The Texas Eagle and 110 MPH

[user 1215]

Is St. Louis to Chicago 110 MPH yet? Is Amtrak running 110 on those lines yet? If not, when? WHEN can we ride a Superliner at 110 MPH??? There was a lot of hoopla about it last November, but I recall that was a short distance - not even enough to change the timetables. When is it going to be done?

 

[battalion51]

I believe the answer is never. IIRC, the Superliners are only good for 100 MPH, so you'll never see a Superliner cruising at 110 MPH unless the rating gets upgraded. But as far as speeds getting upgraded I think you'll need to get PTC installed and active throughout the corridor, and also have the engines upgraded with PTC in cab for any of the engines that will run the route.

 

[NE933]

Besides, are you sure you want to be in Superliner at 110? Don't forget: they are tall.

 

[yo]

Just take a plane if you need to go fast.

 

[amtkstn]

If you want to ride at speed in superliner, take the westbound SWC it still does a good part of the trip at 90 mph.

 

[rickycourtney]

battalion51 is correct. The Superliner I/II are only rated for 100 miles per hour. The fastest they go is 90 on the Southwest Chief and the Pacific Surfliner.

Fun fact: California's Bi-level cars are rated for 125 miles per hour. The only time they've gone that fast was on the test track (including some runs at 135 mph). They might hit that speed in the future. The state plans to reroute the San Joaquin onto the high speed rail tracks from Madera to Corcoran while the rest of the HSR tracks are built.

 

[battalion51]

They'll need some new road power to hit 125 MPH. Although with the specs that are being floated for the new diesel fleet IIRC it calls for them to be rated at 125 MPH.

 

[rickycourtney]

That's correct. The 35 new diesel locomotives being purchased by California and the Midwestern states will be capable of 125 mph.

 

[afigg]

Is St. Louis to Chicago 110 MPH yet? Is Amtrak running 110 on those lines yet? If not, when? WHEN can we ride a Superliner at 110 MPH??? There was a lot of hoopla about it last November, but I recall that was a short distance - not even enough to change the timetables. When is it going to be done?

There is 110 mph operation for a short segment of the corridor. The current construction and project schedule shown here on the Project Overview page of the Illinois DOT Chicago to St. Louis H®SR website is for 110 mph operation for the Dwight to Alton segment by the end of 2015. Dwight to Joliet 110 mph upgrades are scheduled for the 2016-2017 time-frame.There is lot more work to be done which includes another service disruption starting on August 16 for 8 days.

For many of the HSIPR stimulus funded projects, looks like 2016 will be the year that track, ROW and station upgrades finally begin to really kick in.

 

[VT Hokie]

What is it that makes the California cars and Surfliner cars good for 125 where the Superliners are only good for 100? I suspect that the Superliner II's are actually good for 125, but just aren't officially certified for it since they operate interchangeably with Superliner I's, which have lower speed rated trucks.

Anyway, as I understand it, the plan is to keep running the Texas Eagle at 79 mph even after the full upgrades are complete. Seems silly to me not to at least allow it 90 or 100. Even if Amtrak doesn't want to mess with the Eagle's schedule, it'd give it an opportunity to make up time in instances where it's running late.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

What is it that makes the California cars and Surfliner cars good for 125 where the Superliners are only good for 100? I suspect that the Superliner II's are actually good for 125, but just aren't officially certified for it since they operate interchangeably with Superliner I's, which have lower speed rated trucks.
Anyway, as I understand it, the plan is to keep running the Texas Eagle at 79 mph even after the full upgrades are complete. Seems silly to me not to at least allow it 90 or 100. Even if Amtrak doesn't want to mess with the Eagle's schedule, it'd give it an opportunity to make up time in instances where it's running late.

Yes, Amtrak should allow the train to go at least 90 mph, since the SWC does it all the time. This is just a great example of Amtrak's stagnant, non-flexible rail service!

 

[Anderson]

What is it that makes the California cars and Surfliner cars good for 125 where the Superliners are only good for 100? I suspect that the Superliner II's are actually good for 125, but just aren't officially certified for it since they operate interchangeably with Superliner I's, which have lower speed rated trucks.
Anyway, as I understand it, the plan is to keep running the Texas Eagle at 79 mph even after the full upgrades are complete. Seems silly to me not to at least allow it 90 or 100. Even if Amtrak doesn't want to mess with the Eagle's schedule, it'd give it an opportunity to make up time in instances where it's running late.

Yes, Amtrak should allow the train to go at least 90 mph, since the SWC does it all the time. This is just a great example of Amtrak's stagnant, non-flexible rail service!

No, it's because of the nature of the agreement with UP regarding the upgrades. Short version is that IIRC, Illinois only contracted with UP for enough 110 MPH slots for "their" trains and not enough for the Eagle as well. It's possible that the Eagle might get up to 90 MPH regardless, but 110 MPH seems unlikely.

 

[battalion51]

Don't forget it may also have something to do with equipment availability. You'd have to have a PTC enabled motor on the Eagle every trip, and given the potential for the motor to not make it out of SAS for one reason or another, you're tying up resources to make sure that you have a PTC motor on the train. I'm sure Illinois paid some decent money to upgrade the small fleet of P-42s to get PTC, someone would have to pay for at least 5 P-42s to get PTC for the Eagle to get it.

 

[user 1215]

Besides, are you sure you want to be in Superliner at 110? Don't forget: they are tall.

Yes, Yes I do.

Just take a plane if you need to go fast.

Been there, done that. (Hey - I thought most of us here were rail advocates pushing for faster service, narrowing the gap for precious airline market share!)

If you want to ride at speed in superliner, take the westbound SWC it still does a good part of the trip at 90 mph.

Been there, done that, too. On the top bunk. In a Roomette. In "The Coffin". FUN!

They'll need some new road power to hit 125 MPH. Although with the specs that are being floated for the new diesel fleet IIRC it calls for them to be rated at 125 MPH.

Oh, are we off topic already? The P42DCs are certified to 115, making them more than suitable for the corridor.

What is it that makes the California cars and Surfliner cars good for 125 where the Superliners are only good for 100? I suspect that the Superliner II's are actually good for 125, but just aren't officially certified for it since they operate interchangeably with Superliner I's, which have lower speed rated trucks.
Anyway, as I understand it, the plan is to keep running the Texas Eagle at 79 mph even after the full upgrades are complete. Seems silly to me not to at least allow it 90 or 100. Even if Amtrak doesn't want to mess with the Eagle's schedule, it'd give it an opportunity to make up time in instances where it's running late.

Then 100 it should be!

What is it that makes the California cars and Surfliner cars good for 125 where the Superliners are only good for 100? I suspect that the Superliner II's are actually good for 125, but just aren't officially certified for it since they operate interchangeably with Superliner I's, which have lower speed rated trucks.

Anyway, as I understand it, the plan is to keep running the Texas Eagle at 79 mph even after the full upgrades are complete. Seems silly to me not to at least allow it 90 or 100. Even if Amtrak doesn't want to mess with the Eagle's schedule, it'd give it an opportunity to make up time in instances where it's running late.

Yes, Amtrak should allow the train to go at least 90 mph, since the SWC does it all the time. This is just a great example of Amtrak's stagnant, non-flexible rail service!

No, it's because of the nature of the agreement with UP regarding the upgrades. Short version is that IIRC, Illinois only contracted with UP for enough 110 MPH slots for "their" trains and not enough for the Eagle as well. It's possible that the Eagle might get up to 90 MPH regardless, but 110 MPH seems unlikely.

Ridiculous for Amtrak (who operates Illinois' trains) not to negotiate a slot for the Texas Eagle. Did Amtrak outside of IL pay for any of the upgrade? Are there going to be 110 MPH freight trains???

Don't forget it may also have something to do with equipment availability. You'd have to have a PTC enabled motor on the Eagle every trip, and given the potential for the motor to not make it out of SAS for one reason or another, you're tying up resources to make sure that you have a PTC motor on the train. I'm sure Illinois paid some decent money to upgrade the small fleet of P-42s to get PTC, someone would have to pay for at least 5 P-42s to get PTC for the Eagle to get it.

Class 5 trackage (90 MPH) has slightly more engine requirements than Class 4 (79 MPH) right? 110 MPH is Class 6, and I'm not sure what the locomotive requirements are for Class 6 that are different than Class 5 (which they manage to keep doing on the SWC).

 

[jis]

Oh, are we off topic already? The P42DCs are certified to 115, making them more than suitable for the corridor.

Where did you hear that? They are really certified for only 110mph commercial operation.

Class 5 trackage (90 MPH) has slightly more engine requirements than Class 4 (79 MPH) right? 110 MPH is Class 6, and I'm not sure what the locomotive requirements are for Class 6 that are different than Class 5 (which they manage to keep doing on the SWC).

FRA Track Class based speed limits as specified in 49 CFR 213.9 and 213.307 are about the track, and not about signals.
FRA signal rules are specified in 49 CFR 236.0 and in summary it says:

No signals: 49 mph Freight, 59 mph PassengerBlock signals or TCS: 79 mph Freight or Passenger

Automatic Train Stop: 80 mph or more as determined by characteristics of signal system

Traditionally FRA has permitted 90mph operation with just Automatic Train Stop and no signal speed enforcement.

Above 90mph it has insisted on signal speed enforcement, so some sort of cab signal system with signal speed enforcement is needed. Systems like the ex PRR CTC Cab Signal meets this requirement as does ITCS, and all of the various PTC systems.

Above 125mph they further insist that there must be civil speed enforcement, i.e. TSRs and PSR must be enforceable over and above signal speeds, hence ACSES on the NEC.

So to travel above 90mph the engine and the track segment needs to be equipped with gear that enables the engine to enforce signal speed limits on itself, or at least detect violations and bring the train to a stop if not corrected. That is a higher level of control functionality than just train stop enforcement at Stop signals.

 

[user 1215]

110 Max for the P42DCs. I stand corrected. The tracks have the equipment for 110 - that's how it got (and is getting) Class 6 status. The question at hand is, Are the SWC engines "different" than the rest of the P42DCs so they can make 90 MPH? If so, how would that be any different than equipping 4-5 P42DCs for the TE, and keeping those locos on the TE route?

 

[NE933]

Hey, you know what, Venture Forth passionately said "yes" to my question, of whether he'd be ok in a 110mph Superliner.

Well, we only live once, which is becomeing uglier and more difficult in this world. So, my brothers and sisters, esp. VF, I would do it, just as long as it's not on any curves and the track has no dips or depressions. Superliner cars are known to sway, and I should know. On the upper level where the rythmic swaying is really felt, one starts to hope it doesn't roll over.

But on the Lincoln Corridor, CWR is becoming the norm, so Venture Forth, thank you for enlightening me. If offered and I said know, I'd kick myself.

If you get to befriend a few key folks in Amtrak and UP who would consider a trial of 110mph running, let me know, and I'd come over from NYC and do it with ya!!

 

[Ryan]

Locomotives used on the SWC are equipped with a removable "shoe" on the forward truck that works with the lineside ATS equipment (essentially when a stop is enforced, a lever pops up on the ground - when the shoe on the locomotive hits that lever, it forces a stop). AFAIK, the equipment is relatively easily moved between locomotives.

 

[jis]

110 Max for the P42DCs. I stand corrected. The tracks have the equipment for 110 - that's how it got (and is getting) Class 6 status. The question at hand is, Are the SWC engines "different" than the rest of the P42DCs so they can make 90 MPH? If so, how would that be any different than equipping 4-5 P42DCs for the TE, and keeping those locos on the TE route?

I guess it is a quibble, but the definition of Class 6 says nothing about what signals it must have. It gives specification about what parameters the track must stay within to claim to be Class 6. Over and above that the Signal rules which are specified in a different section has to be in place to the satisfaction of FRA to allow actual 110mph operation on said track.

So to operate on a track at 110mph two conditions need to be satisfied:

1. It must be Class 6 track

2. it must meet FRA certification of a signal/control system for operation at 110mph.

P42DCs must have ITCS or whatever signal system is certified by FRA on that segment to be allowed to operate at 110mph.

 

[jis]

Locomotives used on the SWC are equipped with a removable "shoe" on the forward truck that works with the lineside ATS equipment (essentially when a stop is enforced, a lever pops up on the ground - when the shoe on the locomotive hits that lever, it forces a stop). AFAIK, the equipment is relatively easily moved between locomotives.

Really? I thought the ATS was driven by an induction coil pickup, but admittedly I have not looked at it closely recently.

New York subway uses the lever doohickey.

See the induction pickup shoe on the Aerotrain at Las Vegas?

http://s147.photobucket.com/user/VIEWLINER/media/0806/AERO05.jpg.html

 

[afigg]

Anyway, as I understand it, the plan is to keep running the Texas Eagle at 79 mph even after the full upgrades are complete. Seems silly to me not to at least allow it 90 or 100. Even if Amtrak doesn't want to mess with the Eagle's schedule, it'd give it an opportunity to make up time in instances where it's running late.

Amtrak likely will or already has pushed for at least 90 mph speeds for the Texas Eagle when the upgrade projects or as segments are completed. The upgrades being done on the corridor are not just one 110 mph track, but include siding upgrades with both ends of the siding connected, speed improvements to slower track segments, signal, crossing upgrades, several double tracking segments, upgrading the East St Louis to Alton segment from 30 to 79 mph and so on. Even if the TE were to be limited to 79 mph max speeds, the CHI to STL trip time will be reduced. How much, we don't know yet.

 

[battalion51]

The cab signal box carried in most of the fleet will work with BNSF's ATS, CSX's RF&P/B&A, and Amtrak's NEC Cab Signal systems. For ITCS in Michigan there is a separate set of diesels and NPCUs that have ITCS equipment installed. That's why you rarely see AMTK 26-37 and 126-128 outside of Michigan service. They're basically captive because they have ITCS. There's another small fleet numbered in the 60s that have PTC installed on them. If PTC were active on the corridor full time you wouldn't see them roam.

Standard P-42 Cab Signal box seen in between windshields:

Michigan ITCS Cab shown below box on Engineers side to the right of the windshield:

 

[Ryan]

Locomotives used on the SWC are equipped with a removable "shoe" on the forward truck that works with the lineside ATS equipment (essentially when a stop is enforced, a lever pops up on the ground - when the shoe on the locomotive hits that lever, it forces a stop). AFAIK, the equipment is relatively easily moved between locomotives.

Really? I thought the ATS was driven by an induction coil pickup, but admittedly I have not looked at it closely recently.
New York subway uses the lever doohickey.

Now that you mention it, I think you're right. My brain is fried from work this week, and it's only Thursday.

 

[jis]

To operate on NEC though, it is now a requirement for all Amtrak equipment doing so to have operating ACSES. I am not sure that ACSES is actually installed on all P42DCs. I believe there is a subfleet of P42s that are thus equipped for operating on the NEC.

Amtrak equipment with inoperative ACSEs on ACSES equipped trackage is now restricted to 80mph or something like that. I can't find the exact rule right at this moment.

 

[printman2000]

Locomotives used on the SWC are equipped with a removable "shoe" on the forward truck that works with the lineside ATS equipment (essentially when a stop is enforced, a lever pops up on the ground - when the shoe on the locomotive hits that lever, it forces a stop). AFAIK, the equipment is relatively easily moved between locomotives.

Really? I thought the ATS was driven by an induction coil pickup, but admittedly I have not looked at it closely recently.
New York subway uses the lever doohickey.

Now that you mention it, I think you're right. My brain is fried from work this week, and it's only Thursday.

Here is the shoe I took a pic of back in 2008 in La Junta...

I asked the engineer about it. The way I understood it is it kinda slid through a sensor at signals and if it was red, it would stop the train automatically.