The Texas Eagle will be limited to 55 mph. Otherwise it stands a chance of running on time. HA!
But yes the Texas Eagle will benefit from the corridor, just like the LD's that run on the NEC, sure they can't do the full 125 like the regionals, but they can go a whole lot faster than 79!
79 to 100 is a big jump, and that's just the top speed, don't forget that in order to get to that top speed some curves were most likely straightened, which will bring the average speed up
even more.
I'd like for the schedule to remain as it is, and for them to use that half hour (or whatever it ends up being, I'm not really sure how to work out the math) to improve OTP. The A/D times are really pretty good in IL, and the only connexion the TE can't make is the EB*, given the 25 min. transfer window. I doubt an extra half hour would make Amtrak comfortable guaranteeing it, given the atrocious OTP.The Texas Eagle will be limited to 55 mph. Otherwise it stands a chance of running on time. HA!
But yes the Texas Eagle will benefit from the corridor, just like the LD's that run on the NEC, sure they can't do the full 125 like the regionals, but they can go a whole lot faster than 79!
79 to 100 is a big jump, and that's just the top speed, don't forget that in order to get to that top speed some curves were most likely straightened, which will bring the average speed up
even more.
Nice! That ought to save some time! Maybe up to an half hour?
The TE could cut half an hour departing CHI.I'd like for the schedule to remain as it is, and for them to use that half hour (or whatever it ends up being, I'm not really sure how to work out the math) to improve OTP. The A/D times are really pretty good in IL, and the only connexion the TE can't make is the EB*, given the 25 min. transfer window. I doubt an extra half hour would make Amtrak comfortable guaranteeing it, given the atrocious OTP.The Texas Eagle will be limited to 55 mph. Otherwise it stands a chance of running on time. HA!
But yes the Texas Eagle will benefit from the corridor, just like the LD's that run on the NEC, sure they can't do the full 125 like the regionals, but they can go a whole lot faster than 79!
79 to 100 is a big jump, and that's just the top speed, don't forget that in order to get to that top speed some curves were most likely straightened, which will bring the average speed up
even more.
Nice! That ought to save some time! Maybe up to an half hour?
*The TE cannot connect to the SWC in CHI, but can via the MORR or bus bridge SPI-GBB.
The upgrades are for more than just better quality track. The pullover sidings are being upgraded to provide connections at both ends, there are numerous grade crossings upgrades, signal upgrades, I would venture that there are some curve and slow section upgrades for faster running. The UP track for the St. Louis to Alton section was upgraded last year to allow at least 60 mph running. IL received $186 million of Florida HSR funds last year to upgrades to the Joliet to Dwight section including double tracking a portion of it. Even if the Texas Eagle is not able to run at 100 or 110 mph, the track and signal upgrades should provide for a reduced and more reliable trip time from CHI to STL. How much? We will see as the schedules get adjusted.The agreement signed with UP allows for ONLY 3 Lincoln Service trains to run at 110mph. So the remaining Lincoln Service trains, and the Texas Eagle, will travel slower. However, they will benefit from a better quality track. Maybe that means they will be limited to 79mph, I'm not sure. However, all trains that run over that territory will need to have a ITCS locomotive, so look for the Texas Eagle to have to add/remove a locomotive at St. Louis when the corridor is up and running.
They should put guards at the crossing to stop the kids!Tower 55 is a MAJOR interlock just south of the FTW station. Here the UP and BNSF tracks cross at grade, creating massive congestion. The project will take one direction of tracks and run it over the other, eliminating much of the tie up. Plus there is an area nearby where kids are constantly sneaking across the tracks to short cut to and from school. The project will give them a protected way to cross over the tracks.
You would have to treat it like the DMZ between the two Koreas. Manned guard towers in sight of each other, shoot trespassers. The "kids" and it is not all kids, are crossing whereever they want to, even cutting fences if they are in the way.They should put guards at the crossing to stop the kids!Tower 55 is a MAJOR interlock just south of the FTW station. Here the UP and BNSF tracks cross at grade, creating massive congestion. The project will take one direction of tracks and run it over the other, eliminating much of the tie up. Plus there is an area nearby where kids are constantly sneaking across the tracks to short cut to and from school. The project will give them a protected way to cross over the tracks.
The diagrams and the fact sheet at this Tower 55 website provide insight into the complexity of the interlocking crossing and road grade crossings. $93.7 million project with $34 million provided by a federal TIGER II grant.They should put guards at the crossing to stop the kids!Tower 55 is a MAJOR interlock just south of the FTW station. Here the UP and BNSF tracks cross at grade, creating massive congestion. The project will take one direction of tracks and run it over the other, eliminating much of the tie up. Plus there is an area nearby where kids are constantly sneaking across the tracks to short cut to and from school. The project will give them a protected way to cross over the tracks.
Is this true? Union Pacific will still be able to unilaterally hold passenger trains back and prevent them from reaching their rated speeds?The agreement signed with UP allows for ONLY 3 Lincoln Service trains to run at 110mph. So the remaining Lincoln Service trains, and the Texas Eagle, will travel slower. Maybe that means they will be limited to 79mph, I'm not sure.
Guard towers? Shooting trespassers? George, you seem to be a kindred spirit of the Amtrak conductor that famously "protects" customers by kicking them off the train.You would have to treat it like the DMZ between the two Koreas. Manned guard towers in sight of each other, shoot trespassers. The "kids" and it is not all kids, are crossing whereever they want to, even cutting fences if they are in the way.They should put guards at the crossing to stop the kids!There is an area nearby where kids are constantly sneaking across the tracks to short cut to and from school. The project will give them a protected way to cross over the tracks.
Related question i've had for awhile on afigg's text is what is max speed for Amtrak trains going over diamonds? Does it depend on the angle the two tracks intersect at?The diagrams and the fact sheet at this Tower 55 website provide insight into the complexity of the interlocking crossing and road grade crossings. $93.7 million project with $34 million provided by a federal TIGER II grant.
It depends on the specific diamond, and is goverened by speeds listed in the operating timetable for that particular railroad at that particular location. There are some diamonds that can be crossed at 79 mph (or, I'd imagine, even higher). Others have 10 mph or 15 mph speed restrictions on them.Related question i've had for awhile on afigg's text is what is max speed for Amtrak trains going over diamonds? Does it depend on the angle the two tracks intersect at?
While traversing CSX lines between Washington and Florida we seem to go over some diamonds at least 60 mph, while others in the severe curvature of Jacksonville area we creep at 15, a speed governed by the degree of curvature and thus diamonds are not kept to higher standards since no necessity.
The key words were "would have to". He didn't say that one should do that! But rather, nothing short of that is going to stop kids who think that they are invincible.Guard towers? Shooting trespassers? George, you seem to be a kindred spirit of the Amtrak conductor that famously "protects" customers by kicking them off the train.You would have to treat it like the DMZ between the two Koreas. Manned guard towers in sight of each other, shoot trespassers. The "kids" and it is not all kids, are crossing whereever they want to, even cutting fences if they are in the way.They should put guards at the crossing to stop the kids!There is an area nearby where kids are constantly sneaking across the tracks to short cut to and from school. The project will give them a protected way to cross over the tracks.
Would some concrete walls built two stories high stop the kids? I don't think they will take the risk to climb that nigh and they can't get something to blow it up. I know, it's gonna be expensive.The key words were "would have to". He didn't say that one should do that! But rather, nothing short of that is going to stop kids who think that they are invincible.Guard towers? Shooting trespassers? George, you seem to be a kindred spirit of the Amtrak conductor that famously "protects" customers by kicking them off the train.You would have to treat it like the DMZ between the two Koreas. Manned guard towers in sight of each other, shoot trespassers. The "kids" and it is not all kids, are crossing whereever they want to, even cutting fences if they are in the way.They should put guards at the crossing to stop the kids!There is an area nearby where kids are constantly sneaking across the tracks to short cut to and from school. The project will give them a protected way to cross over the tracks.
I don't care whether or not concrete walls would stop the kids (or adults); it would pretty much ruin the view, and yes, I even find people's slummy backyards interesting.Would some concrete walls built two stories high stop the kids? I don't think they will take the risk to climb that nigh and they can't get something to blow it up. I know, it's gonna be expensive.
All this would not be needed if those kids/adults would stop being stupid and slipping across tracks that could kill them. What I'm thinking is that even if the build a walkway, the people will still dare each other to cross the tracks, causing fatalities.I don't care whether or not concrete walls would stop the kids (or adults); it would pretty much ruin the view, and yes, I even find people's slummy backyards interesting.Would some concrete walls built two stories high stop the kids? I don't think they will take the risk to climb that nigh and they can't get something to blow it up. I know, it's gonna be expensive.
Enter your email address to join: