#422 and #3 exceeding 79 mph?

[guest]

What, if any, are the places that those trains likely will exceed 79 mph, and by how much?

 

[Bob Dylan]

What, if any, are the places that those trains likely will exceed 79 mph, and by how much?

#422/#421 will Never exceed 79MPH unless and until Amtrak gets Authorization to Run at a Higher Speed on the Quasi HSR Line between CHI and STL!!! This includes when it is on the Sunset Ltd. between LAX and SAS and the Texas Eagle between SAS and CHI!

Train #3, the SWC, can run up to 90 mph on certain Sections of the Transcon but with the Deterioration and Lack of Maintence of the Tracks in Kansas and eastern Colorado and the Climb thru Raton Pass, the 90 MPH running is very Limited compared to the days of the Old SF Super Chief and Amtrak's SW Ltd.(Santa F/now BNSF owns the Chief names) and the current SWC!!! I'm not positive just where this is but would have to think its in Western New Mexico, Arizona and California!

If I'm wrong, appreciate the Correction by our Engineer types! :help:

 

[the_traveler]

I have clocked (via GPS) the SWC running 90 MPH thru parts of Iowa, NM and AZ.

 

[xyzzy]

90 mph requires both a special type of signaling (or a rare method of operation called manual block) and a certain degree of track maintenance called Class 5 everyone along the line in question. Each is expensive.

 

[George Harris]

Not manual block. That is used when you have no signals at all. You are thinking (I hope) of ATC or ATS or Cab Signals (Automatic Train Control or Automatic Train Stop) which is in combination with the signal system. Yes, it is expensive. Here is the rule: in 49 CFR 236, in 236.0:

(d) Where any train is operated at a speed of 80 or more miles per hour, an automatic cab signal, automatic train stop or automatic train control system complying with the provisions of this part shall be installed.

For details of this, go to Subpart E.

 

[NorthCoastHiawatha]

I was once told that by an LSA that the train can hit 83 (on 79mph track) before automatic breaking kicks in.

 

[George Harris]

I was once told that by an LSA that the train can hit 83 (on 79mph track) before automatic breaking kicks in.

Maybe so, but 79 is the law, or actually, <80.

So far as I know, no part of the route, at least the ex MoPac and T&P parts ever had a speed limit above 79 mph. In fact, St. Louis to Poplar Bluff has never been over 60 mph, and even if it was curves would for the most part keep it to less than that.

 

[PaulM]

I have clocked (via GPS) the SWC running 90 MPH thru parts of Iowa, NM and AZ.

If it gets up to 90MPH during the roughly 20 miles it travels in Iowa, you can probably add Missouri as well.

 

[TinCan782]

Last August, I posted of photo of my GPS indicating 81MPH while on the SL/TE in Texas. Boy, that got the attention of a few but, one member indicated 83 is the "overspeed" penalty point.

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/56439-sunset-limited-121/

I have recorded 90 MPH thorough the desert in eastern California on the SWC and through Camp Pendleton (Calif) on the Pacific Surfliner.

 

[xyzzy]

Not manual block. That is used when you have no signals at all. You are thinking (I hope) of ATC or ATS or Cab Signals (Automatic Train Control or Automatic Train Stop) which is in combination with the signal system. Yes, it is expensive. Here is the rule: in 49 CFR 236, in 236.0:

(d) Where any train is operated at a speed of 80 or more miles per hour, an automatic cab signal, automatic train stop or automatic train control system complying with the provisions of this part shall be installed.

For details of this, go to Subpart E.

Yeah, I see that the CFR changed in January 2012. I'm old. If you go back far enough, the manual block system that's still mentioned in §236.0©(1)(ii) was sufficient. The PRR ran fast passenger trains under that authority.

 

[Trainmans daughter]

In January on #3 going through Arizona I got this screen shot of my SpeedPro app. It had shown 90 mph, but I missed it.

 

[neroden]

This thread will probably be useful for anyone with similar questions:

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/42973-max-speed-of-amtrak-equipment/

 

[Texan Eagle]

Correct me if I am wrong, but currently the only western LD train allowed to do 90 mph (anything above 79 actually) is the SWC and that too only on a certain section of the BNSF Transcon through the High Desert of Arizona/California.

 

[jis]

Correct me if I am wrong, but currently the only western LD train allowed to do 90 mph (anything above 79 actually) is the SWC and that too only on a certain section of the BNSF Transcon through the High Desert of Arizona/California.

and in certain parts of Iowa and Missouri too I believe.

 

[TinCan782]

Correct me if I am wrong, but currently the only western LD train allowed to do 90 mph (anything above 79 actually) is the SWC and that too only on a certain section of the BNSF Transcon through the High Desert of Arizona/California.

I believe that to be correct.

Not an LD train but, the Pacific Surfliner does some 90 MPH running in a couple of places in Orange County and around Camp Pendleton.

 

[Ryan]

Correct me if I am wrong, but currently the only western LD train allowed to do 90 mph (anything above 79 actually) is the SWC and that too only on a certain section of the BNSF Transcon through the High Desert of Arizona/California.

and in certain parts of Iowa and Missouri too I believe.

Correct. At least we did in 2010 - it could have been downgraded in the meantime.

 

[neroden]

The track is good for 90 along large portions of BNSF's "Southern Transcon". The SWC currently diverts away from the Transcon between Newton and Albuquerque, but is on the Transcon most of the rest of the way.

The track will remain good for 90 mph. This requires that it is geometrically suitable (which won't change); and that it is maintained to "class V" standards, which BNSF needs to do in order to run its intermodal trains above 60 mph, which BNSF does want to do on this route.

The *signals* are good for 90 along the sections which allow it due to the retention of the old Santa Fe "automatic train stop" system. This is being replaced with "positive train control" eventually.

We can hope that in other areas where the track is already good for 90 mph (there are several), the speed limits will be raised to 90 mph when they get "positive train control" (which many are scheduled to get). The bizarre situation with the Texas Eagle from St. Louis to Chicago, where it is speed-limited for what seems like no good reason at all, means we may not get this benefit.

 

[Texan Eagle]

Texas Eagle from St. Louis to Chicago, where it is speed-limited for what seems like no good reason at all, means we may not get this benefit.

At least a section of CHI-STL is cleared for 110 for corridor trains, right? Can Superliners do 110 if permitted to do so by track and signal conditions (already in place)?

 

[jis]

Texas Eagle from St. Louis to Chicago, where it is speed-limited for what seems like no good reason at all, means we may not get this benefit.

At least a section of CHI-STL is cleared for 110 for corridor trains, right? Can Superliners do 110 if permitted to do so by track and signal conditions (already in place)?

Only two designated trains are allowed that speed according to contract with UP. And TE is not one of them.
Superliners are supposedly good for 100mph. I don't know if they are run at 100 when they are run occasionally on the CHI - DET corridor. Maybe some experienced Michigander can share any such experience.

 

[MikefromCrete]

Texas Eagle from St. Louis to Chicago, where it is speed-limited for what seems like no good reason at all, means we may not get this benefit.

At least a section of CHI-STL is cleared for 110 for corridor trains, right? Can Superliners do 110 if permitted to do so by track and signal conditions (already in place)?

Only two designated trains are allowed that speed according to contract with UP. And TE is not one of them.
Superliners are supposedly good for 100mph. I don't know if they are run at 100 when they are run occasionally on the CHI - DET corridor. Maybe some experienced Michigander can share any such experience.

Actually, the contract restriction is for three trains in each direction. Of course, this could be changed with a new contract with UP.

 

[chakk]

You can purchase third-party timetables for various rail lines around the USA that list the speed limits on their track sections at http://www.altamontpress.com/

 

[cirdan]

I recently read an article that BNSF is launching or has launched a fast freight train to bring fresh agricultural produce from California to the Mid-west in 5 days.

Why so excessively long?

If the SWC has about 2 days, then surely a high priority freight can do the same. Maybe the train can't move quite as fast, but not doing all the stops should make up for that.

And if there is a market for this, then surely BNSF could consider buying faster locomotives.

 

[neroden]

Superliners are supposedly good for 100mph. I don't know if they are run at 100 when they are run occasionally on the CHI - DET corridor.

I've read reports that they are. Amtrak doesn't impose an arbitrary three-train limitation the way UP does.

 

[neroden]

I recently read an article that BNSF is launching or has launched a fast freight train to bring fresh agricultural produce from California to the Mid-west in 5 days.

Why so excessively long?

Because US railroads suck?
The Russians would laugh at those speeds. That's only 2 time zones. The Russians now run their fast freight across the Trans-Siberian 8 time zones in 12 days, and are trying to speed that up to 7 days, same as passenger. And yes, they have mountain ranges to cross.

As for why US railroads suck, that would be a book.

If the SWC has about 2 days, then surely a high priority freight can do the same. Maybe the train can't move quite as fast, but not doing all the stops should make up for that.

And if there is a market for this, then surely BNSF could consider buying faster locomotives.

 

[jis]

I recently read an article that BNSF is launching or has launched a fast freight train to bring fresh agricultural produce from California to the Mid-west in 5 days.

Why so excessively long?

Because US railroads suck?
The Russians would laugh at those speeds. That's only 2 time zones. The Russians now run their fast freight across the Trans-Siberian 8 time zones in 12 days, and are trying to speed that up to 7 days, same as passenger. And yes, they have mountain ranges to cross.

I suspect that the latitude at which you are counting time zones would have an impact on the actual geographical distance on ground to be covered per time zone. No?

Here is a nice table to use for anyone curious enough and with enough time on their hand to calculate the E-W distance covered by each time zone at any latitude. The distance for one time zone would be 1/24th of the circumference at that latitude.

Of course all admirers of good railroad running should have migrated to Russia long ago if that was the most important consideration in their lives