines on wikipedia, they all have at least one gap of around 90-100 miles.

A secondary issue would be the freight RR’s wanting to keep things at 90 mph—any chance of Michigan coaxing them upwards?

Yes - by buying a big segment of the corridor. Norfolk Southern is offering to sell 135 miles of track & ROW the Wolverine Service uses from Kalamazoo to Dearborn. NS no longer has enough traffic on the route to justify maintaining their tracks to Class IV 79 mph standards and slow orders are taking the trains down to 60 mph for parts of the route - and slower in future years. The Michigan FY10 $308 million HSIPR application for the Chi-Detroit corridor, which had $77 million of 20% state match, was for buying the 135 miles from NS and restoring & upgrading it.

Amtrak owns 98 miles of the Chicago-Detroit route from Porter, IN to Kalamazoo which they have been slowly making improvements to allow for 105 mph speeds. So combined with the NS tracks, Amtrak and Michigan would own ~230 miles of the 304 mile corridor and could upgrade to 110 mph -without getting permission from the freight companies. And if the ROW is suitable and wide enough, perhaps it could be used for new 220 mph tracks in the future.

Michigan got $150 million of the $308 million asked for in the FY10 grants, but the state 20% matching is a problem. MI also got $7.9 million to fix a crossing track bottleneck in West Detroit. Don't know the status in Michigan of the state matching funding for these grants. If MI submits new applications for some of the $2.4 billion of Florida HSR funds, they might be able to land some funding from the stimulus money, if the FRA & LaHood decide to help MI out, that does not require state matching.

So the Chicago to St. Louis and Chicago to Detroit corridors are the best short term prospects in the Mid-West for upgrades to 110 mph speeds and increased frequency of service. Focus funding on them as the demonstration corridors in the mid-West for the next few years while waiting for new leadership in Ohio and Wisconsin.

electricron · #**626** Posted **Mar 25, 2011, 11:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by afiggatt

So the Chicago to St. Louis and Chicago to Detroit corridors are the best short term prospects in the Mid-West for upgrades to 110 mph speeds and increased frequency of service. Focus funding on them as the demonstration corridors in the mid-West for the next few years while waiting for new leadership in Ohio and Wisconsin.

I'll agree, they seem to be the best corridors for the MidWest today. Buying a significant amount of track avoids many potential hick-ups.

What I'm worried most about, can Michigan find the funds for their match (20%)?

Centropolis · #**627** Posted **Mar 29, 2011, 10:01 PM**

From the St. Louis Post Dispatch: "Missouri to apply for high-speed rail funds"

Missouri will seek nearly $1 billion in federal funds for projects aimed at making passenger trains run faster and more reliably through the state.

Gov. Jay Nixon on Tuesday announced the funding application for $373 million in immediate upgrades, including $150 million to replace the Merchant's Bridge near downtown St. Louis and $75 million to buy three new passenger train sets.

The state will seek an additional $600 million to study and begin acquiring property for a separate, future rail corridor between Kansas City and St. Louis. Amtrak trains currently share track with freight railroads.

link

ardecila · #**628** Posted **Mar 29, 2011, 11:49 PM**

Woah, crazy. Hope Missouri gets the money!

The Merchants' Bridge project seems a bit odd to me. The very existence of the Merchant Bridge ensures that there will be a railroad line running down St. Louis' waterfront. The cost is also pretty odd - only $150 million for a new high-level bridge?

Centropolis · #**629** Posted **Mar 29, 2011, 11:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

Woah, crazy. Hope Missouri gets the money!

The Merchants' Bridge project seems a bit odd to me. The very existence of the Merchant Bridge ensures that there will be a railroad line running down St. Louis' waterfront. The cost is also pretty odd - only $150 million for a new high-level bridge?

The current Merchants bridge also handles only freight traffic, I wonder if the Post Dispatch confused that bridge with the MacAuthur bridge which currently carries Amtrak and is a much straighter shot to the station, both are bloody ancient. I am hoping to see some sort of tie in with the Illinois project.

ardecila · #**630** Posted **Mar 30, 2011, 12:07 AM**

The Merchants' Bridge occasionally carries passenger trains when the MacArthur Bridge is congested.

IDOT's current Phase II study for the Chicago-St. Louis corridor is looking into using the Merchants Bridge permanently. I assumed it would be a non-starter, though, since it means the rail line on St. Louis' waterfront has to stay, and it means Illinois can't get a new station in East St. Louis as planned.

I hope Missouri gets the money they asked for. They didn't get much in previous rounds, they're a swing state, and they have a Democratic governor who is supportive of rail improvements and who will be serving until 2013. Seems like a solid choice to me.

Centropolis · #**631** Posted **Mar 30, 2011, 12:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

The Merchants' Bridge occasionally carries passenger trains when the MacArthur Bridge is congested.

IDOT's current Phase II study for the Chicago-St. Louis corridor is looking into using the Merchants Bridge permanently. I assumed it would be a non-starter, though, since it means the rail line on St. Louis' waterfront has to stay, and it means Illinois can't get a new station in East St. Louis as planned.

I hope Missouri gets the money they asked for. They didn't get much in previous rounds, they're a swing state, and they have a Democratic governor who is supportive of rail improvements and who will be serving until 2013. Seems like a solid choice to me.

Ah, I see, didn't know that. I don't think there is any pressure to remove rail lines on the waterfront, the line currently runs through a tunnel under the arch grounds. Honestly, I don't see the need for a station in East St. Louis considering the downtown (STLMO) station is plugged into East StL already through metrolink and bus, and the population density near downtown East St. Louis is very low, and fairly close by downtown (STLMO) for a station, anyway.

Beta_Magellan · #**632** Posted **Mar 30, 2011, 2:29 AM**

Quote:

Associated Press
Gov applying for $150M for Wis. train upgrades
MILWAUKEE -- Several months after rejecting federal funds to build high-speed rail across Wisconsin, Gov. Scott Walker is now asking for at least $150 million to add trains for an existing Milwaukee-to-Chicago line.

Walker said Tuesday the federal funds would be used to buy two train sets and eight locomotives as well as build a maintenance facility in Milwaukee.

The announcement came after the Republican governor, upholding a campaign promise, turned down $810 million to build a Madison-to-Milwaukee high-speed line. Walker had criticized the rail line as a waste of taxpayer money.

Upgrading this line, however, will save the state money through lower operating expenses, fewer capital costs and more ticket revenue while helping to accommodate growth in the rail line, he said.

"That's good for business, that's good for business travelers and it's yet one more incentive to do business here in southeastern Wisconsin," he said.

The money would come from $2.4 billion in high-speed rail funds that Florida was awarded but rejected. Walker said Wisconsin was filing its application jointly with Illinois, Michigan, Missouri and Amtrak.

Read more at http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/...n_8380692.html

Even though I’d kind of like to see this fail for spite (I developed my distaste for Walker when he was my county exec during the noughts), ultimately I hope this succeeds if only to demonstrate that the Midwest isn’t completely crazy.

The part about a joint application with other midwestern states is also interesting—anyone have any more information on this? It’s good to see some regional collaboration, especially in the current political environment.

sammyg · #**633** Posted **Mar 30, 2011, 3:05 AM**

Maybe Walker's trying to hang on to the Talgo plant?

Markitect · #**634** Posted **Mar 30, 2011, 7:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammyg

Maybe Walker's trying to hang on to the Talgo plant?

Very doubtful, because part of his application is requesting funding to convert the Talgo plant into a maintenance base for Hiawatha trains.

And the funding request for buying two more trainsets will be open to other train car manufacturers...as opposed to just buying two more direct from Talgo, as was the original plan before he rejected the $810 million. That could mean Hiawatha service could end up being a hodge-podge of mismatched equipment...the original two from from Talgo, and two more possibly from some other manufacturer should Talgo choose not to bid/loses the bid for these two new trainsets (assuming we'd actually end up getting any of this money in the first place...er, well I suppose it'd be in the second place now since we had it before and lost it).

Funding would also go toward 8 new locomotives.

The new locomotives and additional trainsets would be used to increase the frequency of Hiawatha service...more trains each way per day between Chicago and Milwaukee.

And funding would also go toward building a new trainshed at the Milwaukee Intermodal Station.

Note that these are all items that would have been paid for under the rejected $810 million award.

The request does not include any funding for additional track improvements beyond the $12 million Wisconsin was awarded (which was not lost) with the HSR grants in 2010.

Markitect · #**635** Posted **Mar 30, 2011, 7:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta_Magellan

The part about a joint application with other midwestern states is also interesting—anyone have any more information on this? It’s good to see some regional collaboration, especially in the current political environment.

Apparently it's for the purchase of trainsets.

Here are some more articles on the matter:

State seeks money for Hiawatha upgrade - $150 million is sought for Milwaukee-Chicago route (from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel)

State will seek federal Hiawatha grants (from the Business Journal Serving Greater Milwaukee)

Walker wants federal train money (from the Daily Reporter)

VivaLFuego · #**636** Posted **Mar 30, 2011, 3:09 PM**

What is freight traffic like on the mainline corridor, particularly between around Rondout (where the MD-N commuter service branches off) and South Milwaukee? That mostly straight ~40 mile segment with few grade crossings per mile and low population density would seem to be the ideal stretch to upgrade to 110mph speeds, which would cut around 15 minutes (17%) off the total travel time of the route. Combined with improvements to improve speeds near the terminals, a 70 minute service seems well within reach.

lawfin · #**637** Posted **Mar 30, 2011, 9:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammyg

Maybe Walker's trying to hang on to the Talgo plant?

Walker is such a douche bag. I hope he and Scott Fitzgerald are held in contempt

Markitect · #**638** Posted **Apr 6, 2011, 10:36 PM**

More details about Wisconsin's grant application for proposed Hiawatha upgrades were released today.

The grant requests $206 million of Federal grant money, plus an additional $12 million State match for the following:

- Two new 14-car trainsets (479 seats each) One new 14-car trainset (479 seats)
- Eight new locomotives
- A 106,000 sqft maintenance facility to be built adjacent to the current Talgo assembly plant (previously there seemed to be an indication that the assembly plant would be replaced)

The railcar and locomotive portion of the request is part of a joint application with Illinois, Missouri, and Minnesota Michigan (article misidentifies state) for a total of 100 passenger cars and 31 locomotives ($951 million).

Wisconsin has also applied for a separate $6.6 million grant request for track and signaling upgrades near Milwaukee Intermodal Station.

Surprisingly, this $212.6 million in total requests for Wisconsin, plus the additional $12 million in State money, is quite a bit more than the "at least $150 million" Governor Walker mentioned last week.

Hiawatha upgrades total $225.3 million from The Business Journal Serving Greater Milwaukee

afiggatt · #**639** Posted **Apr 6, 2011, 11:51 PM**

The Wisconsin application is rather puzzling. Illinois has submitted a joint inter-state application with Illinois as the lead state with Michigan, Missouri, and Wisconsin for $806 million total to purchase 100 bi-levels and 31 locomotives for use on all the corridor services in those 4 states. The application is entirely for stimulus money with no state matching funds.

The Illinois applications can be found here: http://www.connectthemidwest.com/cat...l-hsr-funding/. Illinois is also requesting $186.4 million for Chicago to St. Louis with matching funds for a total of $248.5 million.

I suspect Wisconsin is trying to cover the cost of the Talgos they already ordered with state money while making a play to buy bi-levels in a large joint order. If the bi-level rolling stock funding comes through, I would lay odds that Wisconsin will be calling Washington State to see if they are interested in buying 2 Talgo trainsets which have only been driven by an old lady on Sundays.

electricron · #**640** Posted **Apr 7, 2011, 12:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by afiggatt

The Wisconsin application is rather puzzling. Illinois has submitted a joint inter-state application with Illinois as the lead state with Michigan, Missouri, and Wisconsin for $806 million total to purchase 100 bi-levels and 31 locomotives for use on all the corridor services in those 4 states.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markitect

Two new 14-car trainsets (479 seats each)
- Eight new locomotives

The total Wisconsin order would now be 4 14 car trainsets and 8 locomotives. That's also a total of 56 cars which are about half the length of traditional cars, meaning the equivalent of 28 cars, ie 4x7.

Wisconsin would be buying twice as many locomotives as trains.

If the joint inter-state order is broken down similarly, the joint order would be either 15 or 16 trains. Which means averaging having 6.25 to 6.66 cars per train.