Amtrak's Capital Limited and Lake Shore Limited detour through Mic

[amtrak_russ]

I am Surprised most of you have not heard yet but the cap limited and the lake shore detour through michigan yesterday

Here is some of the details . I will post a video of them on youtube later today!

From Nathan earlier this morning. This is a COMBINED eastbound Amtrak Capitol Limited and Lake Shore Limited. They have four locomotives (led by ITCS 30), the 8 car Capitol consist, then two locomotives, and the 9 car Lake Shore consist. No Joke! Aim for 8oAM-8:3o for the Detroit area.

From the Lower boards

http://www.michiganrailroads.com/MichRRs/D...roupFrameSL.htm

Amtrak train 29 and 48 were combined and ran over the Michigan Line from Chicago. This is due to congestion on the NS ex-NYC main. Train got to Dearborn around 0815. The lead unit was cut off and turned @ Bay City Jct. Train finally departed around 093o, went down the Junction Yards secondary to the Detroit Line and down to Toledo. The westbound train was combined at Toledo and the combined 29/49 will come up the Detroit Line, around the secondary to the Amtrak Dearborn depot where the locomotive off the eastbound will be put on and the train head west.

ETA at Dearborn is 1330. Probley take an hour to put on the locomotive, do an air test, get orders, etc.

From Train Orders

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/list.php?2

The weather is bad enough that the crew van service isn't running, and NS was already in bad shape around Elkhart, IN because of the derailment last week in Goshen.

Amtrak combined 30 and 48 out of Chicago and ran the combined train on the Michigan Line, geting to Dearborn, Mich about 0830. At Dearborn the lead locomorive was cut off and sent to be turned and after an NS Pilot crew arrived train departed around 0930 going down the Conrail Junction Yard Secondary to the Detroit Line and than on to Toledo, Ohio.

The unit that was pulled off was sent to Bay City Jct in Detroit, turned and came back to Dearborn. This unit will be put on the westbound combined 29/49 that is coming out of Toledo to go to Chicago on the Michigan Line.

Passenger agent in Dearborn was estimation Dearborn arrival around 1330. Locomotive put on, air test and orders than depart west. No stops in Michigan.

The eastbound made good time. Out of Kalamazoo @ 0555, Dearborn about 0830. Meet 351 at Wayne, Mich

just got off train #355(24) after riding its entire run. That's right, I just got off in Chicago.

Train #350(24) was about 1:10 late into Detroit and Pontiac as a result of general congestion earlier in the run. (I rode it from Detroit to Pontiac since I had never done that stretch before.)

As a result of the late equipment arrival, #355(24) left Pontiac 17 minutes late. The first significant delay was from the CN, which held us short of Milwaukee Junction in Detroit to allow a short-time freight to pass by northbound. Of course, that wouldn't have been necessary had a dead CN freight train not been blocking one main of the Shoreline Sub right at Detroit-Woodward, so I double the blame on CN. That was about a 50-minute delay.

The next delay was also thanks to the CN. We were made to wait about another 50 minutes for a CN westbound freight to clear Battle Creek before we could go across. To emphasize just how common this situation is on the old GTW, when we stopped right beneath the Post cereal plant, the engineer asked the conductor, "Is the westbound we're waiting for even out of Port Huron yet?"

The run continued fine over the NS and Amtrak lines until Michigan City, where we started to feel the effects of the meltdown on the NS in Indiana. #354 still hadn't made it onto the Amtrak line yet, so we were instructed to wait for it at Michigan City. Since we knew we had time, our crew had the presence of mind to get perimssion from the Amtrak Michigan Line Train Director to stop at Michigan City first to let off our passenger for that station, and then back up into the siding at CP 228.

#354 didn't make it off the NS until after 02:00 eastern, so that meet didn't occur until 02:32. By that time, Amtrak had combined #48 and #30 and chosen to detour it over its own line to bypass the congestion on NS. So we had to wait until 04:20 for that meet (that combined train was definitely a sight!). Does anyone have more information on exact how that detour worked?

We finally left CP 228 at 04:22 Eastern after being there for nearly five hours. During that wait, I give a lot of credit to our crew on #355 for doing what they could to keep us informed and providing what free things (snack packs, water) that they could. Furthermore, our crew was all dead on hours of service by 01:30. They were instructed to violate the law by operations in Chicago since the roads were impassable so there was no way to relieve them. They ended up operating all the way in to Chicago.

Leaving Michigan City at 03:21 (I'll convert to Central time here), it was our turn to experience the meltdown on the NS. We waited at CP 482 from 03:35 to 05:12 for trains to clear the plant so we could proceed, then followed the slow freight parade, taking until 06:21 to reach CP 491 where we finally crossed over and passed four trains. The poor NS Chicago West Dispatcher had to delay us a few more times to get us around three trains, and by my count we met nine eastbounds while on the NS.

Our arrival at Chicago was at 07:35 this morning, 9 hours, 37 minutes late on what should be a 6.5 hour run.

I have to say I can take no issue with our crew; they all ought to get awards. They really tried, and even had to violate the hours of service law to get us to our destination. They just couldn't fight the reality of under-capacity on today's US rail system, exacerbated by weather and the effects of the CN strike.

On the bright side, VIA was perfect in every respect I can think of (timeliness, service, etc.) between Toronto and Windsor on the first leg of my trip.

For more info from michigan railfan's read this thread: http://railroadfan.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=3937

I hope this helps!

 

[MrFSS]

Here's a pretty good video. VIDEO

And, Another one. VIDEO

 

[amtrak_russ]

i have seen these if you foll;ow the link there are pics by him as well unhooking p-42 30 off the train.

 

[Rafi]

Good LORD I wish I was on that train. I'd be able to cover not only a Michigan route and the Boston-Albany route in one itinerary (both of which have eluded me so far), but I'd be able to ride Detroit to Toledo, which hasn't seen an Amtrak train in what, 15 years?

-Rafi

 

[MrFSS]

In light of all the time keeping problems Amtrak has been having west of Toledo, maybe they should make that route the normal one.

 

[Rafi]

In light of all the time keeping problems Amtrak has been having west of Toledo, maybe they should make that route the normal one.

Or, even just route the Capitol on the old Three Rivers route from PIT to CHI, and have a stub train from PIT to CLE to DET for pax to connect to the Lakeshore or to continue up to Detroit. That way you'd minimize the number of trains on the congested Toledo route and you'd be able to bring back the Toledo-Detroit connection (having the stub train hold in Toledo until 6:30 AM for the westbound LSL, and then arriving in DET in time to connect with a (adjusted schedule) 8:30 AM Westbound Wolverine or the 2:35 PM northbound Wolverine), providing easy Michigan access from the East Coast.

-Rafi

 

[Guest_steve4031_*]

this might work if amtrak was able to build their own tracks into chicago from porter, or continue south and then follow the pennsy alignment into pine junction. at pine jct. the currrnt alignment is I believe a result of penn centrals efforts to consolidate operations years ago. if you look carefully west of pine junction you can see an abandon right of way north of the current main line. a new line could be built here. so from englewood to kalamazoo amtrak could have their own line. with higher speeds the lengthier routing could be offset.

lots of money? yes. but a 1st world country needs 1st world passenger train service.

 

[Sam Damon]

The best place on the web for explaining Chicago rail junctions, past and present is at this link.

EDIT: While I'm at it, try mucking around a bit here. While the other site explains the junctions, Bill Vandevoort provides some nifty track diagrams. It's hosted on AOL, though, so I thought the site was defunct when I attempted to check the link; guess AOL was busy.

The sites go a long way to explaining what's within the realm of possibility these days.

 

[printman2000]

This is so cool. Wish I were there to see it!

Were the units running that were in the middle of the set? If they were not running, I can understand having 3 locos at the headend. However, if they WERE running, why three?

Was HEP coming from the front for the whole consist or were they using one of the middle units to power the Lakeshore?

 

[amtrak_russ]

they added 30 to the front of the train so it could run on the michigan line. 30 is equipped with icts which is reqritred to run between porter, in and kzoo, mi

 

[Steve4031]

Here's a pretty good video. VIDEO
And, Another one. VIDEO

Those are nice videos. Does anybody have final arrival information for both trains. I called Amtrak at one point and they said 48 was 7 hours late which did not make sense since it was going to be at least 10 hours late out of Toledo based on the times it passed through Michigan. A different agent stated that 30 had been canceled? Ok, but where? she did not know.

 

[rtabern]

Yeah, 29/49 has been having serious time-keeping problems in the last two weeks. I was down at Chicago Union Station the last 2 Saturdays going for rides... and saw up on the board BOTH Saturdays, that 29/49 were "behind 5 freight trains". That's what it said up on the screens. On both Saturdays, 29 and 49 both arrived after all the western trains (21, 3, 5, and 7) departed.

This past Saturday (Feb. 24th), the Zephyr was also horribly late.

It was supposed to arrive at 3:05pm, but at that time, it was still west of Omaha.

I guess it got in around 8am Sunday (Feb. 25th). Eeeks! 16 hours late.

I was surprised about 29/49 though because they're usually into Chicago by 10-11AM.

 

[D.P. Roberts]

Yeah, 29/49 has been having serious time-keeping problems in the last two weeks. I was down at Chicago Union Station the last 2 Saturdays going for rides... and saw up on the board BOTH Saturdays, that 29/49 were "behind 5 freight trains". That's what it said up on the screens. On both Saturdays, 29 and 49 both arrived after all the western trains (21, 3, 5, and 7) departed.
This past Saturday (Feb. 24th), the Zephyr was also horribly late.

It was supposed to arrive at 3:05pm, but at that time, it was still west of Omaha.

I guess it got in around 8am Sunday (Feb. 25th). Eeeks! 16 hours late.

I was surprised about 29/49 though because they're usually into Chicago by 10-11AM.

Not being a long time railfan, I'm confused about a few things:

1) Some of this seems short term (weather, strikes, derailments), some seems more permanent (congestion, maybe a long strike). What are the odds that the serious lateness issues will be resolved any time soon?

2) I may be confused, but with the detour it sounds like Amtrak is not serving its customers on the CL and LSL lines west of Toledo. Is this true? If so, is Amtrak making other arrangements (i.e. busses), or are those people just out of luck?

 

[Guest]

Could amtrak use some kind of eminent domain or other legal recourse to force the host (Looks like Norfolk Southern) to sell the right of way? Could they then dispatch, and add a third track?

Could they force NS to add a third or even fourth track?

 

[George Harris]

Could amtrak use some kind of eminent domain or other legal recourse to force the host (Looks like Norfolk Southern) to sell the right of way? Could they then dispatch, and add a third track?
Could they force NS to add a third or even fourth track?

Aside from practicalities physically and organizationally, there as absolutely no money for any of this to happen.

Under the original Amtrak law, they did by a piece of the Boston and Maine used by the Montrealer due to the condition that B&M had let it fall into. It was then immediately sold to the Central of Vermont, which alreaded operated on the section by trackage rights. It was then upgraded back to a nominal 60 mph railroad, but I do not recall exactly how it was funded. However, the NS condition is no where near as bad as that line was. The line is in fairly good condition, just overwhelmed with traffic. Adding an additional track at about $2 million per mile for one daily train is simply not going to happen.

George

 

[AmtrakWPK]

We need a small national sales or excise tax on tonnage shipped by rail, specifically to fund a trust fund to upgrade rail (on the ground and in the ground) infrastructure. No more single mains. Double at the very least. Straighten out curves, upgrade roadbed and track, upgrade signal systems (in some places there isn't any system in place to even upgrade). Drag the rail infrastructure kicking and screaming out of the 19th Century into the 21st. The primary beneficiaries, in reality, would be the people who are trying to get their freight shipped safely and expeditiously. The freight RRs would benefit (UP especially) by no longer sitting stewing in their own juices because they are so saturated with freight on a totally insufficient infrastructure (given the amount of freight they are trying to move) that either they are hardly moving at all (U.P.) or ANY small problem anywhere in the system causes immediate chaos (all the rest of the RRs). Amtrak would benefit from the upgraded capacity and average speed with a huge improvement in OTP.

 

[printman2000]

This is so cool. Wish I were there to see it!
Were the units running that were in the middle of the set? If they were not running, I can understand having 3 locos at the headend. However, if they WERE running, why three?

Was HEP coming from the front for the whole consist or were they using one of the middle units to power the Lakeshore?

Anyone know the answers to these?

 

[WICT106]

This detour sounds exciting, but I can imagine a ercentage of non-railfan passengers saying, "Never again," to rail travel for this percieved wrinkle to their travel plans. I'd enjoy doing it, because it would add a new twist to my perennial travels between Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Florida. Others might not think so.

 

[WICT106]

Here is a website displaying some photos of the combined 48/49-29/30: Here.

 

[Guest_x-press_*]

Adding an additional track at about $2 million per mile for one daily train is simply not going to happen.

Do you really think that the third track will only benefit one train a day?

 

[George Harris]

Do you really think that the third track will only benefit one train a day?

No. But there is no way that NS is going to build it for their freight. Therefore, if it is built in the forseeable future it will be build on the basis that is needed for ensuring the timliness of the passenger trains, which is currently the Lake Shore Limited only, hence my statement.

This is the route I would consider most in need of multi daily service due to the string of medium and large cities along it.

Back to additional tracks: This is the ex New York Central main which up until the early to mid 1950's had four main tracks. That does not mean that it could once again be a four track railroad with nothing more than laying track because in the 50 years or thereabouts since the outside two tracks were removed chances are part of the roadbed is gone and any bridges built since would be two tracks only. Also, the NYC tracks were on very close centers, probably less than 13'-0" and certainly no more than 13'-0" so with the outside track gone the remaining tracks may be slightly shifted out. In addition, it is no longer permissible to build tracks that close together. Generally track spacing today is at no less than 14'-0" and for a lot of lines 15'-0" or more, so there will have to be grading and new bridges to construct any additional track, which will result in the cost being considerably more than $2 million per mile, which is approximately the cost of track only.

George

 

[AlanB]

Actually the NS main sees more Amtrak trains than just the LSL. From Cleveland to Chicago it sees both the LSL and the Capitol Limited, and for a short period you also add in all the Michigan service trains to the main.

 

[x-press]

Back to additional tracks: This is the ex New York Central main which up until the early to mid 1950's had four main tracks. That does not mean that it could once again be a four track railroad with nothing more than laying track because in the 50 years or thereabouts since the outside two tracks were removed chances are part of the roadbed is gone and any bridges built since would be two tracks only. Also, the NYC tracks were on very close centers, probably less than 13'-0" and certainly no more than 13'-0" so with the outside track gone the remaining tracks may be slightly shifted out. In addition, it is no longer permissible to build tracks that close together. Generally track spacing today is at no less than 14'-0" and for a lot of lines 15'-0" or more, so there will have to be grading and new bridges to construct any additional track, which will result in the cost being considerably more than $2 million per mile, which is approximately the cost of track only.
George

First, sorry about the empty post above. Hit the wrong button!

In response: Exceptions have been granted for track spacing where necessary. I am now designing a re-laid third track (on the high-speed northeast corridor, no less), with less than 13' track centers. 14' is preferred for new construction, but apparently not necessary.

In no way shape or form am I suggesting that it's just a matter "re-laying the tracks." I spend many of my days grinding out mountains of federal paperwork, straw-man alignments, and public-involvement work for transit projects that may or may not ever get built. HOWEVER, if there's a need for it (and if there isn't, you sure could have fooled me), I don't see why we need be so hopeless about it. UP has done triple track projects, and is expanding capacity on the Sunset Route, aren't they? BNSF was doing giant double-tracking projects on their transcon. line last time I heard from them. CSX double-tracked a large segment of the old B&O out that way. Why not NS?

Easy as just "re-laying?" Certainly not. Easier than laying an extra track where there has never been one? Absolutely.

My fellow railfans tend to be so extreme on these matters. We have the "yay, my train is 12 hours late so I get a free meal" crowd on one hand, and the others simply crying into their beer and throwing up their hands! We can still lay infrastructure in this country . . . I hope.