Rail advocates want double tracking DET-CHI

[GP30M4216]

Rail advocates want double tracking between Detroit and Chicago

Advocates seek double-tracking of Amtrak line
The South Bend Tribune
http://www.southbendtribune.com/news/lo ... f826e.html

Thu Dec 3, 2015 - By Landa Bagley

NILES — What’s the best way to achieve faster, more frequent Amtrak train trips between Chicago and Detroit — including stops in Niles, Dowagiac, Kalamazoo and Ann Arbor?

Leaders of two rail transportation advocacy groups say double-tracking the entire track along that approximately 300-mile route, called Wolverine Service, is the answer.

The groups, Midwest Association of Railroad Passengers and Midwest High Speed Rail Association, are seeking public support throughout Michigan for the proposal — starting with the groups’ community meeting held at the Niles Public Library on Wednesday.

The Michigan Department of Transportation, which did not have a representative at the meeting, is in the midst of a Passenger Rail Program to evaluate and identify areas of improvement for the Chicago to Detroit/Pontiac area.

At this point, MDOT is not looking at double-tracking all of the Wolverine route. Roughly 160 miles of track on this route would not be double-tracked, said Rick Harnish, executive director of Midwest High Speed Rail Association.

The two rail associations are asking Michigan Department of Transportation to include double-tracking in its plans for upgrades aimed at reducing travel times, boosting reliability, and adding daily roundtrips to the schedule.

“We think the state should be planning for a lot of growth on the corridor,” Harnish told a group of about 20 people at the meeting. “That means you have to have two tracks, an east track and a west track, the whole way.”

In fiscal year 2014, 477,157 Amtrak riders traveled the Wolverine corridor compared to 465,627 in fiscal year 2015, Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliara said in a separate interview. The fiscal year runs from October to September.

Niles resident Jan Personette agreed with Harnish and explained a key reason why faster and more frequent service along this route is important.

“You’ve got to think about how people are going to get to the large metropolises, like Ann Arbor and Chicago, for treatment of illnesses. As we age, more and more of us need this sort of transportation,” Personette said. “It’s got to happen.”

MDOT officials considered double-tracking all of the Wolverine route, but decided against it, according to Michael Frezell, an MDOT spokesperson.

“A capacity analysis concluded that double-tracking the entire corridor in Michigan was not necessary to accommodate full build-out service,” Frezell said in an interview prior to the community meeting.

Full build-out refers to the goal of having 10 daily roundtrips between Chicago and Detroit (of the 10, seven would go to Pontiac — a Detroit suburb), with trains traveling at an average speed of 58 miles per hour, and with travel time between Chicago and Pontiac at five hours and 16 minutes.

Currently, there are three daily roundtrips of trains traveling at an average speed of about 46 miles per hour, with travel time between Chicago and Pontiac at approximately six hours and 40 minutes.

Frezell said efficiencies in the use of in-locomotive train signaling, GPS, and other technological improvements can help coordinate trains, thereby reducing the need for continuous double track.

“MDOT is being fiscally responsible by not double-tracking the entire railroad now,” Frezell added. “If conditions change in the future there is always the opportunity to expand capacity in the existing right of way because the railroad was once double-tracked and the rail bed remains.”

Harnish said he thinks the analysis information models used by the consultants in developing the draft plan are conservative.

[NSSD70ACe]

Double-tracking the entire line? Theoretically, yes it could be done. As Saturnalia said to correct me, the line was double tracked til the 70's. However, I don't see a justifiable reason to put it all back in for 20 trains a day.


EDIT: Yes I was wrong. I edited my post to reflect the new information.

[MiddleMI]

“MDOT is being fiscally responsible by not double-tracking the entire railroad now,” Frezell added. “If conditions change in the future there is always the opportunity to expand capacity in the existing right of way because the railroad was once double-tracked and the rail bed remains.”

Really, if MDOT is correct about their current plan covering planned future capacity, the only other reason to do this would be for safety, and no one (MDOT or the Feds) is going to pay what it would cost for what would essentially be a safety uprgrade. I'd personally like to see advocates focusing more on the existing proposals to add new services between Michigan cities (Coast to Coast, etc...) instead of further focusing on the Michigan Line, which has gotten the lions share - and rightfully so - these past few years in terms of upgrades. Let's see how these current upgrades work and then see if we need any additional safety or capacity upgrades.

[Saturnalia]

Nick, you're obviously forgetting that until the 1970s, the entire line was double-track. West of Kalamazoo it was single by 1976 when Penn Central gave it to Amtrak. The rest was singled in the 1980s...not that long ago. All the bridges are still setup for two, at least on the railroad side (not entirely sure about road bridges, but those should be, as well).

So you can remove fill, bridges, etc stuff from the equation. It'd be the same as the Dearborn Segment: new ballast, track, signals and the crossing upgrades.

[Ypsi]

Interesting how one of their main points is transport to Ann Arbor or Chicago for "treatment of illness". I think double tracking as far as CP Chelsea would be effective, since a majority of the wolverine meets occur east of Chelsea, so no real need for double track beyond that point.

353/353 meet at lake when both are on time, and 352/ 355 meet at CP Mort (a meet that will become a rolling meet soon when that double track is done). So if you can link up CP Ypsi to CP Lake, you would have over 50 miles of double track from Townline to Chelsea. The only issue is that's just over 20 miles of trackage between Ypsi and lake, which is a substantial distance, double of what is between Mort and Wayne. Obviously it would all take time, but I think MDOT is correct with their current assessment.

If you want to get to 10 trips, and add 12 ARB-DET commuter trains (I have heard 12 wolverines and 12 commuters is one of the "goals"). Double track to ARB would almost be necessary.

The only other reason to do this would be for safety

I can see no substantial safety increase between single and double track on the route.

[NSSD70ACe]

“MDOT is being fiscally responsible by not double-tracking the entire railroad now,” Frezell added. “If conditions change in the future there is always the opportunity to expand capacity in the existing right of way because the railroad was once double-tracked and the rail bed remains.”

Really, if MDOT is correct about their current plan covering planned future capacity, the only other reason to do this would be for safety, and no one (MDOT or the Feds) is going to pay what it would cost for what would essentially be a safety uprgrade. I'd personally like to see advocates focusing more on the existing proposals to add new services between Michigan cities (Coast to Coast, etc...) instead of further focusing on the Michigan Line, which has eaten up most of the attention.

I agree wholeheartedly. MDOT also needs to look at possibly expanding service throughout the state and getting cars off of 94, 69, 96, and 196 instead of focusing only on the MI Line.

Also, the comment about the road bed still being in place again isn't totally true for the Kalamazoo area. West of Drake Road, yes, the roadbed is there, or at least by air it is. However, East of Comstock there doesn't seem to be room for another track unless they redid a huge part of it. Still not justifiable.

Saturnalia, yes I am aware now. I just took a look at Google Maps and realized I was wrong. I'm correcting my original post now.

[ConrailMan5]

The only other reason to do this would be for safety

I can see no substantial safety increase between single and double track on the route.

Well obviously the MI line is all track warrant control...

I can see that the people of MARP and the high speed rail group lack real world understanding of opperations (a real shocker there). Not that I do, but if you look at places like the CN transcon, it is all single track CTC with 20-30 trains per day, and they do a fair job of running it smoothly.

And yes, as Alex said the entire line was double tracked until relatively recently (lake to ypsi came out in 1987 iirc), so the ROW has enough room for the double tracking. in fact they are doing that very thing Mort-Wayne right now. If you schedule the trains to where they meet in the same place every day (in theory) then you do not need to have double track the whole way, just in the places where the meets should occur. So on the east end, that is Hill-Lake, and Ypsi-Townline. Now that they have the 1 main back in service for trackspeed Ypsi-Wayne, those meets go much smoother. Adding the double track back Wayne-mort makes it even better.

As far as capicity is concerned, they only other place on the east end I would add a second main is in the Ypsi-ANn Arbor Yard segment, that is if they want the MI train to eventually take off.

[Saturnalia]

To me, the segment west of Kalamazoo has enough sidings. The east end , however, does have some limitations. I'd say for MI-Train, put in Track 2 until a spot just west of Ann Arbor. The area NW of the Annie bridge could be MI-Train's overnight staging/maintenance yard. That would help the Lake-Ypsi segment quite a bit, in my estimation.

Otherwise, I'd say it is okay how it is for now. Let's get the east end upgrades done first.

Super-Long term, I'd say the thought needs to transition to curve elimination. The east end is a very old alignment and has already seen multiple rounds of reconstruction, but there are places where curves could be straightened out. Maybe creating some larger hills, but also the efficiency with which we can dig and move dirt is far superior to the 1800s when the line was originally laid on strap rail along the banks of the Huron River!

[Ben Higdon]

Nick, you're obviously forgetting that until the 1970s, the entire line was double-track.

When was it single tracked?

[Saturnalia]

Nick, you're obviously forgetting that until the 1970s, the entire line was double-track.

When was it single tracked?

West End: By 1976
East End: By 1987

West End: west of BO, transferred to Amtrak on Conrail Day, 1976. Now AMTK MI Line (AML)
East End: east of BO, to Conrail in 1976. Now MDOT MI Line (MML)

[SousaKerry]

MDOT also needs to look at possibly expanding service throughout the state and getting cars off of 94, 69, 96, and 196

Want to reduce traffic on 94 get them trucks onto railcars pulled behind the passenger trains. Worked in the 90's why not today. Then you can justify all the double track you want.

[PatAzo]

The west was single tracked back in the Perlman era wasn't it?

Safety wise the dollars would be better spent on grade separation than double tracking. Amtrak is at greater risk of a grade crossing vehicle collision that running into it's own trains.

[Doktor No]

Sousa Kerry, my idea would be to run something like CSX did some years ago, The Iron Highway. Drive the rigs onto the flats and take off for either end of the route. Unload them tractors and all. They do it in Eurpoe, the drivers ride in passenger cars on the train. Would take a lil bit of switching but run one every hour each way? Never happen but it would take some traffic off of I94...maybe?!
And absolutly PatAZO, time to remove some of those crossings! THAT alone would make the route much safer for all.
Double track would be a waste of money IMHO. Pearlman/NYC thought so, PC thought so and Conrail definatly thought so.

[Ben Higdon]

Nick, you're obviously forgetting that until the 1970s, the entire line was double-track.

Hold on just a second there professor. I believe Dowagiac to Oshtemo, and Michigan City to Buchanan was single tracked well back into the NYC era, probably not long after traffic moved to the Air Line in the late 50s. Oldest evidence I can dig up right now is PC Timetable 4 dated 10/26/69




Pretty certain Kalamazoo to Battle Creek was single tracked in 1988 (have Conrail bulletins somewhere here).

[ConrailMan5]

http://www.multimodalways.org/docs/rail ... 1-1975.pdf

Employee time table number 7 shows single track MP 192-229 at least by 1975, as well as MP 189-192, and MP 146-177. Not sure where that translates to as far as city locations.

[Ben Higdon]

Based on that, between 1969 and 1975 the double track was removed between Buchanan and the Niles depot (192), and from CP Hump (189) to the west side of Dowagiac. (Sounds like you misread there being single track from 189 to 192) The double track at CP Hump was later moved back another mile or so to it's present location.

[ConrailMan5]

Based on that, between 1969 and 1975 the double track was removed between Buchanan and the Niles depot (192), and from CP Hump (189) to the west side of Dowagiac. (Sounds like you misread there being single track from 189 to 192) The double track at CP Hump was later moved back another mile or so to it's present location.

Yes my mistake. MP 180-189 is what it really was.

[NYCMan]

The article says: "MDOT is being fiscally responsible by not double-tracking the entire railroad now." Now that is an oxymoron, MDOT being fiscally responsible. The MDOT Office of Rail has wasted MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of Taxpayer Dollars, and MDOT has clearly shown that it cannot even be trusted to properly do what it is principally charged with --- the care and maintenance of the state's highway system.

As many have already noted, the Michigan Line was once double track all the way from Detroit to Chicago Lasalle Street Station (used by NYC prior to Chicago Union Station). But, back in those days, all the traffic went westbound on #1 track and eastbound on #2 track. With "CTC" (or whatever initials you might want to call iut), single tracking many segments can work well. One just needs to be logical and selective in how they put together the schedule... and hope for no delays.

"Reinventing" the double track from Ypsilanti to Ann Arbor, and maybe even as far as Jackson, might prove worthwhile. But, beyond that, it does not make either fiscal sense or logical sense to double track all the way west to Porter. Might an extra controlled siding or two be necessary? Sure! But several miles of so of sidings costs a fraction of what a couple hundred miles of double tracking would run.

And, remember, we now have Positive Train Contorl (PTC) to deal with, which adds SUBSTANTIALLY to the costs factors.

As it is, Amtrak is a MONEY LOSER on its Wolverine Service. I've seen the statistic that Amtrak loses about $35 per passenger riding between Detroit and Chicago. There have been some experts that have quipped that it is cheaper to put all those passzengers on an airplace at sSuperSaver fares than to haul them on Amtrak. And, rhoaw loaa figures do NOT include the acquisition costs of the right of way, which a normal business would have to account for. So, Amtrak truly bleeds bloody red numbers. BUT, I do not say that to mean that Amtrak should be shut down. Just that, MDOT should not be tossing MILLIONS MORE into the money losing scheme. Develop what they have now. If they can get to 10 trains each way (which I support!) the ridership should truly blossom.

[Ben Higdon]

As it is, Amtrak is a MONEY LOSER on its Wolverine Service.

Whats I-94?

I agree more frequent service would help bring down the average per rider cost.

It would help their PR if news articles were citing travel times from Chicago to Detroit instead of Chicago to Pontiac. The miles and transit time from Detroit to Pontiac almost amounts to backtracking when you consider the entire route and makes it sound like a slower run.

[ConrailMan5]

As it is, Amtrak is a MONEY LOSER on its Wolverine Service.

Whats I-94?

I saw a statistic once from a reputable source (if I find it again I will post it) that stated we spent more on the roads (may have been just the interstate highway system) in 2011 than we have on Amtrak across its entire 40 year existnace (2011 being their 40th anniversery). Talk about "Money Loser."

In the grand scheme of things, I believe that one they get the current round of rehabilitation done to the Michigan line, they are hoping to add at least 2 more round trips between DET-CHI. That is what I have heard. So taking baby steps in a more well thought out manner towards the goal of 10 trips per day seems to be likely.