Commuter Rail Proposals For Wisconsin. Did someone say RDC's?

[wallyworld]

I agree with jeaton on this. It is not an either or proposition. When I commuted on the North Central line there were several company vans waiting to pick up employees at the train. I knew of three reverse commuters from Chicago who I rode with that pooled their money and bought an old junker and used it to car pool from the station. Spouses would drop off husbands. Some rode bicycles they kept locked in the bike racks at the station where they got off. The conversion of the beltline around Chicago on the EJ&E from suburb to suburb that is planned is another way. Same for the new outer loop on the EL in Chicago for intracity travel. I car pooled from Bristol Wi to Antioch Il alot of times. If you were late to the office-everyone understood delays because-guess what-they all commuted by train-supervisors included. Did you ever pay to park in Chicago? No, trains are not a 19th century solution.

[Paul Milenkovic]

QUOTE:
I don't know if they ever advertised faster times, but long ago passenger speed limit signs at the EJ&E crossing at Rondout, "reduce speed to 100MPH" suggests that may have been possible.

No one doubts for a minute that you couldn't run 100 or 110 MPH with the existing equipment, although they may have to pay more attention to maintaining wheel profiles to prevent hunting at speed. The problems are grade crossings and signals -- either eliminating grade crossings or providing barrier gates, and providing the kind of automatic train stop signals required for faster than 79 MPH. We complain about the FRA, but the casual operation at 100 MPH plus of days past is not something we want to consider in today's social climate.

The problem with signals is that if there are cab signals and train stop devices, they have to be in every train that goes on that piece of track -- presents a problem with freight run-throughs and pool-power arrangements. If the freight railroads could adopt some kind of GPS cab signal for their own requirements as an interchange or pool-power standard, it might solve the whole problem.

So anyway, of the 70 minute running time includes some faster running apart from the 110 MPH segments, I say that folks work on that first -- there is nothing wrong with incrementally working on improving service.

[Anonymous]

I wonder if concentrating on faster trip time is really the most effective course of action.

People get antsy waiting for elevators. Rather than endlessly investing more and more to speed them up, mirrors are put up next to the elevator doors. Time isn't a problem anymore. (Vanity at work).

Maybe there could be activities made available during the trip that would make the time spent on the train more attractive, be it treadmills, poker, or whatever.

[zardoz]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz
Riding the rails: February ridership jumped almost 12% on Amtrak's Milwaukee-to-Chicago Hiawatha line, to 40,503 from 36,317 in February 2005, DOT rail chief Ron Adams said. In the first two months of this year, ridership rose 13%, to 83,227 from 73,762, Adams said.

As I showed in the first post, service seems to be excellent and a good value, if you use ridership as any indicator. Any other business I know of would be thrilled to have such a large increase in business. Why fix it, if it isn't broken?

[wallyworld]

Some good news-Metra announced the implementation of express trains on the North Central Line ( Trains News wire ) which should cut down on travel time significantly.

[Paul Milenkovic]

QUOTE:
I wonder if concentrating on faster trip time is really the most effective course of action.
. . .

Maybe there could be activities made available during the trip that would make the time spent on the train more attractive, be it treadmills, poker, or what

I guess the traditional commuter train version of that is a club car where people can drink on the way home from work.

A person has to wonder why people put up with such long automobile commutes, lumping through traffic, etc. Most people on this forum think that trains are the answer and feel sorry for the people stuck in traffic, but I think it is important to get inside the heads of people who rather like their cars.

The Wall Street Journal had an article about Chicago Southsiders who have left their cars for the commuter trains on account of the Dan Ryan Expressway construction mess but long for their cars and would pay whatever money in gas in parking.

The way I see it that for a lot of people, the ride, by themselves (the horror, the horror!) inside their cars is probably the only solitude and personal time they get all day, between the husband/wife, the kids, the boss, and the coworkers. Yes, they have to sit in traffic, and stop-and-go driving is stressful to many people (although just because you find it stressful doesn't mean there are a lot of people adapted to it). You have your own little personal chamber, customized to your taste in terms of clutter or lack thereof, you can listen to your favorite radio station or music tape or just turn the sound off.

Compare that with a packed gallery car -- with 150 people plus in there you are not talking about a Superliner deluxe bedroom as a travel experience. Trains are kind of neat, and I love trains, but I have commuted on gallery cars to work during my summer internships and to class when in college, and well, it gets old after while. You are packed in with everyone with their colds and sneezes and whatnot, and nowadays, you have people on cell phones.

[jeaton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz
Riding the rails: February ridership jumped almost 12% on Amtrak's Milwaukee-to-Chicago Hiawatha line, to 40,503 from 36,317 in February 2005, DOT rail chief Ron Adams said. In the first two months of this year, ridership rose 13%, to 83,227 from 73,762, Adams said.

As I showed in the first post, service seems to be excellent and a good value, if you use ridership as any indicator. Any other business I know of would be thrilled to have such a large increase in business. Why fix it, if it isn't broken?

Basicly, I agree. I think in terms of marginal improvements that might be gotten with relativly small investments. Something such as getting top speeds to 100mph. I am not a big advocate of "High Speed" (say 125+mph), and clearly that is not necessary for Chicago-Milwaukee service.

[nanaimo73]

Would 100 mph on the former Milwaukee Road between Chicago and Milwaukee require ATS or something similar, with leading locomotives needing to have it installed ?

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73

Would 100 mph on the former Milwaukee Road between Chicago and Milwaukee require ATS or something similar, with leading locomotives needing to have it installed ?

According to the ICC order of 1947 governing train speeds, cab signals or Automatic Train Stop are required to operate in excess of 79 MPH. If a line is equipped with these devices, all locomotives operating over the line must be equipped with them in order to lead.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Paul Milenkovic

QUOTE:
I wonder if concentrating on faster trip time is really the most effective course of action.
. . .

Maybe there could be activities made available during the trip that would make the time spent on the train more attractive, be it treadmills, poker, or what

I guess the traditional commuter train version of that is a club car where people can drink on the way home from work.

A person has to wonder why people put up with such long automobile commutes, lumping through traffic, etc. Most people on this forum think that trains are the answer and feel sorry for the people stuck in traffic, but I think it is important to get inside the heads of people who rather like their cars.

The Wall Street Journal had an article about Chicago Southsiders who have left their cars for the commuter trains on account of the Dan Ryan Expressway construction mess but long for their cars and would pay whatever money in gas in parking.

The way I see it that for a lot of people, the ride, by themselves (the horror, the horror!) inside their cars is probably the only solitude and personal time they get all day, between the husband/wife, the kids, the boss, and the coworkers. Yes, they have to sit in traffic, and stop-and-go driving is stressful to many people (although just because you find it stressful doesn't mean there are a lot of people adapted to it). You have your own little personal chamber, customized to your taste in terms of clutter or lack thereof, you can listen to your favorite radio station or music tape or just turn the sound off.

Compare that with a packed gallery car -- with 150 people plus in there you are not talking about a Superliner deluxe bedroom as a travel experience. Trains are kind of neat, and I love trains, but I have commuted on gallery cars to work during my summer internships and to class when in college, and well, it gets old after while. You are packed in with everyone with their colds and sneezes and whatnot, and nowadays, you have people on cell phones.

Another big problem for a lot of people who commute the farthest is the lack of express trains or for that matter any service at all, during non-rush hours. Miss the last express train, and the all too common extra hour at work or a late meeting can mean not getting home until 9 p.m. Bailing out of late meetings early a few times too many, can become a career limiting move. The Chicago area does have a lot of rush hour traffic and congestion, but it does generally clear up after 6 p.m. so the drive home from a late meeting is relatively quick and pain free. Some commuter lines and suburban feeder bus schedules are better at dealing with this than others, but running largely empty express service is a money loosing proposition and one of the first targets for cuts when budgets are tight.

[wallyworld]

Most folks I spoke to in my North Central commuting days wanted express trains. Stations only afew miles apart required acceleration, deacceleration, a stop, debarking, loading and then the cycle started up all over again. Multiply that by 12 or 13 stops only 3-4 minutes apart-you have a long ride. We also talked about skip-stop, where the frequency was increased but the trains stopped at every other station. Train A stops at stations A-C-E-G. Train B stops at A-B-D-F and so on. Another topic was ( we had plenty of time to talk about anything when we werent sleeping) was the configuration of the cars and platforms. Low level platforms with single entry-exit door with folks backed up trying to get down the stairs to get to the platform slowed us down.High level platforms with dual doors like the CSSB had with a single level was brought up by a guy who used to take this line. He said thet were converting all their platforms to high level. Electrification was brought up by yours truly as the better acceleration achieved by traction motors aka GG1 etc. As a preteen,I rode the CNSM from Mundelein to Chicago often with my dad. When we rounded Green Bay Junction Southbound, and entered Skokie Valley trackage, the motorman opened up the power and even with a long five-six car train, the acceleration was such that you were pushed back in your seat. Flying down that mainline was the most frightening and awesome experience I had with trains for a long time.