  Jdkeepsmiling Member Username: Jdkeepsmiling Post Number: 334 Registered: 01-2006 |
I just wanted to point out a story about Amtrak that mentions Detroit in general and the Detroit-Chicago route specifically. The director of Amtrak points out how that is a high growth route and that is is primed for high speed rail of up to 150mph. Thoughts and reactions??? The article is http://www.newsweek.com/id/147 648 | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 1579 Registered: 12-2006 |
They've been claiming for the past five years or so that the speeds out near Niles will be up to 110 MPH and it has yet to happen; therefore, I'm not holding my breath on this one. It's going to be a while before anything major happens. (Message edited by SCS100 on July 23, 2008) | ||
Jazzfan Member Username: Jazzfan Post Number: 4 Registered: 07-2008 |
It would be great if hey could do 150 mph on that route. As it is, it's faster to drive to Chicago. I know a few years back they spent a ton of money straightening out a lot of the track and welding the seams to create a smoother ride. I thought they were also gearing up for faster speeds? | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1848 Registered: 11-2003 |
Amtrak's problem with doing more is money. The Bush adminstration has been constantly trying to cut off any federal subsidy to Amtrak for as long as he has been in office. Congress has repeatedly said no and does not want service cut to their constituents. So it has been a battle just to get the meager funding operate Amtrak, let alone make any capital improvements above maintenance. So either the state, or the individual line that owns the track pays for an improvement. The state does not have money, so it will fall on Congress to up Amtrak funding. Writing your Congress members to tell them to support increased Amtrak funding and high speed rail is a start. | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 1446 Registered: 11-2003 |
Amtrak only owns the track from Kalamazoo to Porter, IN. So, it's a lot easer to get stuff done on that section. East of Kalamazoo, Norfolk Southern owns it. That, and the presence of many curves, makes it more difficult to get the trains to go faster. | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 1580 Registered: 12-2006 |
^It gets more complicated from there. If I remember correctly, Amtrak is actually leasing the Kalamazoo to Porter portion from Canadian Pacific, although I would expect them to either extend the lease or buy the track altogether. NS was supposed to sell their portion to Watco, which is a shortline operator, although I don't know if that ever happened or will ever happen. | ||
Firstandten Member Username: Firstandten Post Number: 241 Registered: 05-2006 |
I've felt for a long time we are missing out on a great opportunity. For runs like Detroit-Chicago from center city to center city, high speed trains would beat the hassle of driving to the airport, dealing with security and then getting transportation back to the center city. I had the fortune of riding the Japanese bullet train and I thought it would be great if americans could take advantage of a similar type of transportation. | ||
Gravitymachine Member Username: Gravitymachine Post Number: 2208 Registered: 05-2005 |
i was on the TGV between bordeaux and paris recently and feel the same way first and ten. | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 5158 Registered: 02-2005 |
The only true high-speed rail in the country is Amtrak Acela, which covers the Northeast Corridor (DC-Md-PA-NJ-NY-Boston), and is only a partial offering anyway. It is a higher-priced Amtrak option that comprises about half the total daily trips in the corridor. One would think that there would be several other places in line to get high-speed rail after the NE corridor and before Michigan, especially considering the aversion to rail in this part of the country. I'd like to think otherwise, but I can't. It would be good to get a couple more daily trips between the cities, and commuter-style offerings from Ann Arbor to Detroit. Those are realistic goals. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 1113 Registered: 09-2005 |
200 mph is more what I would consider high speed. 150 mph is fast, but not exactly high speed rail. It should be pointed out that the Ontario and Quebec governments are studying the creation of a Quebec City to Windsor high speed line (300 kph). This service would nicely complement any improved Detroit to Chicago rail service. | ||
Mrnittany Member Username: Mrnittany Post Number: 30 Registered: 10-2007 |
Would be nice to have train service from Detroit south to Toledo, where one could then make many connections along the Chicago-Cleveland-NYC line, and then further south to Dayton, Cinci and beyond. Won't happen ... volumes wouldn't be too high. | ||
Jcole Member Username: Jcole Post Number: 2612 Registered: 04-2005 |
Amtrak actually owns very little of its own rails. Most are owned by BNSF or CN, among others. I take Amtrak from Detroit to Colorado once a year, and every time a freight needs the rail, they take precedence over the passenger train. We pull over on a siding and wait. Also, because of the flooding in Ill and Ia, Amtrak couldn't run their normal westbound trains for about 3 weeks this year. They had to wait for BNSF to repair the track. They are largely at the mercy of the freight companies until the US govt approves more funding so they can own their own track. With gas prices what they are, this could be a great transport option IF they can get the delays under control. We ran 6 hours late coming into Denver, and I leave for Chi/Det tomorrow night, and I'll bet I'm 7 hours late coming into Detroit. Not an option for people on a schedule. Fortunately, I'm old and unemployed. | ||
Mbr Member Username: Mbr Post Number: 410 Registered: 03-2005 |
http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ ContentServer?pagename=Amtrak/ am2Route/Horizontal_Route_Page &c=am2Route&cid=1081256321995& ssid=10976&mode=perf&rn=Michig an%20Services Historical on-time performance for Amtrak in Michigan. Shows who owns the tracks and where the delays are as well. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4654 Registered: 10-2003 |
Mrnittany, you'll be interested in this: www.ohiohub.org The State of Ohio needs to obtain federal funding before they can proceed, but with the new Amtrak bill (currently in conference committee), it seems this might finally get somewhere. | ||
Mackcreative Member Username: Mackcreative Post Number: 248 Registered: 08-2006 |
I've taken the train to/from Chicago many times, it is very inexpensive (last time I paid -$60 roundtrip for 2 adults, 2 children,) it has become an increasingly crowded route (no surprise,) but like Jcole mentioned everytime another train passes the Amtrak one has to pull over and wait. In my experience you can expect to be 30-60 minutes later than anticipated, but the easy transition to the EL is great. | ||
Jcole Member Username: Jcole Post Number: 2613 Registered: 04-2005 |
Mack, I agree it's a great way to travel, and most of the delays I've experienced have been on the return trip from Denver to Chicago. The train on that route is coming back from San Francisco and it is always late. they lose time in the mountains. We typically arrive in Chicago too late for the last MI train, and end up on a church bus or mini van, rolling into Detroit at 5am. The train to Chi from D is usually within an hour of scheduled time, and into Denver is around an hour late also. This trip was very slow, still affected by the flooding, I think | ||
Flyingj Member Username: Flyingj Post Number: 265 Registered: 08-2006 |
Jazzfan, everytime I've driven thru Chicago & it wasn't the dead of night it's been a @#$%& traffic nightmare-one that people on the 405 would fear. Amtrak Weekly Specials almost always feature CHI-DET Plus if you buy right now you can celebrate Thanksgiving in the Windy City for $8.00 on www.megabus.com Not bad considering their L.A. routes are gone | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 612 Registered: 07-2007 |
"They've been claiming for the past five years or so that the speeds out near Niles will be up to 110 MPH and it has yet to happen; therefore, I'm not holding my breath on this one." I read somewhere that the trains are actually running over 100 in that stretch. Fact or fiction? More details here: http://mwhsr.blogspot.com/2005 _12_25_archive.html | ||
Jcole Member Username: Jcole Post Number: 2614 Registered: 04-2005 |
The speed limit on Amtrak is 79 mph on the straightaways, except on the East Coast, where they have the Acela train, which goes quite a bit faster. | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 1581 Registered: 12-2006 |
As far as I know, they are still running at 95 mph on that stretch. Please correct me if I'm wrong though. | ||
Jazzfan Member Username: Jazzfan Post Number: 5 Registered: 07-2008 |
Flyingj--a Chicago friend let us in on a little secret to avoid all the traffic. Get off the Skyway at Stoney Island Drive (I believe it's called) and take it right up to Lakeshore. Even if you hit town during rush hour, it moves pretty well. | ||
Jcole Member Username: Jcole Post Number: 2615 Registered: 04-2005 |
According to Amtrak website: "Amtrak-owned property includes 363 miles of the 456-mile Northeast Corridor connecting Washington, Philadelphia, New York and Boston, the busiest passenger line in the country, with trains regularly reaching speeds of 125-150 m.p.h.; a 60.5-mile track segment from New Haven, Conn., to Springfield, Mass.; 104 miles of up to 110 m.p.h. track in Pennsylvania between Philadelphia and Harrisburg, the first new high-speed corridor in the 21st century; a 97-mile segment of 95 m.p.h. (soon to be 105 m.p.h.) track in Michigan, the first high-speed positive train control system in revenue service." It doesn't say if it's near Niles, but I'll take your word for it. It must be only on Amtrak owned track that they can up their speeds past 79 mph. I had my GPS with me on the trip out here, and we never got over 79 between Chi and Denver, often going only 25-30 mph. | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 1582 Registered: 12-2006 |
quote: For the most part, yes, although they speed like crazy during the night on the longer distance ones. If you want speed, stay up late; however, there is a section of the one that runs through New Mexico where they can go 90 on BNSF track via an ATS system. (Message edited by SCS100 on July 23, 2008) | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4657 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Most of the Northeast Regional trains regularly hit 125 mph, and even commuter trains (MARC, SEPTA, NJ Transit) on the NEC line run around 110 mph. Acela only reaches 150 mph in Rhode Island. Now, if we can just get some *true* high speed rail. I think the reason for the 79 mph speed limit is because freight railways tend to run slower than passenger trains. The freight companies only maintain the tracks to a certain standard, because they have no vested interest (i.e. financial compensation) to upgrade for passenger trains only. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 2747 Registered: 07-2004 |
Acela service only hits high speed for a few straight runs. Between New York and Philly, there are only a few places straight enough to run, but when you get going, man, it's FAST -- even a little scary. | ||
Jcole Member Username: Jcole Post Number: 2617 Registered: 04-2005 |
"For the most part, yes, although they speed like crazy during the night on the longer distance ones." I think it depends on where you are at night. We usually are in Nebraska on the overnight, and it isn't very fast. A lot of pulling over for freights, and small town slowness | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 2748 Registered: 07-2004 |
I used to time how fast the train would travel across Ohio at night by starting my watch when we'd hit a crossing. Thanks to T. Jefferson, those roads are usually a mile apart. Usually, at night, I'd time the interval at 55 seconds. All things being equal (traveling more or less perpendicular to roads, roads being actually a mile apart, etc.): 55 seconds per mile = 65.5 miles per hour | ||
Russix Member Username: Russix Post Number: 101 Registered: 11-2006 |
call 1-800-USA-RAIL and nag them daily if they have bike racks on the train between Detroit and Chicago. Alot of the east coast trains have bike racks which allows you to bring it on for free instead of having to box it up your bike and then pay a freight handling fee. | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 1583 Registered: 12-2006 |
quote: The route of which you speak is notorious for being late and most of the track in that area is usually in poor condition. Once you go farther west of Denver it gets even worse. The route that I remember speeding on was the one that runs through Montana. It all depends on conditions, and how far behind schedule you are. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4659 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: I don't recall ever being on a train that allowed you to bring your bike (without boxing it up). Those trains are usually pretty damn near sold out--I don't see where they have the space. |
