Trains.com

high-speed trains for Wisconsin

5876 views
19 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
high-speed trains for Wisconsin
Posted by zardoz on Friday, July 17, 2009 2:18 PM

MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- Wisconsin has agreed to a $47 million deal with Spanish train manufacturer Talgo for two 14-car passenger trains.

The cars would replace the passenger cars that currently run between Milwaukee and Chicago.

Full story:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/W/WI_DOYLE_PASSENGER_RAIL_WIOL-?SITE=WIKEN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=ap_content_popup.html

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,836 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Friday, July 17, 2009 3:47 PM

will this require another FRA crashworthiness exemption? If so will one be granted?

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Friday, July 17, 2009 4:05 PM

From a railfan perspective, I always thought the Talgo was kind of cool, but . . .

Keep in mind that a 14-car train is the equivalent of a 6 or perhaps 7-car Amfleet train.  The Talgo cars are half length, and the strings of cars in a consist typically have a "service car" at each end.  Some versions of Talgo have revenue seats in the end cars and some do not.

The "built in the State of Wisconsin" has become part of the Kabuki of importing railroad equipment.  The equipment is essentially Spanish patents, Spanish design, Spanish much of everything, but as far as I can tell, "assembling" them in the home country and state of the purchaser gives them politically important domestic content.  I guess that is how Talgo, Bombardier, and others do things to get the contract.

The original idea behind the MWRRI was to engage in a pooled purchase of equipment to cover 8 states, get volume discounts, and get economies of shared maintenance procedures and facilities.

Where and how are these things going to be maintained?  These are semi-permanently coupled consists -- would Amtrak handle these things at Beech Grove?

What kind of propulsion and cab cars are they going to get?  Are they going with Talgo's power cars, or are these things going to get the usual P42 at one end, NPCC at the other?

I guess for that price tag it is safe to assume that this is a custom "FRA Compliant" version of the Talgo.  The Pacific Cascades Talgo got a special waiver from FRA, but they are required to have either a locomotive or a locomotive sized and weighted NPCC at each end of the consist, and I also believe they are required to not have any revenue seating in the "service cars" at the ends of the Talgo string.  Do the new cars operate under similar restrictions?

If Wisconsin is purchasing their own cars and maybe operating their own maintenance bay, do they get any kind of "deal" from Amtrak on how much Wisconsin gets charged by Amtrak to operate the train?

I am guessing this replaces the equipment on the Chi-Mil Hiawatha.  Does this free up equipment for the 2nd Chi-Mpls train that WisARP has been asking for?

Are the Talgos carbon steel?  Aluminum?  How does this shape up against the stainless steel cars that Metra specs on its purchases?

It seems that the Hiawatha train is stuffed to the vestibules on runs serving Chicago-Milwaukee commuters, the rest of the time it is more lightly patronized.  Given this thing functions as a kind of commuter train, perhaps one wants to get as many seats on the thing to serve as many customers as possible at the times they want to ride.  Would trainsets of stainless steel Metra-style gallery cars, or Bombardier-type bi-levels, or California Cars have more seating capacity per platform length and purchase cost? 

Since this is a 1:35 run, it can have somewhat lower seating density than the 150 seats stuffed into a gallery car, but I am thinking that a mere 20 percent increase in seats over what they have now is not enough.  The Chicago and Northwestern had long distance day coach gallery cars for their last refit of the "400's" back in the day.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,843 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Friday, July 17, 2009 7:48 PM
Wisconsin would have been better served had they purchased the split level GO Transit style Bombardier cars, IMO.   They could have bought them used and obtained a much cheaper price.
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,483 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, July 18, 2009 6:56 AM

CMStPnP
Wisconsin would have been better served had they purchased the split level GO Transit style Bombardier cars, IMO.   They could have bought them used and obtained a much cheaper price.

Buying secondhand equipment may be a smarter move financially, but it won't sit very well with the voters, even in Wisconsin.

 

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 455 posts
Posted by aricat on Saturday, July 18, 2009 7:00 AM

I rode the Talgo train between Seattle and Portland in 2005 and was less than impressed. They are a poor choice for the Milwaukee- Chicago service except in off peak times. The Milwaukee airport station generates a lot of traffic especially for Glenview and they have luggage. Some people who live in the Northern suburbs of Chicago fly out of Mitchell instead of O'Hare. You need both something that offers comfort and the high density seating.I do not consider the Milwaukee- Chicago service a commuter run per se. Talgos might work on service to Madison which makes a lot more sense than waiting for high speed rail.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,843 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Saturday, July 18, 2009 10:10 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH
Buying secondhand equipment may be a smarter move financially, but it won't sit very well with the voters, even in Wisconsin.

I might not be a current voter but I'm from Wisconsin and financial prudence with tax money sits well with me.     Seriously, this hurts the larger cause of rail passenger service in this country when Politicians use it for pork.     The equipment was not necessarily choosen for needs but for political reasons.    The Chicago-Milwaukee line was built for high speed has almost no curves on it that would require a talgo.     

 What possible advantage does a talgo trainset bring to this Corridor?     

Here in Texas, Joe Taxpayer can attend the meetings for DART or TRE and give their input on Equipment Purchase......they do listen down here in Dallas.    It's amazing to me that Chicago and Milwaukee combined with far less population........the decision is made entirely by politicians, no citizen input?     Whats up with that?     Whose money are they spending again?

 

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Saturday, July 18, 2009 10:24 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH

Buying secondhand equipment may be a smarter move financially, but it won't sit very well with the voters, even in Wisconsin.

Even people in Wisconsin won't stand for second hand GOT Bombardier cars?  What is that supposed to mean?  That even us rubes North of the Illinois Border will demand factory-new dee-luxe pass-ehn-ger eee-quip-ment, so much so that we will even bother to wipe the cow pasture residue off our shoes before boarding?

I once suggested the (remote) possibility of using Metra equipment so as to not turn people away at peak times of the Hiawatha and new Illinois services (which by the way, have a weekend peak), and one of your Illinois advocacy people snarked at me that I was suggesting the use of freight gondala cars in corridor passenger service.  Some time later at a meeting discussing the WisARP proposal regarding a second Chicago-Minneapolis train, our WISDOT guy suggested "being creative" about equipment, to consider everything, including used Metra equipment to Gardner's private gallery car fleet.  Freight gondolas indeed.

Yeah, as a Madison resident, Wisconsin voter, passenger train advocate, and railfan, I think it is great that Wisconsin is getting a pair of shiny new Talgo train sets, even though I am taking an 8 percent pay cut this year and next to help pay for the things, and the Governer has just spent over 10 percent of the money required to get the Madison-Milwaukee connection on rolling stock, something which does not see me a mile closer to getting a train in my town.

Smarter move financially?  No one is telling me what we are getting for 47 million.  Does this include HEP in the service cars?  Talgo power cars or are the locomotives separate?  The maintenance facility as these things need special handling?

Sitting well with the voters?  There are those who won't be satisfied with anything less than shiny and new, and I see this prediliction for spending money that is not at hand at the level of inlaws, church council members, local, state, Federal, and even multi-national agencies.  That this view is pervasive in the advocacy community does not help the cause.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,843 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Saturday, July 18, 2009 11:26 AM

Paul,

Until I got fed up enough to leave the state I was in Wisconsin until age 27 or so and graduated UW there with a BBA.

I was a member of the group that tried to restore the Cannonball Comutter service between Watertown and Milwaukee and rode the demo runs.     Interesting how things have changed in Wisconsin.    I'm paying $100 this August in Taxes to the State of Wisconsin just because I rented a car in Milwaukee for 5 days (yes, 5 days!!!!).     It's getting so ridiculous in that state with taxes I have cut my annual visits from 2-3 down to 1.    While I'm note exactly a big spender, the net result for Wisconsin residents is a reduction in State taxes I used to pay previous.    2-3 visits versus 1.  For Wisconsin to stay even it would have to double or triple it's user fees.    Overall the Wisconsin Treasury has lost money with it's tax increases just against me.......and I am not even a resident.     I can't imagine what it's like trying to eek out a living in the state anymore (I get paid more in Texas as well for the same job and there is no State Income Tax here).

Back to the subject, I totally agree with you that they could have spent probably $15-20 million on used equipment that was decently refurbished (aka TRE here in Dallas.....and they have a new maintenence facility as well, BTW....it's where they invite the public to attend and give input on their future), used the additional $27 million to upgrade the track or start on the 4 quad crossing signals like they have along Chicago - St. Louis.       It's just sad to see Wisconsin squander money when so many people have worked so long to bring decent Passenger Rail Service to the state.       Every dollar squandered is a lost opportunity just as much as every dollar not spent.
  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Near Burlington, WA
  • 380 posts
Posted by Maglev on Sunday, July 19, 2009 3:05 PM

(The same topic is running in the General Discussion section...)

My first thought was, "Why Talgo trains?"  Last week, I was researching British passenger trains on-line, and saw that the new Virgin electric Talgo Pendolino tilting trains are not very popular.  There are numerous sacrifices for the tilting ability and I just can't see why tilting is needed on the Milwaukee line that had 100-mph steam locomotives seventy-five years ago. 

The Talgo trains seem to be fine for the Cascade corridor.  My one trip was in Business Class, so I cannot comment on Coach comfort.   The seating density is better for longer trips than the 90-minute Milwaukee run.

I commented in the other thread about using two low-power locomotives at each end, but again this technology is perhaps best suited to a different situation: how important is acceleration on a train that only makes two stops en-route?

Transportation Secretary La Hood admitted that Washington State was accidently left out of a recent ferry funding appropriation, even though we have the nation's largest ferry system.  Maybe this is another mistake and the Talgo trains are meant for us also...

"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 459 posts
Posted by jclass on Monday, July 20, 2009 11:50 PM

I drove through Marshall, WI a couple weeks ago on HWY 73.  The Watertown to Madison segment runs through there.  To think what it would take to upgrade the ROW!  Yow!!  A couple of old, light rails and a carpet of grass.  Structures hard by.

I'm a WI taxpayer.  Would it have made any sense to refurbish the current Hiawatha equipment? 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Cambridge, UK
  • 419 posts
Posted by owlsroost on Tuesday, July 21, 2009 2:53 AM

Maglev
My first thought was, "Why Talgo trains?"  Last week, I was researching British passenger trains on-line, and saw that the new Virgin electric Talgo trains are not very popular.  There are numerous sacrifices for the tilting ability and I just can't see why tilting is needed on the Milwaukee line that had 100-mph steam locomotives seventy-five years ago. 

 

The Virgin West Coast 'Pendolino' tilting electric trains are not Talgo trains - they are derived from the Italian Pendolino trains and designed/built by Alstom.

While personally I find the interior a bit cramped (due to the body profile necessary to allow tilt operation within the tight clearances on the UK network) the service is popular/successful - the frequency was recently increased to three 125mph trains per hour in each direction between London and Birmingham/Manchester (110/200 miles from London), and 60% of the fleet is soon to be lengthed to 11 cars per train to keep pace with demand.

But I agree that on a relatively straight, medium-speed route, tilting is a pointless expense.

Tony

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Near Burlington, WA
  • 380 posts
Posted by Maglev on Tuesday, July 21, 2009 1:02 PM

I have corrected my post concerning British trains...  The "problems" I read about were (as "Owlsroost" mentioned) interior space restrcition, as well as poor seat design and importantly track wear due to high speed and extra weight from the tilting mechanisms.  But I have ridden from Carlisle to Glasgow, and understand how the benefits outweigh the costs.

I don't think the Talgo trains suffer from weight problems, and they are great for stations with low platforms.  Many routes in America are crying out for trains like this.  I hope Wisconsin plans to assemble more than just two of these... 

"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:02 PM

 Tilting trains are fine on lines with a lot of curves.  DB introduced the ICE with tilting technology (ICE T) on 30 May 1999. They are on some of the more twisty lines and non-dedicated ICE lines in Germany,  They are comfortable and pretty much the same as regular ICE train sets.

But Chicago - Milwaukee?  Almost straight as an arrow.  Even the current Hiawatha service is pretty decent: 86 miles in 89 minutes with 3 intermediate stops.  It seems like the Pendolino/Talgo idea belongs elsewhere, like the Cascade service.

BTW CMStPnP, I recently rented a car for 4 days at Mitchell Field and paid $37.00.  Sounds like you got stung.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:14 PM

CSSHEGWISCH:  "It's amazing to me that Chicago and Milwaukee combined with far less population...(than DFW).....the decision is made entirely by politicians, no citizen input?"  

 

Actually Chicago and Milwaukee Greater Metro areas combined have over 11 million inhabitants.  Last I checked, Dallas - Fort Worth Metro is about 6.3 million.  Is that texas math or just Texas-sized?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,843 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Thursday, July 23, 2009 7:46 AM

schlimm

BTW CMStPnP, I recently rented a car for 4 days at Mitchell Field and paid $37.00.  Sounds like you got stung.

 

You meant to say "It reads like..." unless your hearing voices in your head. Big Smile   

Taxes are based on the valuation of the car rental itself.    I guess I could have done better in the tax area if I rented a pedi-cab.      I've seen the tiny Sherrifs Cars up there.....Impalas?     If you pour water on them...do they get bigger.     Pretty humorous.

On a serious note, I wouldn't complain if I got some serious return on the taxes I pay when I visit Wisconsin BUT everything is far less.......service wise then in other states I visit. 

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,843 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Thursday, July 23, 2009 7:49 AM

schlimm

Actually Chicago and Milwaukee Greater Metro areas combined have over 11 million inhabitants.  Last I checked, Dallas - Fort Worth Metro is about 6.3 million.  Is that texas math or just Texas-sized?

 

 You mean the last the Census Bureau checked.     I'm sure you didn't check on this personally but instead attemped to add using Wikipedia web pages.     Problem there you are running into some double counting and overlap across the states......part of the Chicago Machine at work.    Still I'll admit that DFW is only 7-8 million currently.    Your estimate of Chicago - Milwaukee is way over though.    I'll still concede that the reverse is true.     Still comparable in size and doesn't answer the question as to why citizen input is obtained here but not up there.     Didn't President Obama vow he wouldn't pick the colors of the cars at GM.     Here we have a Governor doing just that with Railroad Equipment.

 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Thursday, July 23, 2009 10:25 AM

No, I did not just go to Wiki.  I used official Census Bureau 2008 numbers from their website.  Chicago Metro area = 11,118,932. DFW = 6,300,006.  So what numbers do you suggest someone should use for population?  Chamber of Commerce?

I agree of course that citizens should have input in the process, but not just through public hearings where often loud SIG types outshout the rest of the population.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,843 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Thursday, July 23, 2009 7:21 PM

I'm standing by the 7-8 million figure for DFW Metroplex today.   I'm very confident in that number and my ability to read carefully. Big Smile

Pubilc discussions should not be about who speaks the loudest.    I noticed in the Town Halls with F. James Sensenbrenner that some people raised their voices at times.     Folks will listen to you and Politicians will as well if you can make a persuasive case.     So you shouldn't let loud speaking people intimidate you from speaking out.     Even without attending a town hall, you can write a Guest Editorial for the Milwaukee Journal........I've done it a few times.      The OpEd folks love reader participation.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Friday, July 24, 2009 2:18 PM

Good point on hearings.  I know there were hearings in Illinois on the route for a revived Blackhawk.  The little town of Genoa packed it and made a lot of claims that don't hold up to the light of analysis.

Not to belabor the population point, but what is your source for claiming such a disparity (over 1 mil.!!) between the census 2008 and you number?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy