Railroad Forums 

Discussion related to commuter rail and rapid transit operations in the Chicago area including the South Shore Line, Metra Rail, and Chicago Transit Authority.

Moderators: metraRI, JamesT4

 #623687  by Tadman
 
What are the biggest bottlenecks on the South Shore? In other words, what projects would take off significant running time or add capacity? I'm making a list off the top of my head but I'd like to hear any discussion we have or input. I don't know to what extent management has some of these projects on the radar, I'm just thinking out loud.

Michigan City Street Running
South Bend's quasi-street running to the airport
Kensington Interlocker (replaced by a flyover?)
State Line Curve (too tight - maybe buy some of the nearby houses and straighten it out?)
Gary high-platforms (and req'd gauntlet track for freight movement)

edit: two more little places that come to mind are he mandatory stops at the former NKP at Shops and the unsignaled road at SB Airport. It wouldn't surprise me if it cost $50 each time a train stops there in current draw to start a train up again. I have no evidence to support that figure, just a educated guess.
 #623699  by byte
 
I think the biggest one would be Metra's caps on train entries/exits onto the MED.
 #623741  by jb9152
 
Tadman wrote:What are the biggest bottlenecks on the South Shore? In other words, what projects would take off significant running time or add capacity? I'm making a list off the top of my head but I'd like to hear any discussion we have or input. I don't know to what extent management has some of these projects on the radar, I'm just thinking out loud.

Michigan City Street Running
South Bend's quasi-street running to the airport
Kensington Interlocker (replaced by a flyover?)
State Line Curve (too tight - maybe buy some of the nearby houses and straighten it out?)
Gary high-platforms (and req'd gauntlet track for freight movement)

edit: two more little places that come to mind are he mandatory stops at the former NKP at Shops and the unsignaled road at SB Airport. It wouldn't surprise me if it cost $50 each time a train stops there in current draw to start a train up again. I have no evidence to support that figure, just a educated guess.
Add to the list the single-track connection, with hand-throw switches, at Randolph Street; plus the long stretches of single track east of CP 58.1 (Emerson).

The biggest (and the ones that would offer the most bang for the buck) are Kensington Interlocking, elimination of the street running in Michigan City, and the South Bend Airport re-route.
 #623745  by dinwitty
 
SB went thru the process of trying to get a quicker way into the airport and pretty much shot down by the locals. Why the existing route was made. It was prolly the least problematic.

In Ft Wayne when the NKP was a problem for traffic at grade level, the NKP got elevated.

MC may not want an elevated South Shore, but thats another idea, keeps it downtown...

I'd rather see SS keep a strong downtown connection, why I still think the NKP route is best and share the Amtrak depot.

Upgrade the trackwork for even higher speed running.
Whats max anywhere on the line? North Shore would hit 80mph standard in their schedules.
 #623813  by jb9152
 
dinwitty wrote:SB went thru the process of trying to get a quicker way into the airport and pretty much shot down by the locals. Why the existing route was made. It was prolly the least problematic.

In Ft Wayne when the NKP was a problem for traffic at grade level, the NKP got elevated.

MC may not want an elevated South Shore, but thats another idea, keeps it downtown...

I'd rather see SS keep a strong downtown connection, why I still think the NKP route is best and share the Amtrak depot.

Upgrade the trackwork for even higher speed running.
Whats max anywhere on the line? North Shore would hit 80mph standard in their schedules.
There is already a plan in place for the SB Airport re-route - it's going to get done in the near future.

Currently, the plan for getting out of the street running in MC is to keep the railroad downtown, in the 11th Street corridor. No plans for an elevated.

The MAS on the South Shore is currently 79 MPH, which is as high as it's going to go without cab signals (Federal regulation sets that).
 #623903  by Tadman
 
Does the South Bend reroute involve a totally new ROW or is it just a revision of the current route? I've always thought the current route could be significantly improved by fencing it in, closing some grade crossings, and rebuilding some of the curves at the South end to be much less severe. However there is no sense throwing good money after bad if the line is truly a non-starter. Also does a general timetable for this work exist yet?
 #623966  by buddah
 
Tadman wrote:Does the South Bend reroute involve a totally new ROW or is it just a revision of the current route? I've always thought the current route could be significantly improved by fencing it in, closing some grade crossings, and rebuilding some of the curves at the South end to be much less severe. However there is no sense throwing good money after bad if the line is truly a non-starter. Also does a general timetable for this work exist yet?

Good question Tadman... I remember a while back (90s) when there was a purposal to run a different ROW to get to the Southbend aiport.. anyone want to Google map? I'll point out the route ROW that was on the drawing table.

1) In South Bend NICTD to follow current track (ROW) up until where NICTD ROW meets with Hwy US 31 ( closest intersection Ardmore trail & Orange rd.)
2) New ROW will curve and branch off north heading under US 31, then run parallel to to US 31. on east side of hwy.
3) ROW would travel over Edison rd.
4) before reaching intersection of US31 and 20 (aka Lincoln way W.) ROW will curve right and run beside quarry and private rd.
5) after passing quarry ROW will cross at grade level over 20 (Lincoln way W.) and curve to follow 20.
6) ROW will follow Lincoln way W (on the north side) which parallels the Soutbend airport fencing, and into the airport terminal.

Im figuring a new station would need to be built as the train would have terminated on the opposite end of the station. It was a interesting idea as it only need two grade crossings, Ardmore trail and Lincoln way W.
 #624145  by dinwitty
 
jb9152 wrote:
dinwitty wrote:SB went thru the process of trying to get a quicker way into the airport and pretty much shot down by the locals. Why the existing route was made. It was prolly the least problematic.

In Ft Wayne when the NKP was a problem for traffic at grade level, the NKP got elevated.

MC may not want an elevated South Shore, but thats another idea, keeps it downtown...

I'd rather see SS keep a strong downtown connection, why I still think the NKP route is best and share the Amtrak depot.

Upgrade the trackwork for even higher speed running.
Whats max anywhere on the line? North Shore would hit 80mph standard in their schedules.
There is already a plan in place for the SB Airport re-route - it's going to get done in the near future.

Currently, the plan for getting out of the street running in MC is to keep the railroad downtown, in the 11th Street corridor. No plans for an elevated.

The MAS on the South Shore is currently 79 MPH, which is as high as it's going to go without cab signals (Federal regulation sets that).
ok, well, the SB and MC relocations may save some time, but getting running speed up is a full line benefit and not one specific locale relocation would dramatically shorten time.

Perhaps looking at locations where other slowdowns occur, some minor mainline adjustments might improve speed. Its always been my assumed a SB to Chicago run takes 2 hours with stops.
I recall like the North Shore Express trains would not make certain stops. I think the SS has eliminated a number of stops, which may speed up times, some trians that may avoid a stop would obviously reduce the run time.
But you would still have regular trains to service the stops, or staggered express trains that pick stops for one train, the other train picks the other stops. Passengers may wonder why this train is flinging past the station not stopping, well, the secondary express may be a few minutes behind.
Not doing a stop may cut 5-10 minutes off a schedule. Doing expresses takes some passenger loading studies and finding balances in operations, trying to recall if Express ride tickets are higher priced on other lines like the North Shore was. The Electroliner was certainly that, and get your burger too.
 #624191  by jb9152
 
dinwitty wrote:ok, well, the SB and MC relocations may save some time, but getting running speed up is a full line benefit and not one specific locale relocation would dramatically shorten time.
Well, the point to point running speed is dependent on geometry. Both of those relocations would enhance the geometry of the alignment (i.e. straighten it out some), and so would offer pretty significant run time savings. In addition, the SB relocation, just by its nature would cut off miles of slow speed running by approaching the airport directly from the west instead of doing the "round the world" approach it takes now to come in from the east. So I don't agree that localized improvements would not "dramatically shorten time".
dinwitty wrote:Perhaps looking at locations where other slowdowns occur, some minor mainline adjustments might improve speed. Its always been my assumed a SB to Chicago run takes 2 hours with stops.
Takes a little longer than that. Certainly a few improvements to turnout speeds might help a little , but what specific adjustments are you talking about?
dinwitty wrote:I recall like the North Shore Express trains would not make certain stops. I think the SS has eliminated a number of stops, which may speed up times, some trians that may avoid a stop would obviously reduce the run time.
But you would still have regular trains to service the stops, or staggered express trains that pick stops for one train, the other train picks the other stops. Passengers may wonder why this train is flinging past the station not stopping, well, the secondary express may be a few minutes behind.
There are several different types of accelerated services we are looking into, but with a substantially single-track line you're severely constrained on true "express" running. There is currently one AM peak express train, Train 106, and one semi-express, Train 108, but the rest are virtually locals. Without the ability to overtake and pass, you have a serialized operation that forces you to keep trains spaced in such a way that they *don't* overtake one another.

One form of accelerated service that could work on our single track line is a skip stop pattern, where some stations are served by one train, and some by the next, alternatively. That would be a radical departure from what we're currently doing (and have done for some time), but it could work to balance loads along the line during peak operations.
dinwitty wrote:Not doing a stop may cut 5-10 minutes off a schedule.
Sorry, but that's wildly optimistic. About the most you can save is 3 minutes, max - a minute for the time lost decelerating from track speed, a minute of dwell time, and a minute to accelerate back to track speed (very roughly). In order to save 5 to 10 minutes off run time by taking off a single stop, you'd have to have a track speed in the 200 to 300 MPH range, where the deceleration and acceleration would lose you significantly more time than blasting through. Even then, I don't think you'd save 5 to 10 minutes.
dinwitty wrote:Doing expresses takes some passenger loading studies and finding balances in operations, trying to recall if Express ride tickets are higher priced on other lines like the North Shore was. The Electroliner was certainly that, and get your burger too.
No, there is no differential in express versus local train fares. The difference is peak versus off peak, but there is no additional charge to ride Trains 106 or 108.
 #624258  by doepack
 
jb9152 wrote:One form of accelerated service that could work on our single track line is a skip stop pattern, where some stations are served by one train, and some by the next, alternatively. That would be a radical departure from what we're currently doing (and have done for some time), but it could work to balance loads along the line during peak operations
I think the skip-stop pattern would work best with AM rush westbounds 106 & 108, especially since 108 leaves MC nine minutes later. It probably isn't going to make a significant difference in the running times for either train, but passenger load balancing could likely be achieved if they were to alternate stops between MC & Hegewisch. Just a thought...
 #624274  by jb9152
 
doepack wrote:I think the skip-stop pattern would work best with AM rush westbounds 106 & 108, especially since 108 leaves MC nine minutes later. It probably isn't going to make a significant difference in the running times for either train, but passenger load balancing could likely be achieved if they were to alternate stops between MC & Hegewisch. Just a thought...
I agree, especially if we were to insert a new express between 104 and 106 - there's a nice juicy slot right there on the Metra Electric that would get us into Randolph Street at about 7 AM.
 #624658  by dinwitty
 
Takes a little longer than that. Certainly a few improvements to turnout speeds might help a little , but what specific adjustments are you talking about?

curve easements, banking, widening curves,

yes, because of the single track, North Shore was virtually doubletrack the whole way.
Now see who survived ...(duh!)

Pretty good accelleration/decelleration to only knock off 3 minutes per stop. We're not talking long trains of 100 cars, all cars with brakes and power 8-D

The new cars and adding a train may help crowding on the train, and might speed schedules...a tad (MAN!!)
 #624681  by jb9152
 
dinwitty wrote:curve easements, banking, widening curves,
Agreed. Unfortunately, we have more pressing "state of good repair" needs to fund first (the wire between Gary and South Bend Airport is decades old, and is one of the weakest links in the system), plus the federal PTC mandate for 2015 (not that far away, when you think about all of the things that have to happen to make that a reality by that year). curve easements and curve widening would likely require some hefty investment in real estate.

Superelevating curves would certainly help, and we're going to be doing that in a few locations.
dinwitty wrote:yes, because of the single track, North Shore was virtually doubletrack the whole way.
Now see who survived ...(duh!)
I think it was probably more the robustness of the South Shore's freight business that was the real reason that it survived long enough for the passenger service to be taken over by a public entity. But double track sure does allow much more flexibility in operations in general. It would certainly allow us to run express service.
dinwitty wrote:Pretty good accelleration/decelleration to only knock off 3 minutes per stop. We're not talking long trains of 100 cars, all cars with brakes and power 8-D
Ummm...you wrote that "not doing a stop may cut 5-10 minutes off a schedule". 3 minutes, while ballpark, is a pretty good rough guesstimate, based on maximum track speed and what I know about the performance of our cars. So, I guess I don't know exactly what you're saying here - are you actually saying that by eliminating a single station stop, we'd save 7.5 minutes on average? I certainly don't agree with that, if that's what you're saying.
dinwitty wrote:The new cars and adding a train may help crowding on the train, and might speed schedules...a tad (MAN!!)
The new cars do certainly have higher acceleration and braking performance, but remember there are only 14 of them, and they are not interchangeable with our current fleet. So, they might speed a schedule or two for the trains on which they operate, but I'd be hesitant to take time out of the schedules at this point because while we're going to do everything we can to keep the new cars on certain trains, there's no guarantee and I wouldn't want to be stuck with the lower performance of the current cars - we'd be late right out of the box.
 #624735  by Tadman
 
JB, your comments about the freight support are supported by observations I've made. It's my impression that CA&E had almost no freight. A group tried to save 10 miles of their track to operate a diesel freight line and the venture never even got off the ground. CNS&M had some minor bridge traffic along with the Weber Industrial Park, but C&NW took over Weber industrial traffic. I had some customers there about three years back, and there's a couple tracks overgrown with weeds but obviously no modern rail service to the area by UP. CSS had both decent freight traffic and a parent company that was in the top five most well-off railroads during the 1970's, when most roads were really fearing the reaper...