Amtrak test train and NS speed increases in AL

[George Harris]

Seems to me they were programming and testing the gates for 90 m.p.h. service because they plan on putting these speeds in at some time, or were at least testing these speeds for a reason other than "11mph just for good measure".
I'm hoping that many portions of the Crescent route get upgraded to 90 soon....

I think the 11mph over is the correct answer. It is generally considered a good idea to test things to limits beyond their normal in-service conditions.

None of this territory or any portion of the Southern Railwya part of the Crescent's route ever had a speed limit above 80 mph.

For the most part very little would be gained by raising the maximum speed to 90 mph as for the most part the location and radii of curves would prevent having long enough continuous segments cleared for 90 mph to be menaingful.

 

[TVRM610]

I agree that it could be the 11 mph thing but i don't agree that it wouldn't make sense to raise speeds to 90 where possible, if there are any segments of the Crescent that can be cleared for 90, then it can help the schedule. It also just makes sense for amtrak to think about the BHM-ATL-Charlotte corridor being expanded someday... that line should have alot more passenger service.

 

[WICT106]

I want to point out that it looks like almost all of the Crescent's route is one of the FRA's designated "incrementally" High speed rail corridors.

Federal Railroad Administration: Passenger Rail (includes a map)

I had assumed that this meant that the designated segments would be upgraded to allow for 110 mph speed limits for passenger trains. If what Mr. Harris tells us is correct, then there will have to be considerable realignment of significant portions of the route in order for this to happen. A worthy investment, perhaps. The landlord freight railroad will, no doubt, demand Just and Fair Compensation in order to compensate for the lines' upgrades.

 

[George Harris]

I want to point out that it looks like almost all of the Crescent's route is one of the FRA's designated "incrementally" High speed rail corridors.Federal Railroad Administration: Passenger Rail (includes a map)

I had assumed that this meant that the designated segments would be upgraded to allow for 110 mph speed limits for passenger trains.

Between B'ham and Atlanta, the rebuild would approach 100%. Northeast of Atlanta, there would still be a lot of realignment. While it is much faster, there are still a lot of curves that limit speeds to the 50 to 70 mph rainge.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

The track speed only increased to 79, the test train ran at 90mph with an FRA waiver in lieu of PTC ,so that NS would be able to besure the crossing gates would respond correctly and with the right timings for 79mph, the extra 11mph was just for good measure.

While it's true that the track speed has currently been raised to 79, why were they testing trains at 90 if they are not looking at increasing the speed to 90 at some time? I don't believe that every crossing gate that has 79m.p.h. speeds has been tested at 90. Seems to me they were programming and testing the gates for 90 m.p.h. service because they plan on putting these speeds in at some time, or were at least testing these speeds for a reason other than "11mph just for good measure".

I'm hoping that many portions of the Crescent route get upgraded to 90 soon....

I wondered about that too, NS tends to keep track one class higher than necessary when possible should they have to cut the maintenace budget and defer maintaince on a section. One of NS's crew said there are a lot of places the track class would allow Amtrak to exceed 79mph. With OTC, NS's PTC system, goes into effect it is highly possible Amtrak will be allowed to run over 79. I've also heard Amtrak, the STB, and FRA will require the freight railroads to allow speeds in excess of 79 when track class allows it once PTC is installed. Knowing this section of the line it is very possible to run a train at 90 or even 110 with no track upgrades necessary aside from assuring the track class is high enough and maintained at that level. From CP Tannehill to just before BHM the track is straighter and more level than the majority of the NEC.

When I was on #20 on the 28th we left TCL on time and stopped at CP Bryant, two miles east of the station, to let #19 pass. We sat for over 20mins, the train started moving and made good time, than at CP Woodstock they poured on the power and blasted along at 79 the rest of the way into BHM. We didn't slow down until we had to leave NS and cross CSX to get into the station, we arrived almost 30 minutes early. We made the 55mi trip in about 60 mins vs the 103 mins scheduled. We made the trip 43 minutes faster than scheduled.

On the return on #20 we departed BHM on time at 12:02 pm at 12:33 we reached CP Vance, BHM is at MP 148*, Vance at MP 177.7* a distance of 34.7 mi in 31 mins for an average speed of 69.4mph. We then proceeded to arrive at TCL at 12:58 which means we averaged 53.16 mph over the 55mi between BHM and TCL which is very fast for an LD train even in the NEC.

Assuming NS continues to pull out the permanent reduced speed limits in places along the Crescent's line we could see the Crescent making the trip from NOL to NYP much faster than it currently does. I think a lot of the speed restrictions removed lately have to do with NS's Crescent Corridor intermodal project between Dallas and NJ. Hopefully Amtrak will pull out padding in the next timetable.

*All of my MP numbers came from the 1941 employee timetable of the Southern Railroad's AGS line, all of the signals are still in the same location.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

I want to point out that it looks like almost all of the Crescent's route is one of the FRA's designated "incrementally" High speed rail corridors.Federal Railroad Administration: Passenger Rail (includes a map)

I had assumed that this meant that the designated segments would be upgraded to allow for 110 mph speed limits for passenger trains.

Between B'ham and Atlanta, the rebuild would approach 100%. Northeast of Atlanta, there would still be a lot of realignment. While it is much faster, there are still a lot of curves that limit speeds to the 50 to 70 mph rainge.

Also between CP Irondale Junction and CP Eden, between BHM and ATN, the Crescent twists and turns through the southern end of the Appalachian Mountains. This also where the Crescent goes through Chula Vista Tunnel, the only tunnel South of Lynchburg. There are places where the tracks soar 80 ft high on embankments above the valleys. I think this is the most scenic section of the route especially in fall when the hills and valleys are ablaze with the changing leaves.

 

[TVRM610]

thanks Crescent ATN & TCL - your post made me quite happy. I may just have to ride the Crescent this week! The crescent has always been one of my favorite trains since it has very little slow running. Now a few more points added to it.

I've been wondering what would happen with the PTC going into the mix... I sure am hoping that all routes will get a speed boost when possible.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

thanks Crescent ATN & TCL - your post made me quite happy. I may just have to ride the Crescent this week! The crescent has always been one of my favorite trains since it has very little slow running. Now a few more points added to it.
I've been wondering what would happen with the PTC going into the mix... I sure am hoping that all routes will get a speed boost when possible.

Another note on PTC with NS, As far as I know their full intentions are to pull down all of the signals and use flexible blocks. The PTC computer will show authorized speed rather than signal indications, In other words no red-yellow-green, instead a red would be 0, green 79 (hopefully more) for Amtrak and Yellow any where from 1-78mph depending on the spacing from the train ahead. All curve, diamond etc restrictions would be programmed in as well as temporary slow orders, the crew will no longer have to take them down in the log and keep up with them. Essentially PTC controls the train with the engineer merely adjusting the throttle and brake to what the PTC system wants.

 

[JeffAmtrak]

The track speed only increased to 79, the test train ran at 90mph with an FRA waiver in lieu of PTC ,so that NS would be able to besure the crossing gates would respond correctly and with the right timings for 79mph, the extra 11mph was just for good measure.

While it's true that the track speed has currently been raised to 79, why were they testing trains at 90 if they are not looking at increasing the speed to 90 at some time? I don't believe that every crossing gate that has 79m.p.h. speeds has been tested at 90. Seems to me they were programming and testing the gates for 90 m.p.h. service because they plan on putting these speeds in at some time, or were at least testing these speeds for a reason other than "11mph just for good measure".

I'm hoping that many portions of the Crescent route get upgraded to 90 soon....

I wondered about that too, NS tends to keep track one class higher than necessary when possible should they have to cut the maintenace budget and defer maintaince on a section. One of NS's crew said there are a lot of places the track class would allow Amtrak to exceed 79mph. With OTC, NS's PTC system, goes into effect it is highly possible Amtrak will be allowed to run over 79. I've also heard Amtrak, the STB, and FRA will require the freight railroads to allow speeds in excess of 79 when track class allows it once PTC is installed. Knowing this section of the line it is very possible to run a train at 90 or even 110 with no track upgrades necessary aside from assuring the track class is high enough and maintained at that level. From CP Tannehill to just before BHM the track is straighter and more level than the majority of the NEC.

When I was on #20 on the 28th we left TCL on time and stopped at CP Bryant, two miles east of the station, to let #19 pass. We sat for over 20mins, the train started moving and made good time, than at CP Woodstock they poured on the power and blasted along at 79 the rest of the way into BHM. We didn't slow down until we had to leave NS and cross CSX to get into the station, we arrived almost 30 minutes early. We made the 55mi trip in about 60 mins vs the 103 mins scheduled. We made the trip 43 minutes faster than scheduled.

On the return on #20 we departed BHM on time at 12:02 pm at 12:33 we reached CP Vance, BHM is at MP 148*, Vance at MP 177.7* a distance of 34.7 mi in 31 mins for an average speed of 69.4mph. We then proceeded to arrive at TCL at 12:58 which means we averaged 53.16 mph over the 55mi between BHM and TCL which is very fast for an LD train even in the NEC.

Assuming NS continues to pull out the permanent reduced speed limits in places along the Crescent's line we could see the Crescent making the trip from NOL to NYP much faster than it currently does. I think a lot of the speed restrictions removed lately have to do with NS's Crescent Corridor intermodal project between Dallas and NJ. Hopefully Amtrak will pull out padding in the next timetable.

*All of my MP numbers came from the 1941 employee timetable of the Southern Railroad's AGS line, all of the signals are still in the same location.

I like your post, I live in Birmingham, watch and record Amtrak/NS trains almost everyday. Its a big difference now since they raised the speed. Months ago they were coming through Downtown Bessemer doing 35-25, raised it to 50 and now 70+. I will have to ride it again to experience the new limits throughout the state. That is pretty fast from TCL to BHM or BHM to Vance as you stated. It is easy to tell the difference because yesetday Amtrak 19 was 1 hour late into BHM and coming through Bessemer, they got to Tuscaloosa about 30 mins late so they made up some time getting their.

 

[VT Hokie]

I wondered about that too, NS tends to keep track one class higher than necessary when possible should they have to cut the maintenace budget and defer maintaince on a section. One of NS's crew said there are a lot of places the track class would allow Amtrak to exceed 79mph.

I've generally been impressed with the NS owned track that I have ridden on. When I took the Crescent down to Atlanta a few years ago, the ride quality was very good for the entire trip. Also, last year I took the Pennsylvanian out to Pittsburgh, and the track between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh was excellent.