West Detroit Connection operational for Wolverines...

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.

neroden

Engineer
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
9,548
Location
Ithaca, NY
...according to a poster on railroad.net.

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=1099&start=840#p1362880

twropr writes: "On Mon. Dec. 21, the WOLVERINES began using the new West Detroit Connector, some trains making the Detroit-Dearborn run in 17 min."

This is massively good news. This was ARRA funded IIRC, and took way too long to clear all the paperwork (a bit like the Texas Eagle on TRE situation).

The shortest previous schedule for Dearborn-Detroit in either direction was 23 minutes, but some trains were scheduled in as long as 29 minutes. Furthermore the new route has fewer conflicts with freight and so should have more reliable on time performance.

I'm just guessing, but I expect to see a serious schedule revision for the Wolverines soon, cutting 5 or 10 minutes out of the schedules.
 
"Massively good news" indeed. This little project was low-hanging fruit like a squash, and past time to get picked. And iirc this is the first piece of the Wolverines upgrades to be completed. The Dearborn-Kalamazoo section is still to come, of course, but a nice Xmas present to have this one in hand this year. The Phase 1 Chicago-Detroit target was to take out 50 minutes. So here's a nice slice of that.

Hope the West Detroit Connector does take out the full 10 minutes that a MI DOT official indicated a few years back. Then as soon as possible take another 10 minutes out of the published schedule. The last arrival in Detroit then will be 11:58 p.m. or so, on the right side of midnight, in other words. I believe that little things like making arrival times before midnight instead of the dreaded after midnight can be worth as much as cutting trip times by half an hour.
 
Another and immediate psychological gain from this upgrade: Everybody hates back-tracking maneuvers. Worse then going slow is backing up. Riders hate it. Here's one place where a few hundred thousand riders won't be backing up anymore. That should greatly improve customer satisfaction scores on the Wolverines!

Meanwhile, 10 minutes ain't much out of a 6 hour trip DET-CHI, and won't do much to attract riders end to end. But 10 minutes is a nice-sized bite out of the 1 hr Ann Arbor-DET schedule, or even the 2 hrs Ann Arbor-Pontiac. Those short segments will have more riders in 2016 than they had in 2015 for sure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is welcome news indeed. These incremental upgrades will enable Amtrak to eventually increase the frequency & speeds of the Wolverine. After the Hiawatha line connecting Chicago to Milwaukee, I believe the Wolverine is likely the 2nd busiest line in the Midwest. Certainly it connects the two largest metro areas in the Midwest.
 
The two biggest Stimulus-funded projects are STL-CHI and DET-CHI. If they are successful, as I expect, we can hope neighboring states develop envy and start to clamor for funds for more 110-mph routes serving more Midwestern cities.

This 10-minute savings near Detroit is a real incremental improvement, more serious than Illinois' very short stunt segment that operates at 110 mph. So Michigan is ahead now, by my scorekeeping. :)

The Lincoln service STL-CHI had only 577,000 riders last year, after repeated service interruptions due to construction. (Plus another 80,000 or so rode the Texas Eagle for this segment).

That was enuff to beat out the Wolverines at 466,000, also held back by numerous construction delays. (Ridership was about 100,000 riders higher on both routes before the construction mess.)

By mid-2017 the construction should be finished, if not earlier. By late calendar 2017, the speeded-up Lincoln service will kick in, with an added frequency.

Wolverines will start going another 40 or 50 minutes faster DET-CHI at about the same time. Due to the massive congestion near Chicago -- South of the Lake -- I don't know if Michigan can squeeze in another frequency, or if that will have to wait for more and costly right-of-way improvements.

Both trains operating over tracks upgraded to carry 110-mph trains will have to wait for the faster bi-level cars. Nippon Sharyo will deliver them as soon as they can after passing the crash test. :(

Those bi-level cars will have about 30% more capacity, giving an indication of how much ridership may have been forecast to grow. Of course, in Illinois that fifth Lincoln train will increase capacity by another 20% or more. With a big bounce back when construction ends for a while, I'm hoping to see a million pax on that route by 2020. Maybe 800,000 on the Wolverines. (btw The Hiawathas CHI-Milwaukee carried 799,000 last year and in 2014.)

One of the Amtrak Presidents (who blurred past before Joe Boardman settled in for stability) said that Chicago and Detroit were "the two largest closest cities" off the Northeast Corridor. So Amtrak and Michigan had begun investing in the Amtrak-owned section Porter, Ind-Kalamazoo. Hey, we've lived long enuff to begin to see the payoff from that work begun 10 or 12 years ago.

btw Seeing that you are newish, I got my ridership figures from Amtrak.com. Scroll to the bottom, click on About Amtrak. That page offers choices including "Reports & Documents." At the bottom of that page are Monthly Reports full of interesting info and frustration. (September is more equal than the other months, because its year-to-day figures match the Fiscal Year just ended.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good news that this stimulus project is finally done. I suspect that Amtrak won't tighten the Wolverine schedule soon, but will instead use the new connection to improve the on-time performance while waiting on other improvements in MI to get completed.

Interesting though that the OTP of the westbound Wolverines arriving at CHI has been pretty good for the past month (status maps archive for 351,353,355 for 11/30 to 12/29). Median arrival time has been 2 minutes early. Eastbound arrivals of 350,352,354 into DET has not nearly as good. Has anyone seen reports of how many of the Indiana Gateway project crossovers and 2nd/3rd track segments have been completed? Maybe the better OTP of the Wolverines (and Blue Water) arriving at CHI reflect some of the upgrades in Indiana getting completed.

Question I have is what Michigan's plans are for track improvements after the HSIPR funded improvements are completed? The cost of the South of the Lake improvements is so large that it is likely to be stalled for years beyond projects in IL tied to CREATE and Metra and maybe 1 or 2 in Indiana. If Michigan were to put a program in place with a sustained capital project funding of even just $20 or $25 million a year, the state could, in combination with the occasional TIGER or other federal grant, tackle Detroit to Pontiac upgrades, double track some segments, do a few grade crossing separations, build the connector to move the Pere Marquette to the Amtrak tracks in MI, etc for incremental improvements to the corridor in Michigan. Better to go after the low hanging fruit than do little while working to advance the SOTL project. Should lower the operating cost if the Chicago to Pontiac trip time is reduced to 5 hours or less. Get the end to end trip time fast enough and maybe squeeze out another daily frequency with no increase in the number of trainsets.
 
Illinois's top priority is probably 75th St CIP, but that benefits the freight railroads so much that they're going to be asked to pay for most of it.

After that, the next CREATE project with passenger benefits is Grand Crossing, which is frankly part of the South of the Lake route.

Michigan has stated their intention to fix the crazy criss-cross north of Detroit station so they have an uncomplicated run to Pontiac. I'd expect that to be the next track improvement planned in MI; both Conrail and CN should want that done.

There are also endless discussions about a new Ann Arbor station, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

I believe there is also discussion about extra tracks through Battle Creek to try to separate the freight and passenger traffic more (although full separation requires a flyover which is not being considered).

In service terms, there is still serious talk of a second Grand Rapids-Chicago run.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Faster running of the Michigan will save some crew costs since they are paid by on duty time. ( don't know if scheduled time if train is early ). However there will some incremental costs due to locos and passenger cars running faster. The below the rail costs will also increase but that usually somehow is passed on to capital costs.
 
In service terms, there is still serious talk of a second Grand Rapids-Chicago run.
That would be great.

There's also talk of a Grand Rapids - Lansing - Detroit route, backed/proposed by the Governor himself, but that's going to involve some serious cash.
 
Illinois's top priority is probably 75th St CIP, but that benefits the freight railroads so much that they're going to be asked to pay for most of it.

After that, the next CREATE project with passenger benefits is Grand Crossing, which is frankly part of the South of the Lake route.

Michigan has stated their intention to fix the crazy criss-cross north of Detroit station so they have an uncomplicated run to Pontiac. I'd expect that to be the next track improvement planned in MI; both Conrail and CN should want that done.

There are also endless discussions about a new Ann Arbor station, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

I believe there is also discussion about extra tracks through Battle Creek to try to separate the freight and passenger traffic more (although full separation requires a flyover which is not being considered).

In service terms, there is still serious talk of a second Grand Rapids-Chicago run.
 
Gi,

The 75th Street SIP will also greatly benefit Metra's Southwest Service trains separating the passenger trains from the freight trains and then connecting to the elevated Rock Island District tracks. The running time reduction and the elimination of the passenger/freight train conflicts will make the service more reliable, just like the new west Detroit connector project did for Amtrak.

The new Metra Rock Island District flyover bridge at Englewood was built long enough so than a fourth NS mainline track could be built under it.

I remember reading a while back that the vertices lift bridges at the Illinois/Indiana state line were also going to be looked at to possibly reactivate one of them as a part of adding a third mainline track. We will have to see if this happens as the upgrade project is finalized.
 
Faster running of the Michigan will save some crew costs since they are paid by on duty time. ( don't know if scheduled time if train is early ). ...
I know nothing and wonder a lot about this.

The new schedule for the Vermonter has it leaving St. Albans another 30 minutes later in the morning, and returning 30 minutes earlier in the evening as well. (This time savings is after a previous 30ish-minutes speed-up a year or two ago.)

So does this new timetable mean that labor costs on the Vermonter could be down this year by about an hour every day? Sweet, and Vermont will use any money saved from a lower subsidy toward extending the Ethan Allen or other train improvements.

Will labor cost savings kick in on the upgraded St Louis-CHI route as well, come 2017? That line is now 4 Lincolns plus the Texas Eagle, and it will add a train to make it 5 Lincolns + Eagle. The Illinois DOT claims it will get "about an hour" out of the 5 state-sponsored runs, and so, I guess, 40 or 45 minutes out of the Eagle. If so, crew cost savings could be noticeable on this route as well as on the Wolverines.

I'm not celebrating a pay cut for the crews working fewer hours. In the case of the Vermonter, if or when that train morphs into a Montrealer, those crews will be working a good bit longer. In the Midwest, average paid hours per employee could drop. But there crews will be needed for the additional run of the Lincoln service, and any added frequency that Michigan can squeeze in. More jobs, but not quite as well paid. And all of these projects will help Amtrak, and all of its jobs, to survive.

Am I getting this right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think that's right. Vermont undoubtedly planned for the reduced costs already; they're very good about budgeting in that state.
 
In service terms, there is still serious talk of a second Grand Rapids-Chicago run.
That would be great.

There's also talk of a Grand Rapids - Lansing - Detroit route, backed/proposed by the Governor himself, but that's going to involve some serious cash.

Nathanael, I had been informed by OBS on the Pere Marquette just after Thanksgiving, 2013, that the second run indeed was going to happen. He told me that he was told it would happen around or shortly after the opening of the new station in Grand Rapids but he was very skeptical of the timing (obviously, he was correct about his doubts). He also mentioned that the scheduling of the second run would look very similar to the extra runs on the day before and the Sunday after Thanksgiving. I'm sure the exception would be that the second run would be a complete one and not terminate in Holland like it has in the past.

Sarah, I had an opportunity to attend the publicly open meeting in Holland regarding the study for the extension and/or creation of the route to Detroit but unfortunately I couldn't, however, I did read in the Holland Sentinel that the study was to conclude at the end of 2015. I agree that if the Snyder administration approved the plan, that it would take serious funding since there would have to be major upgrades to the track from Grand Rapids to accommodate Amtrak since most of (or all) has not been used for passenger rail in nearly 50 years. As we've discussed in the past, I'm all for it, along with your ideas for an route to Northern Michigan. I think I'd seen on Mlive.com some time back that it actually was being studied as well. I guess we'll see what happens in the coming months/years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think the second Pere Marquette will run to Grand Rapids, there isn't enough time to do two full round trips with one trainset.
 
There is very little reduction that will happen in terms of Vermonter labor costs. The only savings would be the 30 minutes or so from the LSA's time. The rest of the crew are paid an 8 hour day and are already on duty less than 8 hours, so there will be no savings whatsoever for T&E costs.
 
There is very little reduction that will happen in terms of Vermonter labor costs. The only savings would be the 30 minutes or so from the LSA's time. The rest of the crew are paid an 8 hour day and are already on duty less than 8 hours, so there will be no savings whatsoever for T&E costs.
Thanks for that info.

So the hour per roundtrip saved from the LSA's pay won't make any difference, except to the LSA. :( The lower subsidy will come from the obvious way: an hour saved will attract more riders at the Vermont end, perhaps paying $1 or $2 more for the better service.

I see that the Vermonter's run from St. Albans to D.C. is 12 1/2 hours weekdays, and 13 hours on Sat & Sun. Crew change at Springfield (or NYC), I guess. Assuming some work time before departure and after arrival, that schedule fits two 8-hour workdays pretty well.

So the longer Montrealer run will need another shift? Or overtime pay?

Noticed this from the online Timetable: "The Vermonter is financed primarily through funds made available by the Vermont Agency of Transportation, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and the Connecticut Department of Transportation." I hadn't realized that Conn and Mass helped with their share of the subsidy, and it doesn't fall on little ole Vermont to do all the heavy lifting.

+++++++++++++

To get back on topic :eek: . With this info I'm not expecting to see T&E crew costs to drop on the Wolverines or the Lincoln services after this phase, the Stimulus-funded upgrades, is finished in 2017 and the run times drop by about an hour.

Pontiac-CHI is 6 hrs 20 min now, so 5 hrs 30 min would still be one 8-hr shift. Maybe shave an hour of overtime, or not.

STL-CHI Lincoln service is now as much as 5 hrs 40 min, could drop to 4 hrs 40 min. But is that enuff to get a roundtrip out of the same T&E crew? How do they do it now? A crew leaves STL in the a.m., returns home in the p.m., and gets paid a few hours of overtime? Nah, that's a 14-hour day, surely too long to be legal. But will the safety limits on how many hours a crew can work rule out 12-hour-day work schedules?

Governor Ruiner might turn around and support another round of upgrades if he thought the faster times would result in pay cuts for Amtrak's unionized employees. Just sayin. :angry:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In service terms, there is still serious talk of a second Grand Rapids-Chicago run.
That would be great.

There's also talk of a Grand Rapids - Lansing - Detroit route, backed/proposed by the Governor himself, but that's going to involve some serious cash.

Nathanael, I had been informed by OBS on the Pere Marquette just after Thanksgiving, 2013, that the second run indeed was going to happen. He told me that he was told it would happen around or shortly after the opening of the new station in Grand Rapids but he was very skeptical of the timing (obviously, he was correct about his doubts). He also mentioned that the scheduling of the second run would look very similar to the extra runs on the day before and the Sunday after Thanksgiving. I'm sure the exception would be that the second run would be a complete one and not terminate in Holland like it has in the past.

Sarah, I had an opportunity to attend the publicly open meeting in Holland regarding the study for the extension and/or creation of the route to Detroit but unfortunately I couldn't, however, I did read in the Holland Sentinel that the study was to conclude at the end of 2015. I agree that if the Snyder administration approved the plan, that it would take serious funding since there would have to be major upgrades to the track from Grand Rapids to accommodate Amtrak since most of (or all) has not been used for passenger rail in nearly 50 years. As we've discussed in the past, I'm all for it, along with your ideas for an route to Northern Michigan. I think I'd seen on Mlive.com some time back that it actually was being studied as well. I guess we'll see what happens in the coming months/years.
Article on the results of the study:

http://environmentalcouncil.org/newsroom/news.php?x=40
 
Thanks for the link to the article which contains links to the study itself.

Quick summary:

It looks at 3 routes, but suggests focusing on 2 going forward

- Holland-Grand Rapids-Lansing-Jackson-Ann Arbor-Dearborn-Detroit (4:03 travel time at 79mph)

- Holland-Grand Rapids-East Lansing-Howell-Ann Arbor-Dearborn-Detroit (3:48 travel time at 79mph)

79mph and 110mph options are examined.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Both routes are perfectly good, except

(a) *how do we connect from Toledo*... I've emailed them about that twice already....

(b) Howell-Ann Arbor-Detroit requires a new bridge over the Huron River and is therefore a PITA of a project. They are apparently using a previous engineering estimate for the price of this bridge, but I'm still skeptical of the low capital cost estimate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, it was disappointing to see that they referred to extensions from Detroit toward Pontiac and perhaps onward toward Saginaw but there was no mention of Toledo. Even if there is a dotted line on the map between Detroit and Toledo, it wouldn't hurt to at least mention the possibility or desirability of extending service in that direction.
 
Well, keep asking Michigan DOT how we are supposed to get to Michigan from the East, and asking for a train connection from Toledo. Eventually they might deign to study it...
 
You do realize that a Detroit-Toledo connection would require cooperation from Ohio. Good luck getting that under the "leadership" of Gov. Kaisch.
 
Even if the state is unwilling to cooperate at this point, it would be worthwhile to see if local governments (city/county) might be interested in participating in the study phase. After all, we're a long way from any construction and the "rail-friendliness" of governments could certainly change by then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top