Ultra-fast trains ordered

Ultra-fast trains ordered

There are 203 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Jul 17, 2009, titled Ultra-fast trains ordered. In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

New passenger trains capable of exceeding 200 m.p.h. will operate from Chicago to Milwaukee under a purchase agreement that Wisconsin officials announced Friday.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

First Prev
of 11
Next Last
I heart Schadenfreude

Chicago, IL

#2 Jul 17, 2009
Ooohhh, the stimulus funds are starting to work. We expect wingnut heads to explode any second now.

Since: Nov 07

Arlington Heights, IL

#3 Jul 17, 2009
Nice. So what are they going to use for track? You can't run half that fast on the current track and even less with all the grade crossings. High speed rail would be nice but there has to be a plan.

“LONELY BEACON OF TRUTH”

Since: Oct 07

Drifter

#4 Jul 17, 2009
What a boondoggle. Must be a gift to the unions.
ronpadz

Highland Park, IL

#5 Jul 17, 2009
VivianC wrote:
Nice. So what are they going to use for track? You can't run half that fast on the current track and even less with all the grade crossings. High speed rail would be nice but there has to be a plan.
Read the article, Einstein. Track improvements are part of the plan. If you've ever ridden the high speed rails in Europe you'd know this is a good thing. I think this is an exciting plan.
Christopher

Chicago, IL

#6 Jul 17, 2009
This sounds cool but I am sure the reality will be anything but fast. Perhaps there will be 2 or 3 brief moments where the train might top out at 110mph. The article itself mention anything south of Glenview will be slow. It's like ATT saying their 3G network is like 3mbps but the real world speed is like a third of that.
Sandwich

Maple Park, IL

#7 Jul 17, 2009
Hmm, so our stimulus money is going to Spain?
Mark

Hammond, IN

#8 Jul 17, 2009
That means it will be quicker to get from Milky to the Loop than from O'Hare on CTA. At least until they fix the Blew Line, which we all know will be NEVER. All this transit upgrade work is just a waste of taxpayer's time and money.

Since: Jul 09

Chicago, IL

#9 Jul 17, 2009
VivianC wrote:
Nice. So what are they going to use for track? You can't run half that fast on the current track and even less with all the grade crossings. High speed rail would be nice but there has to be a plan.
They are going to build track you troglodyte.
Savonarola

Netherlands

#10 Jul 17, 2009
Chicago and Milwaukee are cities to go 200mph through not to.

Since: Jul 09

Chicago, IL

#11 Jul 17, 2009
Sandwich wrote:
Hmm, so our stimulus money is going to Spain?
That is the result when there conservatives refuse to fund anything.

our shit gets outmoded before it even gets implemented and we need to buy from communist Europe.

Now go and complain about your taxes.

Since: Nov 07

Arlington Heights, IL

#12 Jul 17, 2009
ronpadz wrote:
<quoted text>
Read the article, Einstein. Track improvements are part of the plan. If you've ever ridden the high speed rails in Europe you'd know this is a good thing. I think this is an exciting plan.
I've read the article and read the plan. Kick the trains up to a max of 110 somewhere north of Glenview. Think north of Fox lake or you risk plowing through a Metra train without a dedicated track. The plan calls for a feasibility study sometime in the future.

You'll never see speeds over 100mph on track shared with commuter trains and freights. And don't forget that you can't have grade crossings (track crossing a street at the same level) on a high speed rail system. The Chicago to Milwaukee line is full of them.

It is going to take serious upgrade to get to top out at 110mph. It will cost even more to get the trains to hit 155mph which is the minimum speed for HSR in Portugal.

This is a huge project. Why waste the money if you aren't going to do it right?
Kevin

Arlington Heights, IL

#13 Jul 17, 2009
Sounds good and forward thinking. I only question what good is to have 200mph trains that can only run on 90-110 mile tracks? Also I thought the Spanish trains ran by electrification.
JimmyB

Chicago, IL

#14 Jul 17, 2009
John: What's the timeline on this? My guess is 36 months on the trains... 60 months on the track improvements. Plus the usual government delay of double the time and triple the $$$. So sometime after the Olympics are long gone there will be a fast train. Just in time b/c the economy will be so bad that it will be the only way people will be able to get around.
eboloAA

AOL

#15 Jul 17, 2009
To hell with that, why can't they build those trains right here in America hell at 47 mil our industry could use that shot in the arm

Since: Nov 07

Arlington Heights, IL

#16 Jul 17, 2009
Alg Palin wrote:
<quoted text>
They are going to build track you troglodyte.
Not anytime soon. Didn't you read the article? They haven't even started the feasibility study for the track much less laid out a plan to do the upgrades.

Go learn something about railroads and HSR before you sound stupid again.

Alz

Since: Oct 08

Chicago

#17 Jul 17, 2009
Christopher wrote:
This sounds cool but I am sure the reality will be anything but fast. Perhaps there will be 2 or 3 brief moments where the train might top out at 110mph. The article itself mention anything south of Glenview will be slow. It's like ATT saying their 3G network is like 3mbps but the real world speed is like a third of that.
Yes, that's the reality. There won't be many places where the speed will go over 140 to 160MPH. Plus, with all of the grade crossings, etc., the train will be accelerating and decelerating quite a bit.

Will it be nice? Only if you ignore the costs.

Obviously, they are spending monies that we don't have and are unlikely to able to produce anytime soon with all of Obama's taxes and regulations kicking in.

We don't know if the money a) should be spent or b) could be spent on more beneficial projects.

It looks like there are 7 trains per day back and forth. I'm guessing that they'll be able to cut the time down from the current 90 minutes to something like 70 to 75 minutes. Big deal.

As they are spending a fortune widening 94 to Milwaukee now, there won't be any road savings.

I suspect little serious planning has been considered by lawmakers as the liberals have "Europe" stuck in their heads and thus the decision is based on emotion rather than logic.

The problem with emulating Europe is Europe has lots of cities that people travel to and the distances are short. Where does one go from Milwaukee?

Alz

Since: Oct 08

Chicago

#18 Jul 17, 2009
JimmyB wrote:
John: What's the timeline on this? My guess is 36 months on the trains... 60 months on the track improvements. Plus the usual government delay of double the time and triple the $$$. So sometime after the Olympics are long gone there will be a fast train. Just in time b/c the economy will be so bad that it will be the only way people will be able to get around.
There are about 7 trains per day now. One question is how many of the people that are driving will want to take the train??

You have to start modeling this to see if it makes sense.

Even if the travel time is cut, people have to get to and from the rail stations at each end. What is the total savings and how fast can the investment in the new tracks, rail cars, etc. be paid back.

Since Amtrak is already subsidized, what will it take to make the line profitable? In other words, we're starting in the hole before we start. If it's not profitable, then we're just adding to our debt.

I know those trains are more crowded now, but it still isn't clear if we should spend the money making the line faster.
The New Jim Jones

Naperville, IL

#19 Jul 17, 2009
eboloAA wrote:
To hell with that, why can't they build those trains right here in America hell at 47 mil our industry could use that shot in the arm
It says in the article that they will be built in Wisconson...
American

Chicago, IL

#20 Jul 17, 2009
put down dedicated track for true 200mph speeds, viaducts and tunnels over and under crossings. Real seats, space to stretch your legs, dining cars with food you would actually want to eat, more than one lavatory per hundred passengers, beats the short hop flights on those Malibu Stacy Regional Jet Airlines anytime.
What_U_talkin_bo ut_Willis

Lombard, IL

#21 Jul 17, 2009
Alz wrote:
<quoted text>
There are about 7 trains per day now. One question is how many of the people that are driving will want to take the train??
You have to start modeling this to see if it makes sense.
Al, It doesn't take a whole lot of modeling to know that a clean, well run high speed rail service between Milwaukee and Chicago would be succesful.
This is a step in the right direction. Oh yea, All you nay sayers. Will the train run at its maximum speed at first? Of course not.
But, over the years, say 10,20,30 years a large amount of the grade crossings will be rebuilt, the speed of the train will increase.
Rome wasn't built in a day folks.
P.S. Hey Al, have ya seen any good videos on U-Tube lately?:-)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 11
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 7 min CCC 1,275,000
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Joe Balls 196,932
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 3 hr Trey LaTrache 54,497
Candi wright. Homewrecker 4 hr Enough1908 1
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 6 hr CrunchyBacon 100,630
Hillary fires up crowd in Iowa. 7 hr lakeche 4
abby 8-28=15 8 hr Julie 8
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages