MidlandMike I thought the MSP train was just going to be an extension of an existing CHI-MILW train, which would mean no new frequency south of MILW.
I thought the MSP train was just going to be an extension of an existing CHI-MILW train, which would mean no new frequency south of MILW.
Who knows what is going on there or if the WisARP information is even correct.
MidlandMikeI thought the MSP train was just going to be an extension of an existing CHI-MILW train, which would mean no new frequency south of MILW.
wjstixCurrent best guess is work could start late this year, service beginning in 2024 using current Amtrak equipment to start.
So I read what is going on here from WisARP website is that CP will not agree to an 8th Amtrak Freequency on Chicago to Milwaukee Corridor until improvements are made that they requested. One of the delays there is CP has not started yet on the Capitol improvements for Chicago to Milwaukee, though I believe they have been scheduled from other sources I read. So if they start the service in 2023 they will terminate / originate the train in Milwaukee (not sure how maintenence will work out there) and do a cross platform transfer to an existing Chicago to Milwaukee frequency. This approach means a different schedule from what they intended for Milwaukee to Twin Cities.........which they would flip back once the additional or 8th Chicago to Milwaukee frequency is approved by CP in 2024 (projected).
I hope that is not true because it reads as a little bit clugey to me but that is the just of what the WisARP website states. They said equipment might be an issue as well but have my doubts there as they have Siemens cars available and being delivered for the Midwest HSR Compact. WisARP speculates they will also need a Cafe Car and might borrow from Amfleet for that or use a full Amfleet trainset since no Cafe Cars have been delivered by Siemens yet. I don't think they have any Cab Cars delivered either from the Wisconsin specific order to upgrade the Hiawatha service. They wanted to add more seats to the Hiawatha service and drop the Locomotive or Locomotive shell business on one end of the train to save on fuel costs. Once those cab cars arrive from Siemens the above rail costs of each Hiawatha run should drop a bit.
CMStPnPOvernight train to Duluth from St. Paul, in which case not many people would care about running time as they would be sleeping.
I don't think an overnight train with sleepers would be very popular. Train from Duluth to St.Paul would only take maybe 3-4 hours depending on how many stops there are. Could leave 5 PM and arrive around 8-something that evening. You wouldn't really be looking at "day trippers" going Duluth-Twin Cities in the morning and going home that same night. More like people coming down Friday evening, going to a Twins game Saturday, and going home Sunday. Conversely there are hotels, museums, etc. near the depot in Duluth that could be a draw for Twin City folks looking to spend a weekend there.
Re 2nd train Twin Cities - Chicago, the Great River Rail Commission has signed an agreement with Amtrak allowing Amtrak to advertise the service as "Great River" service (similar to Chicago - Milwaukee "Hiawatha Service"). MN Gov. Walz has put funding in his budget proposal for the train, it's currently still being worked on by the Legislature. Current best guess is work could start late this year, service beginning in 2024 using current Amtrak equipment to start.
https://www.greatriverrail.org/
My recollection on CNW suburban services was that dieselization was made primarily with boiler-eqipped GP-7s in the mid 50s. Later in the 60s, freight F units were regeared (and repainted) for the scoots. Later still, surplus E units, along with some acquired from roads like KCS, were used after HEP was installed. I lived along the Galena division which had only one intercity train. It ran with one E-7 to the end.
CSSHEGEWISCH"The 400 Story" by Jim Scribbins includes pictures of one of the bi-level 400's with an F7A/E8A lash-up leading.
No clue why you posted this without a date concerning the picture. I don't think an argument was ever made that C&NW did not have F7's in passenger service.
"The 400 Story" by Jim Scribbins includes pictures of one of the bi-level 400's with an F7A/E8A lash-up leading.
CSSHEGEWISCHI believe that C&NW F units that were rebuilt for primarily suburban service were fitted with HEP and 57:20 gearing. They also worked the "Peninsula 400" and "Flambeau 400" when those trains were re-equipped in 1958.
Thats probably right too...
I was going to add that I was told earlier that this high speed run didn't happen in the mid to late 1960s but much earlier. I thought that was said in the thread somewhere. I never saw a picture of a C&NW train leaving Lakefront station or headed too Lakefront Station with anything less than an E unit in that timeframe before 1958. Not saying they did not exist or were not used then but never saw them in pictures.
Additionally, C&NW had purchased E units from UP but no idea as to when that happened or why. And as I stated before C&NW was very frugal with it's money and discontinued the Twin Cities 400 I thought in the early 1960's (stated in link below). They sold the Lakefront Station to Milwaukee County and some of the surroundling land shortly after WWII, they had to know passenger trains were a goner in the late 1950's at least. See if you can find any F units in the Trains Magazine publication below, there is one picture I am not sure about and my eyes are not very good right now.
https://hwtn.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Eastside-July-24.pdf
Also note the 4 track right of way it shows leading down or up the bluffs from lakefront station in some pictures where tracks 3 & 4 had not yet been removed. And how the buildings on the bluff are above grade and out of line of sight of the ROW.
charlie hebdo Just to clarify. The original post concerned F units placed in passenger service by the CNW, not E units. F units had various gearings for a potential top speed of 65–102 mph, not 115+ mph.
Just to clarify. The original post concerned F units placed in passenger service by the CNW, not E units. F units had various gearings for a potential top speed of 65–102 mph, not 115+ mph.
And the conversation went on from there. That is how online forums work. Someone asked if diesel locomotives were even able to go that fast. They were, and low and behold, the C&NW owned 11 of them. It is very possible for someone to confuse and E and F unit, even more so when talking 50 or so years ago. If you watch the YouTube clip linked by OWTX, the E unit that is leading the train appears to be the 5025, which was geared for 117mph.
But thanks for the trip to the previous page of this thread.
An "expensive model collector"
I believe that C&NW F units that were rebuilt for primarily suburban service were fitted with HEP and 57:20 gearing. They also worked the "Peninsula 400" and "Flambeau 400" when those trains were re-equipped in 1958.
CMStPnP n012944 The C&NW had several E units geared to 117mph. I only found speculation to that effect that C&NW units could go that fast and for good measure, UP, CB&Q and just about everyones favorite railroad. I would have to see real hard evidence that most railroads ordered that configuration. C&NW was unually frugal, so I am still doubting it unless I see it from an official source.
n012944 The C&NW had several E units geared to 117mph.
I only found speculation to that effect that C&NW units could go that fast and for good measure, UP, CB&Q and just about everyones favorite railroad. I would have to see real hard evidence that most railroads ordered that configuration. C&NW was unually frugal, so I am still doubting it unless I see it from an official source.
You're a big boy, Google it. (hint, you are looking for the 25 E8's that had a 52:25 gear ratio).
A big thing that is missing from your logic is just because a locomotive is capable of a certain speed, doesn't mean that it went that fast in regular service. I own a car that has a top speed of 190 mph, and believe it or not, I don't drive it that fast back and forth to work.
CMStPnPI would have to see real hard evidence that most railroads ordered that configuration.
While I don't think the ICC/FRA criterion for testing a design at 10% over its anticipated maximum service speed would apply to the F units in question, having a suitable 'cushion' before birdsnesting risk speed would seem to me to be prudent.
n012944The C&NW had several E units geared to 117mph.
There is a guy I found via Google that states the GP-38-2 holds the records as the fastest Diesel produced because it pulled the San Francisco Zephyr at speeds of up to 250 mph under Amtrak. Hence I kind of shy away from railfan assertions of who bought what for what reason.
Possible C&NW bought units like that for pool service with UP and SP maybe even for the Adams Subdivision. However, I think the record set by the 400 for speed was with a steam not a diesel unit and it was just over 100 mph.....though I am not sure about that and it was only the highest recorded speed I could find on the Internet for C&NW trains.
OWTXWere there flat mainline tangents where high steppin' E units could make up time? Of course. But per the speed survey, they were notable by their rarity in scheduled service.
Motor gearing expressed in "mph" is something of a misnomer; it no more implies the units will actually run 117mph than having a speedometer reading to 120mph implies that the vehicle can safely go that fast (as was alleged in the Firestone 721 fiasco). It translates the combination of gear ratio, traction-motor maximum rpm, and wheel size into a sort of Vne for a locomotive engineer. (It is also something of a nifty marketing point when talking to railroad procurement people and their superiors... as would be seen somewhat dramatically in the case of the N&W TE-1 and how it was presented by BLH as a "65mph" locomotive...)
To this day there are probably docents telling the story of the 156mph GG1.
CNW ordered their E8s with 117MPH gearing, but any claim this ROW was capable of 100mph+ operation is ludicrous:
https://youtu.be/yLG1y_S5KAc
Railfans love sketchy historical speed claims, but they require setting aside most logic, and assuming things like historical railroad managment didn't have any grasp of mow, mechanical and fuel costs.
Were there flat mainline tangents where high steppin' E units could make up time? Of course. But per the speed survey, they were notable by their rarity in scheduled service.
The C&NW had several E units geared to 117mph.
AjsikI'm 63, and if it happens in my lifetime, I'll buy you your beverage of choice and all the refills you can consume in a single sitting. You're talking about ripping out a heavily used recreational trail to re-lay track through areas which include parkland, high-rise condos overlooking Lake Michigan, and a few upscale suburbs. I've heard no local speculation of any such plans, and I'm confident that if any surface, the lawyers will keep things tied up until well after I'm gone.
Huh and DART is built on mostly abandoned railroad rights of ways. Can't remember any lawyers being involved in that. It goes through parkland as well as some nice areas as well.
Tearing out the bike path is not necessarily a must do since most of the way to Shorewood it is a former four track right of way. The right of way is below the condos and out of line of their line of sight. Chances are the bluff blocks the sound of the trains. Not useable parkland for the grade climbing part beyond the bike path. Most of the residential development on the bluff was in place while the railroad was in operation, there have been soms replacements and upgrades since but none that I see lower the land grading of the privately owned lot down to the level of the right of way. So I don't see much of this as a huge obstacle. What upscale suburb would it be a problem for and why? I thought there was only one grade crossing where the line had a street cross it, otherwise it was either above or below grade. In the above grade areas its mostly industrial.
Also, not a lot of people know this but I read somewhere that C&NW sold the station and most of the land that it was on to Milwaukee County shortly after World War II. C&NW continued to operate the station and passenger trains to it under County ownership for 20 years........that is why it was in such bad repair in the late 1960's and had to be torn down. Milwaukee County did not maintain it very well.
CMStPnP I think they will eventually rebuild the C&NW exit from the lakefront either in part or in entirety as long as the roadbed is never obstructed I am pretty sure it will happen at some point.
I think they will eventually rebuild the C&NW exit from the lakefront either in part or in entirety as long as the roadbed is never obstructed I am pretty sure it will happen at some point.
I'm 63, and if it happens in my lifetime, I'll buy you your beverage of choice and all the refills you can consume in a single sitting. You're talking about ripping out a heavily used recreational trail to re-lay track through areas which include parkland, high-rise condos overlooking Lake Michigan, and a few upscale suburbs.
I've heard no local speculation of any such plans, and I'm confident that if any surface, the lawyers will keep things tied up until well after I'm gone.
Look how Menomonee/ Milwaukee Rivers' confluence area is evolving. Highrise Housing/work/entertainment with the lakeshore station and its routes eminating right from it. There even used to be a connecting hypotenuse line splitting off due north towards Sheboygan. Such is life.
Gramp Look how Menomonee/ Milwaukee Rivers' confluence area is evolving. Highrise Housing/work/entertainment with the lakeshore station and its routes eminatiing right from it. There even used to be a connecting hypotenuse line splitting off due north towards Sheboygan. Such is life.
Look how Menomonee/ Milwaukee Rivers' confluence area is evolving. Highrise Housing/work/entertainment with the lakeshore station and its routes eminatiing right from it. There even used to be a connecting hypotenuse line splitting off due north towards Sheboygan. Such is life.
Mayor of Milwaukee back in 1970 or 1971 wanted to take over the Milwaukee Road Cannonball Service to the Western Suburbs as well as fund a regional system for the former C&NW lines. He wanted to restore some of the trolley routes as well.
Look how many years of arguing it took before Milwaukee was finally able to get a street trolley in place. I think they will eventually rebuild the C&NW exit from the lakefront either in part or in entirety as long as the roadbed is never obstructed I am pretty sure it will happen at some point. City of Milwaukee purchased the land where the former C&NW to Milwaukee crossover to access the Amtrak Depot was. Track maybe gone but Milwaukee owns the land and is keeping an eye on any further abandonment there. So they have a plan to use the C&NW Milwaukee to Chicago lines at some point in the future or they never would have bought that land.
BEAUSABRE As long as someine else pays for it
As long as someine else pays for it
I would have no problem with that philosophy if those that espouse it would not use anything that the community pays for BUT I have to tell you as a current HOA President, those that refuse to pay generally also have no issues using what the community pays for. Can't have it both ways I am afraid.
BEAUSABREAs long as someone else pays for it.
Municipalities love the prospect of free access to trains... as long as they don't have to contribute anything but permission and promotional press opportunities. Of course, as soon as local voters object to the train, as in the communities on the north end of the Adirondack... that support isn't there.
Meanwhile most local politicians look more at how the train service discommodes all their constituents who don't love trains or utilize the service. (See the various objections to the Jersey side of Gateway that have now made it essentially two more North River tunnel tracks, just not as direct). Repeat this in spades for state politicians whose constituency is even more diluted or further away from the service area. And the cherry on top is all the opportunities in the opportunity cost of the rail service...
Gramphe Milwaukee Northwestern lakeshore route was lost.
I would not say it was lost the roadbed is still there as a bike path. They might use it again for light rail.........we'll see. Milwaukee always wanted an express service from UWM to downtown. They have the City Bus but not exactly express. However the former C&NW roadbed would fit that scenario nicely.
I was told the C&NW station in Oshkosh was torn down by cousins that live up there. Nice to hear it is still around.
CMStPnP Yes I remember the old Northwestern Oshkosh station before it was torn down. I think the Soo Line station is still there because it was built of stone or cement. Green Bay still has the Northwestern station but it's a restaurant now. Both large train stations were torn down in Milwaukee for freeways. Northwestern station in Milwaukee they planned to emulate Chicagos Lake Shore Drive but with a Freeway instead............farthest they got was the Hoan Bridge over Jones Island. Happily as a Lakefront freeway would have been an eyesore and very expensive to maintain.
Yes I remember the old Northwestern Oshkosh station before it was torn down. I think the Soo Line station is still there because it was built of stone or cement. Green Bay still has the Northwestern station but it's a restaurant now. Both large train stations were torn down in Milwaukee for freeways. Northwestern station in Milwaukee they planned to emulate Chicagos Lake Shore Drive but with a Freeway instead............farthest they got was the Hoan Bridge over Jones Island. Happily as a Lakefront freeway would have been an eyesore and very expensive to maintain.
Actually the Northwestern station and freight house buildings still exist. Were converted into office space. The original Soo Line station was downtown on a curve. It was replaced by the stone block station built on the south side of town.
My dad lived on ninth st (now ave.) as a kid. He said he would hitchhike on the Milwaukee Rd steam switcher to downtown and back often during the summer.
Always thought it too bad the Milwaukee Northwestern lakeshore route was lost. Such a swift, direct way northwest and north. So much lack of vision when it comes to transportation routes.
GrampMy grandmother lived three blocks from the Oshkosh Northwestern station. When we visited her in the late 50's through sixties, we'd always spend time at the station. I remember those Mars lights. Always liked the sidewalk automatic gates. Always will remember the trip there when the station platform roofing was torn down. So many poignant impressions.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.