Join the discussion on the following article:
Illinois to invest additional $102 million in Chicago-St. Louis corridor
Pat, throw some $ to CN to double track the IC so you don’t bitch about why Chi to Carb trains are always late!
Mr. Reid III, you are absolutely correct. I understand Amtrak is appealing to the STB for relief on CHI-CDL. The Newswire is carrying an item citing Sen. Durbin’s beating up on CN for repeated “freight train interference” (the standard wording used by Amtrak and the commuter authorities in their delay reports).
This is nuts! I’m sure Sen. Durbin understands capacity issues when it comes to the highways operated by the IL Tollway Authority. He was probably “all in” back when I-355 was being proposed, in the name of adding capacity. That that roadway was antithetical to the transit interests and handed the truckers a new road to play on at someone else’s dime I’m sure gave him no pause.
The 1980s saw the single-tracking of the IC CHI-CDL and beyond. No one outside the rail industry and the fan network even noticed. But who will attempt to educate Sen. Durbin on rail capacity issues on that line? Apparently, all concerned understood capacity expansion was necessary on the UP between JOL and STL. But Durbin and his ilk, when it comes to CN apparently would rather curse the darkness than light a candle.
Mr. Brunner, be patient with the Kalmbach web server. Click Submit once and wait.
And it’s Edgewood, not Edgeworth.
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
As for double-tracking this particular line, it seems as if it’s primarily the area north of Edgeworth, Il. and north toward Chicago that would matter.
Edgeworth is ten miles or so south of Effingham, and the CN has switched a considerable number of its Chicago / Memphis traffic to those tracks. A fairly recent construction project from the prosperous years of the 1920s, the Edgeworth Cutoff is CTC single track that bypasses the grades south of Carbondale and the aging Mississippi River crossing at Cairo, for a straight line with some tunnels and a crossover point over the Ohio River.
At the very least, double-tracking segments north of Urbana alone would have considerable impact on handling dense traffic. And no additional property would need to be acquired for any such upgrade, as it would just return the railroad to its previous status: bridges and overhead crossing are already sized for two tracks.
This isn’t to take away from the Chicago / St. Louis upgrade, a wise choice initially for a high-speed corridor. More accurately, though, since American “high-speed” isn’t even close to European standards, that corridor, even after millions of dollars, might be called at best a “higherish-speed corridor.”
I feel for my former neighbors and fellow taxpayers of the Prairie State. $102 million spent to cut five minutes off of a 284-mile train schedule; that’s a little over $20 million per minute. Only in Illinois.