Chicago Milwaukee Hiawatha HSR ? | Taking Back The Rails | Chicago Hub Network
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 июл 2024
- What would passenger rail look like if the freight companies DIDNT own the vast majority of the rail rights of way in the United States? What if, instead, those routes were dedicated to providing high speed passenger rail service? This sub-series seeks to go beyond the hype and find out if the freight rail rights of way are even any good for the purpose. We'll start with a classic passenger rail route: the old Milwaukee Road Hiawatha between Chicago, Illinois and Milwaukee, Wisconsin. This same route is currently used by Amtrak for their Hiawatha Service. We'll take a look at what the current route can bear, electrified and freed of its freight rail constraints. We'll also look at fast HSR could reasonably get, and compare that to a higher speed diesel-electric option. In other words, we're Taking Back The Rails!
Image Attribution:
"A Hiawatha Service train at Glenview station in October 2018"
by David Wilson
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Lucid Group Discord Channel Invite:
/ discord
Chapters:
0:00 Hey It's Your Old Pal Lucid Stew
0:22 Purpose of Taking Back The Rails/Chicago
3:05 Suburban Chicago Issues
6:04 High Speed North of Rondout Illinois
6:42 More Issues Near and North of the Wisconsin Border
7:46 Milwaukee Mitchell International Airport
8:58 Milwaukee/Why electrify?
9:40 Milwaukee Intermodal Station
10:36 Let's Upgrade!
11:39 Let's Compare!
12:30 Conclusion/Up Next
12:52 See You On That Big, Beautiful Freeway!
Topics:
High Speed Rail
HSR
Freight Rail
Chicago
Milwaukee Road
Hiawatha
Chicago Union Station
Passenger Rail
Nationalization of Rail
Mandated Electrification
Union Pacific
Regional Rail
Commuter Rail
METRA
Western Ave. Station
Grand Ave. Facility
Diamond Crossing
OWLS
At-grade Crossing
Grade Separation
Morton Grove Illinois
METRA North Glenview Station
Glenview
Rondout
Canadian Pacific Kansas City Limited
Green Oaks
Illinois
Wisconsin
Rosecrans
Milwaukee Subdivision
Chicago & Milwaukee Subdivision
Sturtevant Wisconsin
Milwaukee Mitchell International Airport
Oak Creek
Electrification
Diesel-Electric
Siemens Charger
Milwaukee Intermodal Station
Interstate 794
The Hop
Deerfield 
Наука
The economic impact of the expensive option to make Milwaukee and Chicago just 36 minutes apart is super intriguing.
It’s time to buy real estate near Milwaukee Intermodal Station I guess
@@weeniswbring down 794!
Its like 2:15 am rn and I wanted to go to sleep, but this is more important to watch
As your numbers suggest, I think the potential of even 110-125 mph rail with frequent service avoiding freight holdups (call it Brightline Florida-style rail) in a lot of midwestern markets like this is really interesting, and the costs are really quite low and attractive given the return and possibility of creating whole new regions of rail users. Or, it could pay for about half of one tunnel in the NEC. Alas.
Tell me about it. The Mid-West COULD have a great higher speed rail renaissance should it get a vision and plan together... Or private-equity financing like Brightline to speed things along...
I haven't looked at many of the others in the area, yet. However, here, if Illinois can do it on the way to STL, surely MKE can be done in a similar fashion. Plenty of room for extra sidings to get freight out of the way of 110mph passenger. A budget version seems like a good idea for the money when compared to, as you point out, sometimes ridiculously priced NEC improvements.
I would love to see 110 - 125mph service between Des Moines & Chicago over the Iowa Interstate route. IAIS obviously opposes this, but it is not a high-frequency freight route and the infrastructure is in pretty good condition...
Problem with running on the same rail in the in the Chicago area is the massive amount of freight. Every major Class 1 has tracks in the area: BNSF, CPKC, CN, NS, CSX, Union Pacific. Its one of the most important freight hubs in the nation. The only way I can see high speed is to run on completely separate rail in the same corridors. Not mixing with freight. And I cant see a way to cut the freight rails in the area to condensed down to less rails. But it should be looked at if their is regions to buy adjacent rails and expand rails to at least double track
@@stickynorth Honestly, the whole Midwest needs a high(er) speed network. It's astounding that there are no high-frequency Amtrak lines going from Cleveland to Louisville (or even Nashville).
It's a corridor of 2M+ metro areas built around railways, with palatial downtown stations that are being left to rot, and there's a lot of abandoned rail infrastructure that could be rebuilt for passenger service.
Your estimated speed between Union Station and the Milwaukee airport is only ~6 minutes slower than taking the blue line to O’Hare. Just based off of fact that alone, the ticket revenue would pay back the construction costs in about two years
Even though it isn't all that close, I figure its a nice option. I live in a similar situation in LAX's service area where you'll do just about anything within reason to avoid LAX. The last several times I've flown into/out of the area its been through Palm Springs.
Could we keep going to Minneapolis/St. Paul? This Milwaukee Road trains use to average 112~mph in the 1930's so I assume the Geometry gets better as you go northwest.
This is such a sensible thing that should be done. For how close and how large Chicago and Milwaukee are, we really should have faster train service. 45 mins from downtown to downtown would be AMAZING. And it would absolutely get the ridership. The Hiawatha is already one of Amtraks most profitable lines outside the NEC, this would make it so much better. Like I wouldn’t be surprised if Brightline comes in and makes this happen for their start in Brightline Midwest.
It's rather remarkable that the train is slower now than it was in the 30s under steam power. Surely we can at least match that and there is some value in it.
@@LucidStew yep lol
A more interesting option would be "Putting Back the Rails". Look into the option or relaying the Chicago North Shore and Milwaukee main line. That was an electric railway that operated off of a connection with the Chicago L system. It was running dedicated 100+ mph electrified passenger service in the 1940s. The main line has largely been turned into walking paths, but with one exception where an industrial park crosses the path, could be returned to railway use.
Rails-to-trails-to-rails. 🤔 Honestly, I wouldn't mind. Those things are the bane of my existence.
I mean, consistent 110 mph between Chicago and Milwaukee would be a huge upgrade from the current Amtrak service which crawls
Top notch as usual.
One thing that passenger rail advocates sometimes miss is that making things tougher for rail freight can has bad environmental consequences, if it increases the incentive to switch to road freight...
How could this happen if freight is never in a rush anyways.
Didn't realize how close Chicago and Milwaukee actually are.
Speaking of radical changes: With the situation at MKE airport I immediately had the urge to swap the rail alignment and Howell Avenue, since that would eliminate the shuttle bus, saving another few minutes for passengers going to the airport. (Also, any buses going to either location would likely want to stop at _both_ the airport and the rail station, which would be a single stop instead of two if they were in the same place.)
I was surprised to find out that they are basically perfectly aligned to have the rail go down Howell Avenue. You would "just" need to evict 50-ish houses on Greeley Street to get it connected back to a rail alignment on the Milwaukee side.
Oh, and a series of businesses would loose freight rail sidings.
Great video as always! Chicago will always be a tough to crack, because of the dizzying number of at grade crossings-both road and rail! Not to mention Metra further complicating the rail operations.
After much deliberation and considering Chicago’s context, I settled on converting Metra service to an El train directly over the existing tracks with enough clearance for freight and HSR. Local trains get the El, HSR and freight get the original tracks.
Interesting. Do you think the locals would go for it?
@@LucidStew if they can’t build elevated viaducts through the burbs over existing tracks in *Chicago*… it can’t happen anywhere.
Why couldn't Chicago's Metra, Amtrak & CTA get together and create a unified transportation station, located at Mayfair, Illinois? That would allow for more convenient transfers between the CTA subway line serving O'Hare airport and Mayfair, where Amtrak's Hiawatha or other northbound trains already transit through, but do not stop, until the Glenview station some 12 miles further north.
We need a better and more powerful FRA to be able to coordinate these things. I know they do a little, but more makes more sense in the longer-term if we're recognizing that rail travel will continue to grow as the road networks continue to fill.
Awww I was hoping to see The Milwaukee Road Hiawatha color scheme with pantographs over the cars, including the dome view end car
I think this should be done on the old CNW shore line to Milwaukee, a lot more people could benefit, like Metra passengers as well.
Bring it to the Cities too!!! 🗣🗣
I would analyze departing from Ogilvie and taking the UP-NW to the video’s first diamond crossing in Mayfair but avoid crossing it by veering onto the abandoned ROW that is now the Skokie Valley Line Trail (I say this as a frequent user of that trail but willing to sacrifice it back to better and higher use). This merges with the Northern end of the CTA Yellow Line which quickly ends. Beyond is more abandoned ROW that used to be a fast bypass line to express to Milwaukee without stopping at the local North Shore communities (like the UP-N does). The corridor is used for transmission lines so we have more reason to electrify. I believe this is the straighter alignment that @Lucidstew wanted to switch over to. It will have less curves to straighten but grade crossings and bridges and replacing the removed track up until Northbrook will be expensive.
That ROW is long gone, sad to say. And OTC platforms really aren’t long enough for intercity service.
A less destructive and labour intensive option would be to trench or tunnel directly north of Glenview station. There's existing tracks there going north east that join the ROW you mentioned north of northbrook.
Is definetly a lot smoother but also with the amount of businesses that have rail spurs along that route I don't know if it's that good a candidate anyway...
It's too bad you skipped Racine and Kenosha (76k + 98k). But I understand why...the tracks closer to Lake Michigan are just much slower. I hope HSR and the Twin Cities is on your todo list for videos! MN has always been interested in connecting to Duluth and Rochester. Rochester is hilly...but could transition nicely through Wisconsin and to Chicago. The old Twin City to Chicago trains were very fast because they used fast/flat tracks on the Mississippi. Sadly these great Mississippi tracks are mostly reserved now for freight...some of the fastest freight trains in the country run along this corridor. My dream for the Twin Cities would be a super loop to Chicago even if just a mix of HSR and conventional rail: Twin Cities > MSP Airport > Rochester > La Crosse > Wisconsin Dells > Madison > Janesville > Beloit > Rockford > O'Hare > Chicago Union > Kennosha > Racine > Milwaukee Airport > Downtown Milwaukee > Fond du Lac > Oshkosh > Appleton > Green Bay > Wausau > Eau Claire > Twin Cities. Most of the population of WI, MN, and IL lives along this route, and it would be crazy popular.
The tracks by the lake are going to purposed for the future KRM line
Another great video! Shame that Talgo was screwed over by Wisconsin. Their dual-mode high-speed trainsets might have been great for this route, they're now even making a dual mode hydrogen-electric version of the Talgo 250, which can go 155 mph.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that option. That would have been a good one to put in the video.
Scott Walker is a corrupt bastard
"Higher Speed Rail" can be effective, delivering high average speeds and fast travel times at a reasonable cost. The goal for intercity rail should be NOT as fast as possible, but as fast as necessary and practical, and that is what you see with Brightline Florida and Brightline West, and how the California HSR Project has stumbled with its over-ambitious gold-plated plan.
I think an argument in favor of the full-cost upgrade option is that in the future the route could serve as the northernmost segment of a larger Midwestern high speed rail network. Possibly the northern part of a high speed line connecting down to Indianapolis.
Can u put some kinda speedometer in the corner of these videos
Another good video. I think the grade separation and improved curves for $9.8 billion is an excellent deal is a no-brainer. Same with completely separating freight from the passenger service as much as possible. Thanks for the video and I look forwad to your next one, especially the Richmond VA to Raleigh NC HSR.
love the cheap upgrade, sounds super standard for an intercity
I have an idea: how about running up the CTA Red Line from a terminal by the Loop to the CTA Skokie Swift Line to the old right-of-way for the old Chicago North Shore & Milwaukee interurban right of way into Milwaukee? 🤔
Thanks for showing the downsides as well as the positives, it's important to be realistic or else we get a CALHSR disaster. One more of those could kill HSR in the US.
I looked around the country for a little while before settling on this and I figured I'd need to set the series up for some disappointments. It appears that it could be a great idea some places, but there will be a lot of places where it will NOT be a good idea at all. Which really is similar to the Taking Back The Streets idea. There the rails actually being IN LANES is completely in jest, but that I-35 corridor isn't half bad in places.
I think there are alignments out of OTC/NWS that would be better suited for this.
Also this would benefit greatly by adding in a train line to Madison from Chicago that makes a station call at ohare. And south of the city build a connection between Union station and the Metra electric corridor. And you can get a nice alignment that will take you to St Louis and Indianapolis
Let's be real in the long term u wanna extend that system to Minneapolis, that would mean doing the expensive option is rly ur only way.
Instead of making the a Rail trench for the crossings, you could have the road go over or under the tracks. That’s what they are doing with CHSR
This IMO is almost always a better option. Cars can handle steeper grades and tighter turns...so roads should be going under/over railroads and not vice-versa.
@@AaronSmith-sx4ez Exactly
The opportunity to transition from Metra's Milwaukee district to UP's Milwaukee subdivision is just before I-94 in Kilbourn Park. It's at the first set of diamonds you remarked upon. You jog right (north) up that line and use a flyover to cross the expressway which would put you on Chicago & North Western's former Skokie Sub. The right of way is intact, though without rails. It serves as a utility easement for the most part. At Skokie, the CTA's Yellow Line joins the route utilizing what one was the Chicago, North Shore & Milwaukee right of way. A few miles north the CTA service ends and after that the UP Milwaukee Sub swings in from the southwest. The right of way is likely at least 100 feet wide al the way to Milwaukee Mitchell Airport, which the line passes on the east side. It's literally the airport boundary. In downtown south of the Amtrak station there is a point where the UP and CPKC mainlines are about feet apart, making for an excellent transition point. That's the route I'd choose. CNW was very much into grade separation wherever possible.
Two things I think you should add to future videos:
1. Would simply building a viaduct or tunneling under the city to avoid all of the tight curves near the station make more sense?
2. Do other freight rail corridors have the slack capacity to handle the additional rail traffic? If not, how much do you need to widen either them or the nearest highway to accommodate the shift? (I’m assuming you wouldn’t build a new freight rail line, because if you were going to build a new rail line, you’d just build a new fast passenger line instead of taking the older, slower freight line)
Could you do a Windsor-Quebec City analysis? Would be cool to get some Canadian representation
Honestly 110 mph most of the way isn't bad for that route.
Yeah, it's pretty straight except for the ends. That's why the old school trains were pretty fast.
Old pal ;-), I think you should also look at corridors where you have a network effect. So not simply A-B city pairs but rather lines that could bundle multiple lines that run beyond the HSR segment. Alot of countries that have implemented HSR have leveraged connections to the old network to increase the usage of the initial HSR infrastructure, in some cases even with dual mode trains. Getting more trains per hour on that new line and offering better service to more people makes the upfront investment much more bearable.
Another option: while the Acela/Avelia Liberty trains can tilt up to 6 degrees, allowing a 25 to 30% speed increase through curves, many European tilting trains tilt up to 8 degrees, allowing a 35 to 40% curve speed increase. May not sound like a radical improvement, but a 90mph non-tilting curve could become 115mph with 6 degree tilt and 125mph with 8 degree tilt.
X2000 stands ready, I am sure. Set up for cold weather, already tested for clearance on Chicago lines.
I'd be interested to see what a revival of the north shore line's former interurban ROW would yield? you'd need to do grad sep, but from what I've walked of it, it's mostly still there, and fairly straight? It was famous for its high speeds (for the time). Anecdotally it also acted as an inspiration for the shinkansen? I'm not sure I believe that one though.
Another great video there old man. I have so much trouble imagining these things happening 20-40 years out; I'm still of the mindset that we'll have teleports by then but the fact that we've been predicting these things since the 1950s and all we gotten so far is 27 versions of Twitter and 1,594+ ways to lose your money on crypto, so a breakthrough in physics or engineering comparable to the first steam locomotives seems less likely than ever. I guess I should stop hoping for big new developments besides slightly shinier electric cars. I really hope you're right but I still want my flying DeLorean dang it!
Was just saying something similar in Discord. We were promised flying cars, instead we'll get half a dozen daily train trips between Springfield and Boston by 2045. I'm conflicted about the near future because we have a serious fiscal crisis looming in the next decade, but I think the Republican party will start fading as the boomers die out. So, probably a political climate to support expansive passenger rail, but maybe not the money?
@@LucidStew Oh no, we're going to get political. I doubt the GOP will die out with boomers; the Dems are fracturing and bleeding support to the GOP as people vote left, then regret it; "Yay, Sanctuary City!" (a few moments later) "We don't have enough jobs/housing/money for all these immigrants" and so on across the board. Also, 34 trillion in debt is a heck of an overdraft to pay off and it's only going to get deeper but no one can predict the future, so let's keep on going and see if we can make it better than our past.
BTW: Chicago Union, O’hare airport, Mitchell airport, and Milwaukee Intermodal are linked by pre-existing rails, with just one turning track missing in Des Plaines. Any attempt at serious HSR in this route should consider making that small detour over to O’hare.
Another great video! I think it might be interesting to do a video in a similar vain except you can eminent domain anything you want just to see how fast you can make certain connections. It would have no practical value, but i think it would be fun!
Extend it to the Twin Cities!!
stop at glenview as their is thecenter for great lakes naval aviation center near by.
Brightline west finally broke ground yay.
Watching this just makes me think how complicated and expensive the corridor near me-Cascadia-would be to upgrade to HSR. Loads of at grade crossings, bridges, a packed freight corridor, lots of fairly sharp curves 😢 It’s definitely not like building a line through the California desert on freeway ROW.
The only way this becomes practical is if the route is extended to the Twin Cities, making high-speed much more viable...
39 mins (presumably ~35 mins downtown to downtown if you ran express trains skipping airport) would be worth the cost of electrification and grade separation. Trains running on fossil fuels just seems too volatile economically. Electricity prices are going to be more predictable & steady (unless your jurisdiction is getting all its electricity from fossil fuels - in which case, the point is moot).
The grade separation could benefit METRA as well, as it could increase speeds of their trains on the same right of way, which could help overcome any local NIMBYism & get more buy-in from Illinois and the Chicago area.
For Milwaukee and Wisconsin at large this would be a massive win and would really connect Milwaukee (at least the parts within 10-15m walk or transit of the station) to Chicago in ways that are easier than many parts of the Chicago metro area at present. Property values and the tax revenue alone could help pay for the cost.
I’m wondering, with the grade separation, what METRA stations could be served as is? Would some have to be rebuilt? That would be an additional cost for METRA of course but seems like a great plan. And cost is quite reasonable.
once again as europoor, it feels insane not to just *spend* the money on electrification, grade crossings and basic alignments adjustments instead of doing it 4 times over and wasting multiple times as much money
Let me clarify to make sure I understand this correctly: so basically there are three different lines connecting Chicago directly to Milwaukee that are largely redundant but exist because they are owned by competing companies, so if one of these were to be converted to a passenger-only line then it would only cause minimum disruption to freight movement between the two cities?
There are actually 5 if you include Canadian National's line a little further west and an abandoned ROW that is now a bike path(that's the first diamond crossing in the video). 2 are owned by UP, btw. Chicago's rail system back in the day was pretty enormous. But yeah, wouldn't some national coordination and corporate cooperation be great?
@@LucidStew That, and the fact that the track geometry of the route is already straight enough to support high speeds over the majority of its length, almost sounds too good to be true. It seems to be the easiest potential high speed rail project in the country, so its kind of insane that I've never seen it get brought up in discussions of that topic.
@@topsnek4603 I think the fact that they're running freight on it disqualifies it in most peoples minds. However, people have to remember that politics isn't static and big changes are likely coming in a generation or two.
I think straight electrification is the most practical. Still pretty good time to Milwaukee and could be extended to Madison or Minneapolis-St Paul with true high-speed service. And maybe if a couple grade separations happen in a couple strategic locations, you can maximize time savings without doubling the cost like with the two proper high speed options.
The diamond crossings are the biggest individual expenses. The two on the Chicago end wouldn't be bad on time since you're just barely coming out of the slow part anyway. The one at Rondout, not as good, but not terrible as you need to slow to 125mph about 9 miles north of there for the curve mentioned in the video. That curve can not be easily remedied any would likely continue to interrupt speed mid-journey.
Two questions.
-Do you have maps showing where those grade separations and curve straightenings would be for the 'spensive option?
-Where do you find data for freight traffic on a given section of track? I think CMAP used to keep up with that a long time ago, but I've not seen anything more recent from them since the 2010s.
Thanks!
Your problem children are 7 curves between Gurney, IL and Truesdell, WI. From south to north their radii are roughly, 2.25, 1.25, 2.75, 1.15, 1.15, 1.4, and 1.5 miles. All but the 2nd can be adjusted to 3 miles, which I have as a minimum for 200mph. The 2nd one is limited by some nature preserves to the north and a housing subdivision to the east. The 6th one is limited to a 2.25 mile radius, but you can get to 3 by demolishing a warehouse.
I don't have data for freight traffic. It was mentioned in source material that freight traffic was light south of Rondout.
Check out the Chicago CREATE program to modernize and speed up the extensive rail network in Chicago and Metro area mostly in the central and southern regions. It is ambitious and has already accomplished a lot to speed up freight and passenger. The players are state and local governments all seven big freight railroads and local exchange belt lines METRA and Amtrak too. They have even built flyover tracks or rail to rail overpasses. Usually the passenger trains use the rail overpasses it’s easier for passenger trains. What CREATE really needs is more capital it is amplified by all the CREATE players since the benefits help all. This program if extended to the North to Milwaukee would deal with not only the grade crossings but would make the necessary rail flyovers to make it really happen. In Chicago folks are not bent out of shape by rail it’s a city that likes its trains and wants them to improve. 1200 trains a day and some 700 passenger mostly METRA. Really enjoyed your presentation I really wish we would commit Chicago and surrounding cites would really benefit. Thanks again for the fine work!
The reason they big freight railroads agreed to that program is they recognize Chicago as a massive bottle neck. It's been the biggest bottleneck for over a decade if you don't count the ports on the coasts.
Have you calculated speeds using tilting cars? I know the curves through Deerfield might lower max speed, but maybe with tilting cars it would improve.
I didn't. conventional is surprisingly competitive on routes that aren't all that straight as long as they have a few good bursts, so with one this straight its almost surely faster.
Yo what about Cascadia HSR route to visualize what it would look like Portland OR, to Vancouver British Columbia?
Sooner than later. A Pacific Northwest Corridor video will be coming pretty soon, but it won't be as visualization focused.
So if its not grade separated then the route has the ability to support 150mph for about 7 miles, if it is grade separated then it can support 200mph for about 30 miles, and if it is both grade separated and given track geometry adjustments then it can support 200mph for about 50 miles?
That sums it up pretty well. I was careful with the geometry adjustments. You could squeeze out more if you were willing to make bigger sacrifices. The main thing holding speed back is the inconsistency of grade separation. You get 2 miles here, 3 miles there, but not enough to bother with accelerating.
@@LucidStew Would it make sense to grade separate first and then make track geometry adjustments in the future, or would it make more sense to do them at the same time? I guess what I'm asking is if any of the track geometry adjustments would need to be done in areas that would overlap with grade-separation work, thereby requiring some of the grade separation work to be redone?
very stage hearing that level crossings are limited to 110mph
there are a fair number of 125mph level crossings in the uk and on mixed traffic lines too.
I think there is a case of 125mph routes for places that are within 100 miles of each other. It becomes more appealing for a higher top speed if you continue to the twin cities but that is how you explode with costs.
Yeah, ideally if you're going to do 200mph its part of a larger network and extending beyond 86 miles where you can build up some miles at speed and really build up a difference in time. Although 20 minutes in less than 100 miles isn't bad.
Yet another option: combine 125mph diesel locomotives with refurbished 1st gen Acela tilting coaches! A bit more than $3.1bn, but not much. What would be the journey times for 125mph diesel with 6 degree tilting coaches?
Like the original Milwaukee right of way, I think you'll need 3 tracks, four in some spots
What are your thoughts of high speed between Chicago and Milwaukee via the tracks that run along I290 through Waukesha? More miles but maybe faster speeds.
The various routes between Chicago and Milwaukee are pretty similar in terms of their speed potential.
You mean I-94? 290 is way down in Chicago lol
Hehe your train model is the Ukrainian EKr1 train :D
Start with diesel-electric option and grow the corridor first.
It already has the ridership to support more/faster service
@@andykillsu Currently the ridership is 636,854 annually. With $100 million/minute saved cost, it gives $157 per minute save for every rider in a year.
Do you think paying $157 to save a minute every year worth it?
Pretty interesting that this could be faster than even the NEC on average if they just opened it up to 110.
@@onetwothreeabc You can’t just base your calculations on current ridership. Having faster service will create more demand.
@@andykillsu How much more demand do you expect? 1 million / year? 10 million / year?
Best damn US HSR channel strikes again!
Basically making a roadmap for lazy politicians! I wonder how similar this is to internal FRA work (assuming it exists).
What? Not a Glenview stop? People in the burbs want to avoid going downtown.
Milwaukee- Mitchell - O'Hare - Bloomington - St. Louis. Bypass downtown Chicago altogether?
125 mph hybrid electric is probably the best option all around for any inter-city route at this point. I am a fan of electrification but few routes probably can justify the added cost especially when hybrid electric trains using hydrogen or batteries is now both technologically and commercially possible... I think the obsession with going 200 mph+ is rather foolish unless you are China and money is no object or you have alternative priorities than being revenue neutral/positive... OR...
How about an alternative version of the route using "Brightline West" design concepts... I.e. down an Interstate corridor ROW using one-track networks with passing sections... Would this be faster or even possible along this corridor I wonder?
Still, 40 minutes would be pretty nice. The hurdle with electrification is kind of like the argument of building more local transit before HSR. The more you have the more attractive HSR becomes, but if you're going to build HSR eventually I say sooner is better than later regardless. Of course in the videos I'm looking at little portions, but ideally it would be part of a network that make much more sense.
#SaveDreams ❤
Hi Stew, frustrated Aussie here. Australia: worst passenger rail of ANY advanced economy! Uzbekistan does better! OK, got that off my chest. A couple of cities here (Melbourne and Adelaide) are benefiting from aggressive 'level crossing removal' projects. How crossings are removed varies with context - sometimes both the rail tracks AND an adjacent train station are elevated to remove a crossing. Benefits include eliminating some traffic jams. Worth considering? Regards, Warwick
I recently stayed near O'Hare Airport in Chicago. Without any financial constraints (as my employer would have covered the cost of an Uber), I chose to walk to the L station, which took 20 minutes, and then embarked on a one-hour journey to the city center. This is two to three times longer than the car journey time indicated by Apple Maps at that particular time. I believe many people, like myself, would find satisfaction in having frequent services between destinations, along with improvements to the surrounding areas and the establishment of corridors such as bike paths and pedestrian streets leading to these stations. This approach would make better use of the funds required to enhance travel speeds to true HSR.
This is the only service that’s makes sense out of Chicago!
Electrify everything is my take
Considering how much we spend on Highways and how inefficient they are at moving people. I would prefer to spend 9-10 billion on true hsr. The expensive option truly does look world class in the renderings.
I get we like our cars here in the US. However given the obesity rate, lowering life expectancy, and traffic jams. Even me as a non left leaning individual. Would like to see more walkable and transit oriented development. Rather than the concrete jungle of interstates mowing through towns.
What is Hiawatha in the Title?
That's the name of the Chicago to Milwaukee train service, passed down from previous operators.
I know you're a pretty strict single-issue type of channel which only cares about exclusively hsr, but I think that beyond the marginal improvements it would bring the electrification option here, and electrification of freight and passenger rail nationally is critical to lessening the impacts of the climate crisis. Getting people out of cars and into trains (and busses and whatnot) is a critical piece of the puzzle, and frankly our freight trains need to be electrified too for the same reason (and to move more shipping away from trucks and onto trains).
So once again the solution is to screw the railroads over in the name of "national wellbeing"?
No, this is more what it would look like IF you screwed over the freight railroads in the name of national well being. I spend a significant amount of time in the video discussing the implications and complications of this. Did you watch it?
Quite frankly, the Big 4 freight roads have been "screwing over" everyone else for sometime now...