Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
NewsSunday, September 14, 2008 7:16 PM CDT
Faster Amtrak trains once sidelined, now gaining support
Advertisement

Cutting minutes from a train ride between Normal and Chicago is taking years. In 2002, news reporters joined government officials on an Amtrak passenger train in Normal to race over shiny upgraded rails toward Pontiac at speeds reaching 100 mph and more.

The trip was to preview the imminent approach of high-speed rail service in Illinois. Officials promised Amtrak would slash 20 minutes from the trip between the Twin Cities and Chicago.

But safety issues sidetracked the project.

Now, six years later, officials are hoping the high-speed rail plan is moving ahead again — in time to take advantage of renewed interest in rail travel brought on by higher gasoline prices.

It’s about time for train advocates like Rick Harnish of the Midwest High Speed Rail Association.

“At the grassroots level, there’s an understanding that we need better trains and fast,” he said.

Regulations currently limit train speeds to 79 mph, and trains are running late far more often than not. Still, Amtrak is setting ridership records. July ridership was the highest in Amtrak’s 37-year history. August figures released last week showed more than 500,000 people have ridden Amtrak on the Chicago-to-St. Louis route so far during fiscal year 2008. That’s up 15 percent from a year earlier. Add in the Chicago-to-Quincy and Chicago-to-Carbondale routes and ridership leaps to just less than one million — up 16 percent from the same period in fiscal 2007.

U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., credits greater public awareness about the need to reduce dependence on foreign oil and cut pollution and traffic congestion.

“Amtrak is not the past. It is the future,” Durbin told an Amtrak summit in Normal a few weeks ago. “Aviation downsizing and the high cost of driving have led to a dramatic increase in Amtrak ridership.”

“Intercity corridors are up 20 percent with aging equipment and on-time performance not stellar,” added Amtrak president Alex Kummant.

Even more people are expected to answer the call of “all aboard” when every train on the St. Louis-to-Chicago corridor travels at more than 100 mph on the stretch from Springfield to Mazonia near Joliet by late 2010, said Michael Franke, Amtrak’s assistant vice president for state and commuter partnerships in the central region.

A handful of Amtrak trains travel at that speed now elsewhere in the United States. In the Midwest, a route in Michigan, which broke the 90 mph mark earlier this year, is slated to reach 100 mph before the end of 2008. At that pace, Franke estimated about 20 minutes could be cut from the 2½ hours a train takes to reach Chicago now.

“For the Midwest, this is high speed,” Franke told the rail summit.

Reducing traffic

State officials decided to lay the groundwork for faster trains in Illinois beginning in the mid-1990s. The goal wasn’t to compete with airlines, but to reduce vehicle traffic, said George Weber, acting bureau chief for the bureau of railroads within the Illinois Department of Transportation.

“The idea was to get some cars off the road,” said Weber.

A few years later, the federal government targeted certain rail corridors for potential upgrade to high-speed service. Enough money, about $100 million, was found for the St. Louis-to-Chicago route. By 2004, track was improved to handle trains at speeds of 110 mph. At the same time, four safety gates, instead of the usual two, were installed at 69 public road crossings. Private crossings received two gates.

But that’s where progress stalled.

Because of the speeds involved, engineers could not depend on the old-style trackside light signals to alert them that tracks were clear ahead and still give them enough time to stop in emergencies. High-tech equipment was sought so signals inside the trains would let engineers know well in advance if the track was busy ahead.

The system also would allow the locomotive to stop automatically if the engineer failed to respond to a problem. The device would work as a fail-safe to prevent a real-life replay of the scene from the movie “Silver Streak” when an Amtrak train crashed into Union Station in downtown Chicago.

After several years and at least $12 million, designers could not get the new gizmo to work. As a result, Weber said the partners in the project recently decided to use an older system “off the shelf” that will do the job.

“The technology has been around since World War II,” Harnish said. “All we have to do is take the technology that’s been proven and put it to work between Joliet and Springfield.”

Money is a holdup now. About $10 million to $15 million more is needed to equip the trains with the devices. The state has applied for grants to get the job done. Approval could come any day. Franke said Amtrak also hopes for money to be included in the Illinois capital budget at the center of an ongoing stalemate between Gov. Rod Blagojevich and fellow Democrats in the Illinois House. Political support is there: Illinois currently is second only to California is providing state support for passenger rail service.

Weber said switching the Springfield-to-St. Louis segment to high-speed rail traffic could cost as much as $125 million more. If that was done, two hours could be cut from what is now a 5½-hour trip from Chicago to St. Louis. But Weber doesn’t see that money becoming available any time soon.

Advocates like Harnish hope trains will go even faster one day, perhaps reaching speeds of 150 mph as they do in some places in Europe. He recently rode a train in Madrid that went so fast a trip from Chicago to Normal would take just 45 minutes.

“Imagine to be anywhere in the Midwest ready to do business in three to four hours. That changes everything,” Harnish said. “When you talk about Chicago to Minneapolis in 2½ hours, it really changes the dynamic of how cities interacted. That is the kind of thing this country desperately needs.”

On time

But officials agree going faster will not mean much if trains still don’t arrive on time. On-time performance on the St. Louis-to-Chicago run has been as low as 14 percent during one month this year.

“That is unacceptable,” said Durbin.

The senator is insisting rail companies that own the tracks Amtrak leases do more to give passenger trains higher priority so they aren’t delayed by freight trains so often.

Aging Amtrak equipment and too few rail cars to handle new rail travelers also are issues. Durbin has introduced legislation to encourage rail car makers to relocate to the United States and to provide money to rehabilitate older Amtrak rolling stock.

“Just imagine if there were as many seats as people wanted to buy and if they were on time,” Harnish said. “We could double the length of these trains.”

Amtrak also is looking to expand trains traveling at standard speeds.

More trains have been added to existing routes, including from St. Louis to Chicago, in recent years. Three new routes are being explored in Illinois, including Chicago to the Quad Cities, Chicago to Peoria, and Chicago to Dubuque, Iowa by way of Rockford, Freeport and Galena.

Durbin thinks money for more and faster trains, more train cars and other improvements could come from devoting a portion of the highway gasoline tax to Amtrak.

Harnish sees reason for hope.

“It is clear people really want to be able to take the train,” Harnish said. “That message is getting through to elected leaders.”




Riding the rails



Chart shows the increase in year-to-date ridership on three Amtrak

routes in Illinois.

Route...Fiscal 2008...Fiscal 2007...Difference

Chicago-St. Louis...501,383...436,998...64,385 (+15%)

Chicago-Carbondale...279,157...240,816...38,341 (+16%)

Chicago-Quincy...212,357...177,728...34,629 (+19%)

Total...992,897...855,542...137,355 (+16%)

Take a look
Amtrak train 301 heads south for St. Louis as it departs Normal on Thursday morning. (The Pantagraph/STEVE SMEDLEY)
Video
Most commented stories
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 18 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

Gary Trolley wrote on Sep 18, 2008 6:35 PM:

" There have been many good comments. Sen. Durbin thinks Amtrak is the future. Amtrak was set up to be the end of passenger trains. If there can be improvement it will happen more when drivers pay their full share of road costs. The Congress just approved a large amount of money to come from general revenue to help highway maintenance. Unless we get our local,state and federal government to make drivers pay their full cost then trains will not be able to show their efficiencies and their advantages of speed and capacity. "

Pangloss wrote on Sep 15, 2008 12:25 PM:

" This line needs to be double tracked. The delays get compounded when trains have to pull over for 15 minutes or more to wait for a delayed train in the other direction. The line to Quincy has more double-tracked mileage, and those trains are on time much more often. "

TomWest wrote on Sep 15, 2008 8:53 AM:

" 1) I find it very odd that 110mph trains are so fast that "engineers could not depend on the old-style trackside light signals to alert them that tracks were clear ahead". In the UK, trains regularly operate at 125mph with line-side signals.
2) The article points out that time and money was wasted on a system that activates the brakes should train drivers accidentally go past signals at danger. Why on earth didn't they use the off-the-shelf, proven technolgy in the first place? "

pennme wrote on Sep 14, 2008 9:55 PM:

" Outside B/N, I can understand your position. I was supposed to get on that train at Summit at 5:37 P.M. It never came. I waited in the rain for 2 hours until the next train showed up. The whole time, reservations kept saying it was 10 minutes late. They continuted to say this when it was more than an hour late. Sorry you had a lousy ride too. "

Jarhead71 wrote on Sep 14, 2008 9:44 PM:

" The USA is SO FAR behind Japan and Europe on rail travel. It is an embarrassing shame that the USA has not developed fast, safe, reliable and on-time rail travel with dedicated passenger tracks. "

Btown83 wrote on Sep 14, 2008 5:30 PM:

" Doesn't matter how fast it Can go if your train is just sitting on the tracks.

Privatize and see how quickly the trains start making it on time. "

earthling wrote on Sep 14, 2008 3:13 PM:

" Anyone who uses it has stories and gripes..me,too. But it doesn't have to be that way. America CAN do this if there is the political will and strength to stand up to the lobbys of..you guessed it: cars,airports, roadbuilders and OIL. It is possible if rail gets a slight fraction of a fair share. We have to demand it. There will be new jobs created and our use of oil will go down. Plus, it's a great way to travel (when it's done right). Other countrys do it, we can too. Gripe all you want but direct some of the gripes where it can help. Gripe to your US Representative and Senators. "

Rivers wrote on Sep 14, 2008 1:41 PM:

" Millions of dollars for upgrades to save 20 minutes means nothing when the train is 30 minutes late. They need to build their own tracks, not improve someone else's. "

logicisneeded wrote on Sep 14, 2008 12:26 PM:

" Dalmanties is half right. Yes Amtrak is a 2nd class citizen. However they do get priority or the freight railroads pay. Still though, there is an increase in rail traffic due to the high cost of trucking and these 1 mile long or so trains have to find the next siding to pull into. Missouri, where I live is facing a similar problem. THey are building additional sidings into the system to make it better.

Now about you all whining about your train service in Illinois. It is much later in Missouri, and it serves illiois quite well. We have 3 lines that run through Missouri. The St. Louis-Kansas city line, that serves a few cities and the state capitol. The Chi-KC line that only serves 2 cities in missouri and the STL-San Antonio line that only serves 2 cities here. There are far more cities in missouri that could use train service than in Illinois. You have it made by my standard. So for all of you to whine and bellyache in Illinois about the lack of train service, please. "

dalmanites wrote on Sep 14, 2008 11:54 AM:

" First, the rails are owned by the freight trains and Amtrak is a second class citizen on the rails. Amtrak is sided to allow the freights to pass first. If Amtrak is to upgrade to the 21st century, new, dedicated rails need to be built and to the high speed standards that exist in the rest of the world. The USA is so far behind in the rail technology it's pitiful. Second, the existing trains are dirty, smelly and lacking in proper HVAC. I've ridden trains in Egypt, from Cairo to Alexandria, that were nicer and faster--and on time. "

mgownr2 wrote on Sep 14, 2008 11:37 AM:

" I agree with 'outside B/N', I was there waiting for a friend to pick up from chicago. The amtrak agent in Bloomington knew of the repairs, but had no idea about the expected arrival of the train. Also, he indicated he couldnt find the train on GPS. The 7:30 pm arrived @ 9:20 pm. Everytime I have to pick up or drop off someone at the Amtrak station, the trains is ALWAYS late. Try getting them ontime. If this was a real business, they would have been bankrupt years ago. Quit giving government money unless than can provide better service. "

jw wrote on Sep 14, 2008 11:09 AM:

" My brother loves trains and has tried to use Amtrack. Starting in Chicago STARTING the train is 2 hours late, can't even start on time. Train in St. Louis 8 hours late. Standing on a platform in Maryland w/ @ 30 people, the engineer forgets to stop, another empty train shows up 3 hours later. Billions of taxpayer dollars, million dollar bonus's & NO ONE CARES. Absolutely no improvement over the years because the money keeps coming in & NO ONE CARES. "

blogger wrote on Sep 14, 2008 10:55 AM:

" Since we're making a wish list here: run tracks east to west, add some lines, be on-time...........they should invest in Wi-Fi on the train. At least that way when then park you for 2-hours, you'll have something to do. Riding the train for fun is one thing but if you have business, there is NO WAY you could count on the train. The last time I rode it, it took me 4 hours to get to Chicago, not included the wait at the station. I felt terrible while waiting and talking to an elderly person who missed her Dr. appointments becuase the train was running so late. I listened as she called the Dr, explained the situation and then was told they couldn't get her a later appointment. She left the station clearly upset and missed her Dr. appointment. "

earthling wrote on Sep 14, 2008 10:11 AM:

" Thank you Mr Richardson for a thoughtful, informative, and encouraging article. Political pressure for support is the way to satisfy a huge popular yearning for a new age of rail transit for this country. Passenger rail barely receives table scraps compared to other forms of transportation subsidies. Look at where this community is located and think of what the future could be with 21st century rail here. It is no coincidence that rail built this place. Contact your elected officials. "

outside b/n wrote on Sep 14, 2008 9:33 AM:

" Well this is nice 'spin'. We bought tickets online for the 7:30 - 10am trip yesterday with no warnings about expected delays/track repair. At the counter the Amtrak employee did not say anything about track repair either. However once we boarded the conductor told us due torepairs between Joliet/Chicago we'd be rerouted and two hours added! Instead of arriving at 10am we didn't arrive until 12pm. A 4 1/2 hr trip! We missed our meeting at 11:30am. On the return trip we pulled out of Union Station ontime at 5:18pm and then SAT for 1.5 hours just outside the station. The conductor said we had to wait for a "pilot" to drive to Joliet. Add this 1 1/2 hr delay to the delay for the repairs we didn't get to Normal until 9:30pm. A 4 hr a 15 mins trip. So, if you're looking for a nice long, 4-5 hr train ride to Chicago for the kids I suggest taking Amtrak. If you need to get to Chicago on time for meetings I suggest you drive your own car. I won't be taking Amtrak on this route again. "

historic wrote on Sep 14, 2008 9:12 AM:

" Amtrak has to not only be reliable and on time, but it has to serve more communities. There is no east/west train that would connect Springfield to Champaign-Urbana, and Decatur is not even served including Clinton, and other areas that have a population that could support Amtrak service! Illinois has approximately 1.200 communities, and Amtrak serves 32 of them. I don't call that a user friendly system. Its great if you are lucky enough to live on the line! People on the east side of the state are just plain screwed! "

michelle24 wrote on Sep 14, 2008 8:53 AM:

" Nothing but positives here! Getting to Chi town and St louis for ball games even quicker would be awsome, and the adding of cars to it on game days will definately be an asset with more revenue for the railway. GIT R DONE!!! "

blogger wrote on Sep 14, 2008 12:49 AM:

" I would love that sinceI work up North often but what I would like even more is if the train could run on time just once. I can't count on the train if I have a meeting b/c they are so incredibly unrealiable out of Bloomington. A typcial wait is over an hour late. "

Add your own comments

Please read the rules before posting comments.

You must be logged in to leave comments.
If you don't have a member ID, please register.

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?