Comments on recent trip to Chicago: RI vs. HC

A little while back I was attempting to do some comparisons between the Heritage and Rock Island corridors as the preferred alignment for high speed service beyond Joliet to St. Louis. Here are my observations:

The inner seven miles of the Heritage Corridor can be speeded up. The movable bridge and several crossings would probably not be more than 30 mph, but they are far enough apart that a train could speed up to 40 or 50 instead of just poking along like they do now. It was particularly annoying to crawl over straight, beautiful track through the little used Amtrak yard.

The RI has almost as many diamonds as the HC. Without knowing the traffic at each one I have no way of determining whether RI or HC is the path of least resistance in that regard.

The overall potential track speed of the RI is greater. But factoring in the additional distance to Joliet, it may not be enough to warrant rerouting intercity trains. I can't imagine how Joliet would have to be reconfigured to service trains on the southeast quadrant of the interlocking.

Even though the RI line is probably unsuitable for intercity trains, it is potentially the fastest of all the Metra lines. With some revisions where the suburban brach diverges and then rejoins the main tracks, they can conceivably run from Chicago to Joliet at 79 mph with NO intermediate restrictions!

One final question on the Rock Island: Why do the tracks in South Chicago presently wiggle around the right of way for no apparent reason and why does Metra appear to be building a brand new right of way immediately east of it?

Nyterider wrote:The RI has almost as many diamonds as the HC. Without knowing the traffic at each one I have no way of determining whether RI or HC is the path of least resistance in that regard

RI crosses four railroads at grade, however two of the crossings are controlled from towers staffed by Metra personnel, including the busy diamonds in Joliet, and with Metra traffic having priority, delays due to cross traffic occur rarely. HC has a slightly shorter route to Joliet, but the in-city portion of the line is slower, particularly due to a manual crossing that requires all trains to come to a complete stop first before continuing (assuming there's no cross traffic, of course). I know, it's hard to believe a 19th-century practice like this remains alive and well in 2006, but if this crossing is ever modernized to remote standards, the upgrade could boost its potential as a high-speed rail corridor, especially since Amtrak trains already use it...

Nyterider wrote:One final question on the Rock Island: Why do the tracks in South Chicago presently wiggle around the right of way for no apparent reason and why does Metra appear to be building a brand new right of way immediately east of it?

That is part of Metra's bridge renewal/mainline relocation project along a five-mile segment of the ROW south of the LaSalle St. terminal, that includes the upgrade of all of the bridges and viaducts in this area, and this work is being done in tandem with Metra's construction of an additional main track to the east as you noticed. Metra traffic will eventually be shifted there once the work is done, although it's dragged on for several years now, and no firm completion date has been set...

doepack wrote:

Nyterider wrote:One final question on the Rock Island: Why do the tracks in South Chicago presently wiggle around the right of way for no apparent reason and why does Metra appear to be building a brand new right of way immediately east of it?

That is part of Metra's bridge renewal/mainline relocation project along a five-mile segment of the ROW south of the LaSalle St. terminal, that includes the upgrade of all of the bridges and viaducts in this area, and this work is being done in tandem with Metra's construction of an additional main track to the east as you noticed. Metra traffic will eventually be shifted there once the work is done, although it's dragged on for several years now, and no firm completion date has been set...

Worth noting: Originally there was no "wiggle", even with this project underway. A monkey wrench was thrown into the works in the form of the Sept. 2005 derailment at 43rd Street. It left a big mess of the old bridge there, so Metra shifted the mains over to the new bridge at that location. Unfortunately, the curvature required is only good for some stupidly slow speed like 25mph. At this point it's pretty clear that this situation is not going to be rectified until the whole project is done and the mains are moved over to the new bridges for the entire length ofthe project limits.

EricL wrote:Worth noting: Originally there was no "wiggle", even with this project underway. A monkey wrench was thrown into the works in the form of the Sept. 2005 derailment at 43rd Street. It left a big mess of the old bridge there, so Metra shifted the mains over to the new bridge at that location. Unfortunately, the curvature required is only good for some stupidly slow speed like 25mph.

Yes, but that isn't the only part. Several miles of main tracks have inexplicable reverse curves in them. Mostly without speed restrictions. Looking through the rear window it's obvious the tracks were once tangent throughout this area.

BTW: Will we ever have a flyover at Brighton Park on the HC?

Tadman wrote:I wouldn't hold your breath on a Brighton flyover - usually that type of thing gets talked about for ten years before it's done, and I never heard any talk of a flyover. Heck I haven't even heard talk of interlocking that Fred Flintstone junction

Actually, a flyover has been proposed for this crossing via the CREATE program, a joint partnership developed a few years ago between IDOT, Metra, and the six class one railroads, designed to improve the flow of rail traffic within the Chicago area, which includes eliminating precisely these kinds of traffic headaches. However, CN's recent decision to back out of CREATE, coupled with the fact that funding for these and other similar projects are currently stalled in Congress will ensure that various folks from Barney Rubble to Mr. Slate will continue to man that little shack at the Fred Flinstone junction for some years to come!

Tadman wrote:It should also be noted that if I were to nominate a Metra line for electrification, it would be the RI line, at least to LaSalle-BI over the suburban branch. That's one of the most densely trafficked and station-infested routes out there. However, the whole RI line could use the juice, and that would be conducive to high-speed passenger operations. The real stopping point, however, is that fact that Metra would almost surely use 1500v DC, which is great for sub-100mph, but unheard of at Acela-like speeds.

Another potential Metra candidate for at least partial electrification would be the UP/N line, especially with nine stations in a six-mile stretch between Evanston and Glencoe. With no illusions about this route being a hi-speed rail corridor, it shouldn't take that much to string up some catenary between OTC and say, Winnetka, and run electrified local service between those two stations, with the diesels handling everything else. Whenever Metra finds more money to replace all of the older MUs on the MED, you could hypothetically tack on about an extra 10 or 12 cars to the order for use on the new UP/N locals. From an operational perspective, off-peak trains would be the greatest beneficiaries, not to mention speeded up diesel service above Winnetka. Of course, such a plan would likely mean the re-installation of the old third main, which would be yet another lesson in a railroad ripping up capacity, only to regret it later...