Charlotte Gateway Station and Railroad Improvements

[kermit]

5 minutes ago, Hushpuppy321 said:

High Platform means Level Boarding & Faster Loading\Unloading right...?

Yup, all doors can be used and supervision is not required.

Edited June 23, 2021 by kermit

[Hushpuppy321]

25 minutes ago, kermit said:

Yup, all doors can be used and supervision is not required.

Cool deal.  My only issue looking at the Phase I & II Gateway Infrastructure currently under Construction is that the Bridges\Rail Mainline don't seem to be wide enough for Future Silver Line LRT?  I guess that wasn't planned for these on-going phases of Gateway.  

Also - That Wye planned for the Gold District to turn Trains around is back on NCDOT Funding\Construction Schedule?

[Matthew.Brendan]

[kermit]

1 hour ago, Hushpuppy321 said:

Cool deal.  My only issue looking at the Phase I & II Gateway Infrastructure currently under Construction is that the Bridges\Rail Mainline don't seem to be wide enough for Future Silver Line LRT?  I guess that wasn't planned for these on-going phases of Gateway.  

Also - That Wye planned for the Gold District to turn Trains around is back on NCDOT Funding\Construction Schedule?

This was not a screwup. Based on early design the Silver Line will travel on its own bridges, this is almost certainly due to FTA regulations which require that most LRT equipment be separated from heavy rail by some large number of feet (or a large concrete wall).

I have not heard anything about the wye. In the near-term its not a big deal, the Piedmont trains run push-pull now so they do not need to be wyed. The Carolinian has enough slack time in its schedule that running it to Atando is no big deal schedule wise, and if NS beotches enough about the track fouling NCDOT will find the money. (I don’t think the wye was planned for the Gold District, it was at Charlotte Junction, near the airport. I think NS would really like to have it to better connect the intermodal yard to its Columbia sections — I would not be surprised if they just went ahead and built it themselves)

[B Randy]

On 6/23/2021 at 3:41 PM, kermit said:

This was not a screwup. Based on early design the Silver Line will travel on its own bridges, this is almost certainly due to FTA regulations which require that most LRT equipment be separated from heavy rail by some large number of feet (or a large concrete wall).

I have not heard anything about the wye. In the near-term its not a big deal, the Piedmont trains run push-pull now so they do not need to be wyed. The Carolinian has enough slack time in its schedule that running it to Atando is no big deal schedule wise, and if NS beotches enough about the track fouling NCDOT will find the money. (I don’t think the wye was planned for the Gold District, it was at Charlotte Junction, near the airport. I think NS would really like to have it to better connect the intermodal yard to its Columbia sections — I would not be surprised if they just went ahead and built it themselves)

Yep.  Offsets required + SL not funded yet so no infra being built...

[cowboy_wilhelm]

The wye is tentatively scheduled to be let in August of this year, along with the Kannapolis second platform. The second platform in Salisbury is scheduled for a November let.

Can't remember where I read it, but yes, NS needs the wye to eliminate backing into their intermodal yard from the Columbia line, so I'm sure they were more eager to cooperate on this project than some others.

https://connect.ncdot.gov/letting/12 Month Tentative Letting Library/12 MONTH LET LIST (JUNE 2021 - MAY 2022).pdf

[kermit]

Amtrak just reached an agreement to purchase matched trainsets from Siemans to replace all of their day train equipment in the east. This is related to Gateway because the new sets will have dual mode locomotives, which means there will no longer be an engine change (from electric to diesel) required in DC. This should reduce travel time between NC and points north of DC by 15-20 minutes. When combined with the S-Line and some slow-zone track tweaks in NC and VA trips to the corridor could become nearly 2 hours shorter before spending any $$$ to rebuild track for higher top speeds. 

The sets should be similar to the Brightline equipment used in Florida, they are very nice. The press release is not specific but I believe I heard delivery is expected to begin in late 2023 assuming the widely discussed federal funding happens.

https://media.amtrak.com/2021/04/amtrak-announces-siemens-as-preferred-bidder-for-new-equipment/

[as an aside, much of the NCRR was rebuilt to accommodate 90mph top speeds using the ARRA stimulus cash. It appears that NCDOT and NS are unwilling to pay the maintenance costs for Class 5 track so trips between Charlotte and Raleigh currently top out at 79mph. Attaining 90mph top speeds might cut another 10 minutes off trips to Raleigh.]

Edited July 8, 2021 by kermit

[LKN704]

3 hours ago, kermit said:

Amtrak just reached an agreement to purchase matched trainsets from Siemans to replace all of their day train equipment in the east. This is related to Gateway because the new sets will have dual mode locomotives, which means there will no longer be an engine change (from electric to diesel) required in DC. This should reduce travel time between NC and points north of DC by 15-20 minutes. When combined with the S-Line and some slow-zone track tweaks in NC and VA trips to the corridor could become nearly 2 hours shorter before spending any $$$ to rebuild track for higher top speeds. 

The sets should be similar to the Brightline equipment used in Florida, they are very nice. The press release is not specific but I believe I heard delivery is expected to begin in late 2023 assuming the widely discussed federal funding happens.

https://media.amtrak.com/2021/04/amtrak-announces-siemens-as-preferred-bidder-for-new-equipment/

[as an aside, much of the NCRR was rebuilt to accommodate 90mph top speeds using the ARRA stimulus cash. It appears that NCDOT and NS are unwilling to pay the maintenance costs for Class 5 track so trips between Charlotte and Raleigh currently top out at 79mph. Attaining 90mph top speeds might cut another 10 minutes off trips to Raleigh.]

From the rendering it looks like the order will be EMUs which is interesting as well. 

Any word on the NCRR replacement fleet for the Piedmont yet?

[kermit]

1 hour ago, LKN704 said:

Any word on the NCRR replacement fleet for the Piedmont yet?

Best I can tell they got all of the cash from those two federal grants (just before the pandemic) and then have done nothing? (I may be wrong).

IIRC, they seemed most likely to piggyback on the Midwestern gear order which will be delivered shortly. Those are also Siemens cars so they should (mostly) match the new Amtrak equipment, I suspect NCDOT will take a close look at the Midwest equipment once delivered and then say "we want these too". The list of potential US-based manufacturers is very small so bidding is going to basically be a formality (Alstrom and Stadler would need to come up with a mostly new design, CAF has probably been blacklisted).   With a little luck (which Amtrak generally lacks for equipment orders) all the new gear will arrive around the time Gateway station opens.

[orulz]

Back in the late 80s or early 90s, Governor Jim Hunt articulated a vision for hourly trains and a 2 hour trip time between Raleigh and Charlotte.

We need to reawaken some of that ambition. A Brightline-scale effort is about what it would take.

1. Raise the corridor-wide speed limit to 90 mph - (~10min?)
2. Get DEMU trains with distributed traction (for better acceleration - the Amtrak Siemens order doesn't have this) and retractable gap fillers (to make it easier to build high platforms) (~10min?)
3. Complete double tracking between Raleigh and Greensboro (no speedup but enables hourly service?)
4. Rebuild every platform as high level, with a setback from the main line to avoid freight interference, which will shorten station dwell times (~10min?)
5. More grade separations, probably focusing on problematic urban areas like Cary, Durham, Mebane, and Thomasville, where there are clusters of busy grade crossings in close proximity (no speedup but still badly needed for safety)
6. Curve straightening (~5min?)
7. Build some sections of 125mph dedicated passenger-only 3rd track, including full grade separation, in locations between stations where tracks are relatively straight or can be straightened further (~10 min)
8. Electrify the corridor (~20min)

That brings the NCRR up to near-Northeast Corridor standards, which should about do it.

How much would this cost, and how long would it take? Items 1 and 2 cost essentially nothing in terms of capital (the signals are already done- the track just needs to be maintained for 90mph, and NCDOT already plans to buy new trains) and could easily be completed by 2025.

Items 3-6 (complete double track, high platforms, more grade separations, and some curve realignments) combined are probably an ARRA scale effort, so $500-750m, and using the time it took to complete the "Piedmont Improvement Program," this could be completed, through scoping, environmental analysis, planning, engineering, and construction - by 2030.

Item 7 (125mph dedicated tracks) is perhaps another $500-750m.
Item 8 (electrification) is another $1-1.5b.

These could be done at the same time as 3-6 if the project is fully funded on day one, but if not, an incremental program could add the 125mph dedicated tracks by 2035 and electrification by 2040.

So my order of magnitude estimate: ~$2-$3b and 10~20 years.

Now, that's a lot of money, don't get me wrong, but we drop sums like that on highway projects *all* *the* *time* with nary so much as a batted eyelash. It's time to get with the program and ditch the timid incrementalism. Set a *meaningful* goal and plan a course to achieve it.

That would basically be the endgame for conventional intercity rail in the NC Piedmont. The next phase would be dropping $10+ billion on 200 mph TGV-style high speed trains and *1* hour trip times between Raleigh and Charlotte. Which would be awesome, but we shouldn't just skip the conventional upgrades, because service to intermediate cities that a NC TGV would skip (Burlington, High Point, Salisbury) is definitely important.








 

[jthomas]

33 minutes ago, orulz said:

Back in the late 80s or early 90s, Governor Jim Hunt articulated a vision for hourly trains and a 2 hour trip time between Raleigh and Charlotte.

We need to reawaken some of that ambition. A Brightline-scale effort is about what it would take.

1. Raise the corridor-wide speed limit to 90 mph - (~10min?)
2. Get DEMU trains with distributed traction (for better acceleration - the Amtrak Siemens order doesn't have this) and retractable gap fillers (to make it easier to build high platforms) (~10min?)
3. Complete double tracking between Raleigh and Greensboro (no speedup but enables hourly service?)
4. Rebuild every platform as high level, with a setback from the main line to avoid freight interference, which will shorten station dwell times (~10min?)
5. More grade separations (no speedup but still needed)
6. Curve straightening (~5min?)
7. Build some sections of 125mph dedicated passenger-only 3rd track, including full grade separation, in locations between stations where tracks are relatively straight or can be straightened further (~10 min)
8. Electrify the corridor (~20min)

That brings the NCRR up to near-Northeast Corridor standards, which should about do it.

How much would this cost, and how long would it take? Items 1 and 2 cost essentially nothing in terms of capital (the signals are already done- the track just needs to be maintained for 90mph, and NCDOT already plans to buy new trains) and could easily be completed by 2025.

Item 3-6 combined are probably an ARRA scale effort, so $500-750m

Item 7 is perhaps another $500-750m.
Item 8 is another $1-1.5b.

3-6 could be done by 2030. 7-8 could be done at the same time if the project is fully funded on day one. If not, an incremental program could add the 125mph dedicated tracks by 2035 and electrification by 2040.

So my order of magnitude estimate: ~$2-$3b and 10~20 years.

Now, that's a lot of money, don't get me wrong, but we drop sums like that on highway projects *all* *the* *time* with nary so much as a batted eyelash. It's time to get with the program and ditch the timid incrementalism. Set a *meaningful* goal and plan a course to achieve it.

That would basically be the endgame for conventional intercity rail in the NC Piedmont. The next phase would be dropping $10+ billion on 200 mph TGV-style high speed trains and *1* hour trip times between Raleigh and Charlotte. Which would be awesome, but we shouldn't just skip the conventional upgrades, because service to intermediate cities that a NC TGV would skip (Burlington, High Point, Salisbury) is definitely important.








 

This is basically the same vision I have for the core NC intercity system, with regional rail overlaid end to end (Clayton-Burlington, Burlington-Salisbury, Salisbury-Gastonia). You are right that all it would take is a comprehensive vision, and a willingness to channel existing resources in a new direction. I'm a little torn, because on the one hand I want to see this as soon as possible. But on the other hand, to do it right requires system-level integrated thinking and planning, a la Switzerland or Japan, and we are not there yet. Throwing money around haphazardly risks baking in suboptimal solutions (although everything you listed is so basic that one couldn't go wrong with it).

In my head, I have a half-baked idea of a regional transportation authority covering the entire NC urban crescent that would coordinate fares, scheduling, and infrastructure investment for all public transportation - from Piedmont trains all the way down to local buses. Imagine one fare and one app to plan seamless car-free journeys anywhere across the region. 

[orulz]

2 hours ago, jthomas said:

This is basically the same vision I have for the core NC intercity system, with regional rail overlaid end to end (Clayton-Burlington, Burlington-Salisbury, Salisbury-Gastonia). You are right that all it would take is a comprehensive vision, and a willingness to channel existing resources in a new direction. I'm a little torn, because on the one hand I want to see this as soon as possible. But on the other hand, to do it right requires system-level integrated thinking and planning, a la Switzerland or Japan, and we are not there yet. Throwing money around haphazardly risks baking in suboptimal solutions (although everything you listed is so basic that one couldn't go wrong with it).

In my head, I have a half-baked idea of a regional transportation authority covering the entire NC urban crescent that would coordinate fares, scheduling, and infrastructure investment for all public transportation - from Piedmont trains all the way down to local buses. Imagine one fare and one app to plan seamless car-free journeys anywhere across the region. 

You are so right about integrated planning.  It's easy to get lost in the weeds on this, and I am not a professional (what I know I learned mostly from reading blogs) but:

The way to do this, is to *start* by drawing up the timetable you want to run. Work backwards from there to figure out the infrastructure needed to make it work.

If you do it right (meaning you have a willing and cooperative freight operator), by step 6 (2h 30m run time), you would have a system where passenger trains and freight trains never have to overtake each other in the same direction because they all run the same average speed: about 60mph. Freights would go a steady 60mph. Passenger trains going 90 would start to catch up with the freights ahead of them, but then fall back behind as they slow down, stop at a station, and then accelerate back up to speed. No same-direction overtakes are needed at all, meaning a two-track railroad is perfectly adequate. Actually I think that, perhaps with 90mph top speeds, trains that can accelerate a bit faster, and high platforms for shorter dwells, there would be enough space in the schedule for the new stops that are planned (Hillsborough, Lexington, and Harrisburg) while still maintaining the magic freight-compatible speed of about 60mph. On the freight infrastructure side, you would need to be sure that anywhere freight trains need to slow down to enter a yard or service an industrial siding, that there is space off the mainline for them to do so, or otherwise that they only do so overnight when passenger trains are not running.

Norfolk Southern has demanded dedicated tracks wherever passenger trains are expected to go faster than 90. It turns out that this isn't because of safety concerns, nor because of simple unwillingness to cooperate - it's a very reasonable requirement, grounded in the realities of operating a railroad. Raising top speeds to 110 or 125mph, and/or the much faster acceleration of electric trains, will make intercity passenger schedules (even including stops) faster than freight trains can reasonably be expected to operate, which means that passenger trains will have to overtake freights moving in the same direction. Without extra tracks to accomplish those overtakes, it starts to reduce the efficiency and capacity of the line as a whole.

Think: overtaking a slow-moving vehicle on a two-lane country road where there is a dashed yellow line. The Blue Ridge Parkway is a great example. The system works fine when traffic is light, but during peak season when traffic is heavy, either the slow car has to pull over at an overlook, or (if they're stubborn) you just never get the opportunity to pass them.

The Northeast Corridor gets away with fast passenger trains and freights sharing the corridor because it is a largely 3- and 4- tracked, and it is a passenger-first corridor where freight explicitly plays second fiddle. On the other hand, the NCRR, especially between Greensboro and Charlotte, is certainly busy and valuable enough as a freight corridor, that maintaining efficiency of freight operation is an imperative consideration.

With electrification, *regional* trains stopping every few miles (rather than every 20 miles) could hypothetically intermingle with freights operating in the range of 50-60mph, and indeed that is what they do in places like Switzerland and Japan. Japan manages to slot freights into <10 minute gaps beween regional passenger trains. We're a long way off from that level of operational precision and proficiency, you need shorter, lighter, and better powered freights, and you also have to design the infrastructure specifically to accommodate it, but we have to understand that it *is* possible, and start planning for it on day one/step one, as we plan the timetable.

[DMann]

TRC indicated in another thread that something big is just on the horizon.  I am thinking that it is the announcement of the plans for the AMTRAK station and surrounding development.  I seem to recall that an announcement was to be made in the summer.

[Matthew.Brendan]

 

 

 

not Gateway exactly, but….. trains!

(side note, I wish there was an easy way to embed video. I managed to capture the above NS freight, CATS Blue Line, and Amtrak all within 40 seconds of one another)

[videtur quam contuor]

I found posting to Youtube and then linking here is a way, perhaps not the only way or best way.

Edit: do we see fewer tagged (graffiti covered) rail cars in Charlotte than...somewhere else?

Edited July 10, 2021 by tarhoosier

[kermit]

A few more details are out on the preferred Atlanta-Charlotte passenger rail corridor route. We have known for a few months that the Greenfield route was selected as the preferred alternative but no details were offered on exact routing at each end of the route.

CBJ (via ABJ) now reports that the NS ROW (on “dedicated passenger tracks”) will be used from the CLT airport station to Gateway (no surprise). I would think that speeds on this section of track will be low enough that the new tracks can be easily shared with commuter and regular intercity rail to the airport (meaning that Piedmont / Carolinian service could use those tracks at terminate at CLT rather than Gateway). After leaving CLT the new tracks will run South of Belmont to a new station in “South Gastonia” near the state line. Its nice there will be a Gaston county stop, but this will really be in the middle of nowhere and it will do little for intra-metro mobility (its more of a benefit for SC “free riders”)

On the Atlanta end the greenfield route will end just West of Athens and follow existing CSX (and some NS) tracks into Atlanta at Howell Junction. New tracks will be built from Howell to Hartsfield. There is still some ambiguity in the Atlanta routing and two possibilities are being considered through Gwinnett. In addition to an Athens stop, two stops in Gwinnett / Dekalb (these two stops depend on route selection) downtown and Hartsfield are planned. Not mentioned, there will certainly be commuter rail using the Athens-Atlanta tracks.

There was no change to planned “middle-finger” SC stops (GSP airport and Anderson)

While the route will be designed for 220 mph electric service on the greenfield portions of the route, this news indicates that they may run 125 diesel service for a while they delay wiring for electric to a later phase of construction. While not running at 220 would certainly be a wasted opportunity, 125mph service should still create Atlanta-Charlotte travel times of well less than 3 hours. Some small upgrades to the NCRR and decent scheduling should make 5 hour trips from Raleigh to Atlanta easy.

https://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/news/2021/07/13/atlanta-charlotte-high-speed-rail-corridor-chosen.html

Not mentioned was timeline. The project is a long way from an EIS or any engineering, but I do wonder if there might be a way for the project to get a large chunk of cash from this very rail-friendly administration in need of a Southern showcase project in two swing states. Perhaps buying up ROW and setting aside money for capacity increases on the shared freight corridors at either end would be kosher? Packaging an initial investment in this project together with money for S-Line reconstruction would make a hella political announcement.

 

Edited July 13, 2021 by kermit

[tozmervo]

23 minutes ago, kermit said:

After leaving CLT the new tracks will run South of Belmont to a new station in “South Gastonia” near the state line (a surprise). Its nice there will be a Gaston county stop, but this will really be in the middle of no where and it will do little for intra-metro mobility (its more of a benefit for SC “free riders”)

"Casino Station"

[Matthew.Brendan]

 

By special request on a day with spectacular skies. I can’t find the post at the moment to reply but I think someone mentioned freight cars???

Also this made me realize I had never been to the Charlotte Amtrak station. Not long for this world. I’m sure NS is happy?

[videtur quam contuor]

On 7/10/2021 at 4:39 PM, tarhoosier said:

I found posting to Youtube and then linking here is a way, perhaps not the only way or best way.

Edit: do we see fewer tagged (graffiti covered) rail cars in Charlotte than...somewhere else?

Several posts above was this from yours truly. The post above mine showed a freight engine pulling clean cars.

Answer to the question: No, not at all.

[kermit]

Eric Spanberg has a bit more on CLT-ATL HSR.

Cost estimates: $6.2-$8.4 billion

(this is quite a bargain when compared to the $117 billion Amtrak just requested to rebuild the NEC) (<— blue text). $8 billion is also about 1/2 the cost of the Texas Central HSR that is (in theory) about to start construction and roughly the same length. 

The expert interviewed indicated the three states would be expected to pay $1 billion each towards total costs. I can tell you right now, SC is not going to put in a dime for this. I would also expect some resistance from NC to paying 9 figures for 30ish miles of track. If there are signs of success at Texas Central could see a private company building and operating this route.
[don’t forget, the federal government typically pays for 80% of the cost of highway construction].

Models suggest: 

• HSR would divert 29% of total trips between the two endpoints (this would create some substantial carbon savings which should be applied against project costs)
• Annual ridership of 5.4-6.3 million by 2050 (Texas Central projects 13 million)
• HSR would divert the following portions of airport traffic: 4% in Atl; 7% in CLT, 30% in GSP

https://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/news/2021/07/15/charlotte-atlanta-rail-brings-big-price-tag.html

Edited July 16, 2021 by kermit

[Matthew.Brendan]

[videtur quam contuor]

Link Belt crawler crane, rigged for weight not height or reach. Decades ago I worked for a local company that was the rep for Link Belt in this area. You should see a crane like that arrive in pieces on rail cars and then assemble itself without additional assistance to then go about its business: mine, quarry, swamp.

This is from trucks but the idea is the same:

https://interestingengineering.com/video/watch-the-telescopic-crawler-crane-assemble-itself

[Matthew.Brendan]

‘‘Twas a beaut alright. Wide stance. 
 

 

 

[XRZ.ME]

Brightline posted some new map that contain CLT to ATL HSR.

[kermit]

^ Glad they are still being active with PR. Unfortunately Brightline has been having trouble selling their bonds to finance LA-Vegas. I think sources of capital are in wait and see mode. They need to see what kind of yields come from the Orlando service. If that looks good (won’t know for more than a year), then I think Brightline will begin a push for more routes, but LA-Vegas is first in line. Clt-Atl might be next, but I’ll bet it will require some big public subsidies.