https://chicago.suntimes.com/2023/7/6/23785853/metra-service-chicago-rockford-begin-2027-passenger-trains?fbclid=IwAR1ySCz0Guucg2IQcwvXS9yHCOikhL_u8V0yLJPDq_yxyTKXoDkYTzdq5vc
Presumably this would start as two extended turns of equipment servicing the regular stops on the West line. The issue we've discussed regarding this service is that some kind of limited-stop service would be needed to make the Rockford-Chicago through service "competitive"...
Can someone like Dan Peltier explain how the situation in Elgin is to be arranged?
OvermodCan someone like Dan Peltier explain how the situation in Elgin is to be arranged?
Why aren't you using screen names? You know that posting someones real name in a forum like this also throws it out to Google Search?
CMStPnP Why aren't you using screen names? You know that posting someones real name in a forum like this also throws it out to Google Search?
I am sure he meant the baseball player ..
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/peltida01.shtml
Saw the news coming back home from work late this afternoon. Was somewhat surprised that it was Metra who was the successful bidder and not Amtrak. Had it been the latter, I would have at least held out a little bit of hope of eventually getting things extended to Dubuque or out to Waterloo on CN but we all know how anti-passenger rail CN tends to be.
Overmod Presumably this would start as two extended turns of equipment servicing the regular stops on the West line. The issue we've discussed regarding this service is that some kind of limited-stop service would be needed to make the Rockford-Chicago through service "competitive"...
I'm thinking this is in keeping with Metra's wanting to become a regional rail operation, not just an in and out of the Loop commuter service. The two lines west of Big Timber (which is west of Elgin) run closely parallel for a distance. Probably a connection will be built there. With a top speed of 79mph west of Big Timber, stops from Elgin into the Loop would have to be few (maybe one?) for the train to make it from Rockford to the Loop in 95 minutes. Would be interesting if they build a Rockford station at the original site of the Galena and Chicago Union in Rockford adjacent to the river. City is trying to revitalize downtown. My grandfather had his Piggly Wiggly Midwest HQ office in the 7th St. east Rockford station building along the line in the late 30's/early 40's. The station still stands today. Rockford needs all the help it can get. High violent crime rate.
https://www.wrex.com/news/midtown-group-plans-to-move-into-historic-7th-street-train-station/article_e2a2723a-8d2e-5e9c-9de5-e53c04580ba8.html
CMStPnPWhy aren't you using screen names?
Of course, if you're concerned, why did you 'double down' by leaving his name intact in your quoted text?
Overmod Presumably this would start as two extended turns of equipment servicing the regular stops on the West line. The issue we've discussed regarding this service is that some kind of limited-stop service would be needed to make the Rockford-Chicago through service "competitive"... Can someone like Dan Peltier explain how the situation in Elgin is to be arranged?
Connecting track from Metra Milwaukee District West to CN needs to be installed.
It might be nice if this new battery electric were used.
https://fb.watch/lGXY9aQcVI/?mibextid=Nif5oz
After Elgin/Big Timber, stops in Belvidere, maybe Hampshire or Genoa.
charlie hebdo Overmod Presumably this would start as two extended turns of equipment servicing the regular stops on the West line. The issue we've discussed regarding this service is that some kind of limited-stop service would be needed to make the Rockford-Chicago through service "competitive"... Can someone like Dan Peltier explain how the situation in Elgin is to be arranged? Connecting track from Metra Milwaukee District West to CN needs to be installed. It might be nice if this new battery electric were used. https://fb.watch/lGXY9aQcVI/?mibextid=Nif5oz After Elgin/Big Timber, stops in Belvidere, maybe Hampshire or Genoa.
no connection to CN needed. Using UP from Rockford to near Elgin. As I mentioned earlier, connection to UP could be easily made west of Big Timber where CPKC and UP closely parallel. No flyover needed.
Local Rockford paper says intermediate stops would be Belvidere, Huntley, and Elgin. Trains won't be considered Metra commuter.
Pritzker approved Illinois funding.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/now-boarding-everything-you-need-to-know-about-rockfords-new-metra-line-to-chicago/ar-AA1dyrvq
New station in Rockford would be near S. Main St./Court St./Winnebago St. No problem having trains use Rock River bridge.
Northwestern station torn down late 50's/60. Now a parking lot.
https://midwayvillagemuseumdigitalcollections.omeka.net/items/show/2680
Galena and Chicago Union RR. First railroad west of Chicago.
https://history.rockfordpubliclibrary.org/localhistory/?tag=the-poneer-engine
(As usual, the marketing wizards are not planning a 21st century station location for Rockford. In my view, a station adjacent to Alpine Rd. or Perryville Rd. on Rockford's southeast side would draw more of the bulk of today's Rockford area population. Belvidere is too far east, and the station there will be located close-in to that downtown. Belvidere I think will draw well as a lot of people don't want anything to do with downtown Rockford).
OvermodBecause his screen name is 'dpeltier'. Not rocket science to see that the incremental risk of malicious screen scraping isn't that great.
I couldn't ever mention rocket science and screen scraping in the same sentence.
However, I am more concerned with people doing a Google Search and seeing this discussion thread in their search results. In short the practice is troll bait.
GrampI'm thinking this is in keeping with Metra's wanting to become a regional rail operation, not just an in and out of the Loop commuter service.
How would that work? I heard they were buying new equipment. I think their current equipment gets rather tiresome if you have to sit on it longer than 60 minutes myself. Long ago they used to have single level pub cars on some runs but those are gone.
Someone asked an interesting question on another thread. Will Metra have to switch from right to left-handed running when it switches from the Milwaukee West Line to the UP Belvidere Subdivision at Big Timber? Of course the question is moot given the current arrangments since the Belvidere line is entirely single track with no passing sidings (just a yard at Belvidere) and no signals at present. In the future, however, there might be sections of double track. I suppose it depends on what UP decides, assuming it retains ownership.
No passenger service on this former C&NW line since the late 1940s or early 1950s. A lot of work to do.
Here is everything I knoe about the knew rockford metra service. It is supposed to be a express train. The terminal will be union station in chicago. The train should run at speeds of up to 79mph. 2 new stations will be built in rockford and belvidere and they will need to build a flyover at big timber to connect from the ex-Milwaukee tracks to the UP tracks.
Why would a flyover be needed for such a low-volume interchange? None at high-volume Western Avenue.
charlie hebdo Why would a flyover be needed for such a low-volume interchange? None at high-volume Western Avenue.
Flyover is an error. The former Milwaukee mainline bridges over the former Northwestern line west of Randall Rd. Only an at grade connection is needed east of Randall Rd.
Lament time. It would be cheaper to build and a better service if it were Rockford new Alpine Rd. station on the former IC. To Genoa. Connection with former Milwaukee Road there. There used to be one. On Milwaukee to Elgin and the Loop. IC was 79mph. MR was 90mph. If people would get along.
Some blame lies with CN, as I recall. Once they increased freight traffic on the former IC, they no longer wanted passenger services added.
Rather an interesting coincidence...............read below link starting on page 4-15......"SLATS - The Beloit MPO Urban Area".
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dBlVj9u82S0k29JOFND3NpLqEgtDQgC0/view
Earlier in the study and of note is the former C&NW line from North Milwaukee to Fond Du Lac via West Bend where the rails are torn up is labeled "Interim rail trail".......meaning it's only a rail trail now but they might restore it in the future back to rail use.
CMStPnP .....meaning it's only a rail trail now but they might restore it in the future back to rail use.
.....meaning it's only a rail trail now but they might restore it in the future back to rail use.
When you speculated in a similar manner in another thread regarding the bike trail through the Milwaukee North Shore suburbs, I vowed to buy you all you could consume in a single sitting of the beverage of your choice if the rails were ever relaid. I'll double that offer for the day the West Bend to Fond du Lac trail gets railed over.
Yeah, I think West Bend would fight tooth and nail to keep what they have put in place downtown.
AjsikWhen you speculated in a similar manner in another thread regarding the bike trail through the Milwaukee North Shore suburbs, I vowed to buy you all you could consume in a single sitting of the beverage of your choice if the rails were ever relaid. I'll double that offer for the day the West Bend to Fond du Lac trail gets railed over.
I remember that but part of your point of view as I remember it was that the rail and trail could not coexist together on the same right of way and that the bikers would never permit it. Which has not panned out in all other parts of the country exactly that way.
However, placement of bike trails is only secondary. It's more a matter of grass roots support for restoring rail service and preferred route as it is in other places of the country. If the support is greater for the bike trail the bike trail will prevail. If the support for restoration of rail service is greater they will find a way.
Understand that some folks in the railfan community feel that bicyclists are all powerful and insidious lobby. My argument is the reverse. The argument and support for rail is weak in the cases where the bikers were able to overcome the rail lobby.
And if you look at the history of the Brookfield, WI to Waukesha, WI cutoff, that is exactly what happened. The railroad at the time was too weak financially to fight it's case and public support really didn't see the railroads point of view. Also, it wasn't bikers that drove the effort to lift rails there it was the Mayor of Waukesha that wanted additional tax revenue from a bank expansion over the right of way as well as he didn't like the rails along the river, passing through a river park in some areas through the City. Only later did it become a bike trail on a truncated portion of the route that was already abandoned with the rails lifted.
CMStPnP Overmod Can someone like Dan Peltier explain how the situation in Elgin is to be arranged? Why aren't you using screen names? You know that posting someones real name in a forum like this also throws it out to Google Search?
Overmod Can someone like Dan Peltier explain how the situation in Elgin is to be arranged?
I just noticed this post now and wanted to say that a.) I unfortunately know nothing about and have no insight into Elgin or the Metra extension to Rockford, and b.) I don't mind people using my real name. I try to be reasonably discreet in this forum and don't think that my online activities make me look any worse than my IRL ones.
Back in my pre-railroad-career days I was maybe a little less discreet... But fortunately it seems that it is becoming harder and harder to find archives of misc.transport.rail.americas...
Dan
CMStPnP I remember that but part of your point of view as I remember it was that the rail and trail could not coexist together on the same right of way and that the bikers would never permit it. Which has not panned out in all other parts of the country exactly that way.
My belief is that its the political clout of the upscale suburbs though which the rails would be relaid that would kill any such proposal, not the objections of the trail users. I also question whether enough of the right of way is still intact to allow rails and the trail to coexist with an adequate safety buffer.
CMStPnP Understand that some folks in the railfan community feel that bicyclists are all powerful and insidious lobby. My argument is the reverse. The argument and support for rail is weak in the cases where the bikers were able to overcome the rail lobby.
You and I are in agreement here. I'm an avid cyclist and an avid railfan, and would be happy to hear any news of rails being relaid (or rails saved from being ripped up in favor of a trail). I can always find another place to ride my bike, but there are only so many intact corridors available where laying tracks is even an option.
Some new information this weekend likely affecting the UP Belvidere Subdivision. As part of its agreement with the UAW, Stellantis is promising to reopen its Belvidere Assembly plant.
That would definitely increase the freight traffic, both inbound and outbound. I think that it would have little effect on potential passenger riders.
Agreed. UP and CNW before it handled Belvidere traffic with a single turn, daily at most, between Belvidere and West Chicago and/or Proviso. Fast moving, relatively short freights typically, often running at night. CNW upgraded the Subdivision with welded rail to handle the Chrysler traffic. If Metra goes through, the Sub should see more improvements.
CMStPnP Rather an interesting coincidence...............read below link starting on page 4-15......"SLATS - The Beloit MPO Urban Area". https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dBlVj9u82S0k29JOFND3NpLqEgtDQgC0/view Earlier in the study and of note is the former C&NW line from North Milwaukee to Fond Du Lac via West Bend where the rails are torn up is labeled "Interim rail trail".......meaning it's only a rail trail now but they might restore it in the future back to rail use. [
[
I wouldn't read too much into use of the term "interim rail trail use". The "interim use" label is often used to describe the legal status of trails established under the National Trails System Act ("NTSA"). This is because the legal fiction underlying the NTSA is that a rail-trail conversion isn't an "abandonment" of the railroad - merely an "interim use" of the right of way until such time (if ever) that rail service is restored. The purpose of this "legal fiction" isn't really to preserve the ROW for future rail use. It's to prevent reversionary sections of the right of way from reverting to the holders of the reversionary interests (usually the owners of adjacent properties).
Congress probably saw this as a cost free way to establish trails over reversionary segments of a rail ROW without paying anything to the reversionary property owners. If so, it didn't work (at least the part about "not paying anything"). The Supreme Court ultimately held that the Federal government had to pay for "taking" the reversionary property owners' interests, see Preseault v. United States, 494 U.S. 1 (1986).
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.