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.