Rail advocates want double tracking DET-CHI

[GP30M4216]

I just grabbed a current Amtrak Michigan services timetable and a Conrail/AML TIMETABLE to determine where Amtrak meets are scheduled to occur.

I don't follow along on a scanner or follow trains in real time online, so these may be off slightly, especially on the west end, but this should be pretty close to demonstrate what I mean:

350 meets 351 at Dowagiac
350 meets 365 at Lawton (or west of Decatur)
350 meets 353 at Chelsea
352 meets 353 at Buchanan or Three Oaks
352 meets 355 at Dearborn
354 meets 355 at Comstock
364 meets nobody!

Then, just for fun, I pulled the Thanksgiving schedule which was just in effect out to see where those meets with one additional eastbound and one additional westbound would take place (5 WB and 5 EB daily between CHI and Battle Creek):
356 meets 351 on the Water Level Route
356 meets 365 at Michigan City
356 meets 353 at Albion
352 meets 359 at Albion
364 meets 359 at Dowagiac
354 meets 359 on the Water Level Route

So, there's two additional meets on the west end, but possibly a total of four IF westbound trains are running late. That's the thing....the west end (between Kzoo and Porter) has passing sidings, but there's also a much larger chance that trains will be late in this section - being further from the starting point for westbounds, and after the traffic jam on the Water Level Route out of Chi-town for eastbounds. Wasn't there a proposal a few years ago to connect two or three of the controlled sidings in the west half together to form one long section of double track? The currently existing controlled sidings are all between 1 and 2 miles long - but to keep things fluid, not only do you have to try to arrange trains into the sidings so they don't have to come to a complete stop (not always possible), but they have to slow down from 110mph to go through the diverging switches (what speed are they good for? 40mph? I don't know). And which train gets to be the lucky one to go into the siding? The one that's already late, or the one that is on time but can lose a few minutes? A delay could quickly amount to 15 additional minutes or more which would be eliminated having a second track.

I agree that re-doubletracking the entire corridor at this time is not a wise use of money. With only 6-8 Amtraks (never more than 10) and fairly minimal freight traffic over the entire route, it's not worth the expense. If MDOT were using its purchase of the Michigan Line as a concerted driver to try to get rail-using businesses to build along the line for targeted freight service, that would be a different thing. Likewise, if 10 or more roundtrips become a reality on the west end, that may warrant looking at it again. In the meantime, it seems logical to stitch together a couple of the passing sidings allowing for a longer section of double track wherever meets tend to occur....Dowagiac and Decatur comes to mind, maybe (build 5.5 miles of second track, now becomes a 9 mile long Double Track segment). Then meets would cause fewer delays and could more likely be made at speed.

In the meantime, re-doubletracking between MORT and WAYNE was practical and logical - the highest volume of on-line freight interference is on this section of the route. It probably should never have been single tracked in the first place. And I remember when this was done - it would have been around 1989-1990. If MI-Train comes to pass, then it would be logical to extend that double track west from YPSI to Ann Arbor, maybe to the old NYC Yard just west of the Annie bridge. The only other place where it seems like delays regularly occur due to track congestion is Battle Creek.

[Ypsi]

Most of the delays not on the water level route happen between East of CP Lake. There are so many speed restrictions and other stuff that causes delays. A couple weeks ago you could count on any WB train losing 20 minutes after departing Dearborn station heading for Ann Arbor (that may have slightly changed by now, but the WB's are still consistently clearing Ypsi about 10-20 minutes off what would be the advertised). Once this is up to snuffs on the east end, you should see better travel times, and as long as you're close to the "Amtrak window" on the Chicago line it should be ok.

[Saturnalia]

Once you stop asking Amtrak to make money, you'll be back to practical terms. Passenger was never supposed to make money. Railroads made their profit on mail and other expedited traffic on those trains.

Oh...that's also how many airlines make their bucks - CARGO IN THE UNDERBELLY. Perhaps Amtrak could capture mail/UPS traffic back? I know the long trains destroyed the uni bodies, but a car or two of additional PAID baggage, using today's containerized method like UPS on airlines - could work.

I know that sorta thing once was tried and didn't really prove itself, but hey what's old is often new again.

And yes - the more trains using the infrastructure, the less loss per passenger.

Oh. And one more thing. We need a dedicated passenger corridor into CUS from the east. I've looked at the CSS, and there are ways to make it work, totally separating eastern trains from the Waterlevel route.

[AARR]

Amtrak tried getting into the freight business hauling mail and perishables. They acquired a fleet of 60' express box cars. The freight railroads were not happy. I don't recall why the freight service ended.

Oh...that's also how many airlines make their bucks - CARGO IN THE UNDERBELLY. Perhaps Amtrak could capture mail/UPS traffic back? I know the long trains destroyed the uni bodies, but a car or two of additional PAID baggage, using today's containerized method like UPS on airlines - could work.

[CSX_CO]

Talk about using a cannon to kill a mosquito. Spend millions on double track because AMTRAK can't stick to their schedules and make meets where the sidings are. Current AMTRAK management would probably want double track on a furnacular railway because they don't think they could make the meet reliably.... (Look up a furnacular railway if you don't get the joke)

Get rid of the mindset at AMTRAK that delays are acceptable and unpreventable, and you don't need 100's of miles of double track.

[AARR]

I agree with you, CSX. And here's why. Back in the 1990's (IIRC) Amtrak had a railroad man running it (instead of a someone who was owed a political favor). IIRC he was a former CR exec. It was the best financial and performance period in Amtrak's history. However, he eventually was dismissed because he didn't know how to play nice with the politicians. I can't recall his name

Get rid of the mindset at AMTRAK that delays are acceptable and unpreventable, and you don't need 100's of miles of double track.

[CSX_CO]

Amtrak tried getting into the freight business hauling mail and perishables. They acquired a fleet of 60' express box cars. The freight railroads were not happy. I don't recall why the freight service ended.

Oh...that's also how many airlines make their bucks - CARGO IN THE UNDERBELLY. Perhaps Amtrak could capture mail/UPS traffic back? I know the long trains destroyed the uni bodies, but a car or two of additional PAID baggage, using today's containerized method like UPS on airlines - could work.

They quit because the additional overhead required to make the money. Looked good on paper, but when you ran the numbers expenses were too high for what revenue they were potentially making.

[ConrailMan5]

Amtrak tried getting into the freight business hauling mail and perishables. They acquired a fleet of 60' express box cars. The freight railroads were not happy. I don't recall why the freight service ended.

Oh...that's also how many airlines make their bucks - CARGO IN THE UNDERBELLY. Perhaps Amtrak could capture mail/UPS traffic back? I know the long trains destroyed the uni bodies, but a car or two of additional PAID baggage, using today's containerized method like UPS on airlines - could work.

The reasons as I have understood were
1, realtions with the freight railroads were hurt
2, Costs were getting out of hand
3, the express shipments were inhibiting amtrak from serving the needs of customers because of the increased terminal time (and associated delays) to trains on those routes.

But lets try to keep this topic civil and pointed.

Talk about using a cannon to kill a mosquito. Spend millions on double track because AMTRAK can't stick to their schedules and make meets where the sidings are. Current AMTRAK management would probably want double track on a furnacular railway because they don't think they could make the meet reliably.... (Look up a furnacular railway if you don't get the joke)

Get rid of the mindset at AMTRAK that delays are acceptable and unpreventable, and you don't need 100's of miles of double track.

I am not so sure that that is te mindset at Amtrak. If it were they wouldn't be doing the projects they are right now (such as improving the signaling system on the AML, fixing common choke points such as the Ypsi-Wayne corridor) IMHO. Nor would they get after roads like they have in the Past (CN, SP are the two that come to mind) for excessive delays. Lastly, I am almost certain that none of the views supporting the double track in this article came from amtrak management. I could be wrong though (and will likely be told I am).

Most of the issues of timekeeping come from two places on the wolverine route right no as I understand. Getting out of chicago, and slow orders along the line most of which are on the east end. With 0 slow orders, the schedule is easily attainable because of padding time. But the slow orders are killer. On a relatively recent trip west, I coulnted close to 30 items Townline-Jackson, but only 2 Jackson-Porter. Before the trackwork began (back in the NS days) trains regularly would lose time on the Chelsea-Wayne segment because of track conditions and th inability to make easy meets Ypsi-Mort. To combat this, Amtrak has gotten the one main Ypsi-Wayne back in service, and extended the double track Townline-Mort. Before, I can remember 352 getting stuck at ypsi for a meet with 355 for some times as long as an hour. Now they regularly meet at Dearborn wih minimal delay. Trains still lose time DER-AA because of the slow orders associated with trackwork, but once those projects are done the items should hopefully go away. I do not think it is fair to judge amtraks timliness right now with all of the work that is going on. If these projects do not improve timliness, then I think it is fair to go out and start making a stink about "wasting money" on these improvements.

[Saturnalia]

One major thing to recall here:

Neither MDOT or Amtrak have supported re-doubling the tracks on the MC. It has thus far only been advocacy groups - who get a kick out of it anytime more trains could be attained.

[j32885]

I Favor more Double-Tracking, but just not all the way to Chicago. Not at this point in time, Future Needs...Maybe.... More likely seeing duo-tracks going to be all the the way to Porter Jct. The old MCRR ROW past there, isn't good shape and is in need of a total overhaul.

At this time Re-Double-Tracking the east end of the MC Line is more important. Freight traffic plays a factor. So far...NO Trains have been using the North/Westbound/Track 1. South/Eastbound/Track 2 still being use as it was before the other track was put back in. New overhead boom signals at Monroe St. in DBN, are still partly covered for Track 1. Getting Wayne-Townline section back has been huge improvement. The JAX-AA-YPSI-Willow Run-Wayne section next in need of Double-Tracking for another round railroad work.

Track congestion in Battle Creek is there, because AMTK is on CN's tracks. CN will run has many trains as they feel like running, until they're ready to let AMTK off it's merry little way. By the time AMTK is up and running they are more late. Clara's On The River was the old MCRR train station, while the ROW ran through the middle of town.

[ConrailMan5]

. So far...NO Trains have been using the North/Westbound/Track 1. South/Eastbound/Track 2 still being use as it was before the other track was put back in.

Ummm which segment are you talking about? Becasue the Mort-Wayne segment has not been cut in yet. I guess I don't understand your point. They are not really putting the double track back in to make for directional running. The South main is supposed to be the "passenger main" whereas the North Main (track 1) is supposed to be the freight main/ meeting track. As far as how it is, They moved Mort west of the Dingell Transit center, but it goes Double to single. And on the Wayne-Ypsi segment they have run up the one track to make meets on several occasions, and in fact were using that track exclusively for a week or so during the summer.

[GP30M4216]

j32885 wrote:
. So far...NO Trains have been using the North/Westbound/Track 1. South/Eastbound/Track 2 still being use as it was before the other track was put back in.

Ummm which segment are you talking about? Becasue the Mort-Wayne segment has not been cut in yet. I guess I don't understand your point.

Pretty sure you guys are just agreeing with eachother.....J32885 is saying the "new" track from MORT to WAYNE is not yet in service, and so is CRMan. But you're right - new arrangement will not set up for directional running. Both tracks are signalled in both directions. When complete and open, there will be a 21-mile continuous stretch of double track from CP-YPSI to CP-TOWNLINE, with several crossover control points, overwhich multiple Amtrak and freight trains can meet, and in the future, commuter rail (if we ever get there). The right of way looks "complete" again with the second track back where it belongs!

[CSX_CO]

The stuff I've heard from people I know that work for AMTRAK, and on the Michigan corridor, it is mind boggling the ineptitude of AMTRAK management. At least in the C&S department, the delays from bad signals, etc are unavoidable and thus persistent problems keep being problems. At least that's what management tells the people in the field. So my statement about delays and malfunctions being "accepted" at Antrak isn't off the mark.

[Ypsi]

The double track at between Wayne and Townline is supplied to have one main be a "freight main" and the other be the "Amtrak only main" with Amtrak's using both when they meet. My best guess days they will use one of the mains more and keep wear and Tate form on the second track like they planned (which is I guess why freight will only use one of the mains). It also seems that they will use the 1 track at Dearborn station as much as they can so passengers are closer to the building and don't have to cross.

[AARR]

CSX is correct, again. Both editors at Trains Magazine have commented on the poor decision making and poor prioritizing of current Amtrak leadership. What Amtrak needs is more equipment and service to attract more riders. Instead they're cutting both and ridership is down. It's amazing to me it's only down a few percent considering their poor on-time performance and cut backs.

The stuff I've heard from people I know that work for AMTRAK, and on the Michigan corridor, it is mind boggling the ineptitude of AMTRAK management. At least in the C&S department, the delays from bad signals, etc are unavoidable and thus persistent problems keep being problems. At least that's what management tells the people in the field. So my statement about delays and malfunctions being "accepted" at Antrak isn't off the mark.