Trains.com

C&O and B&O Passenger Trains in Chicago

13349 views
19 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,001 posts
C&O and B&O Passenger Trains in Chicago
Posted by NP Eddie on Monday, April 7, 2014 12:14 PM

Fred Frailey's excellent book "Twilight of the Great Trains" (page 165) states that in 1969 C&O and B&O passenger trains moved from Grand Central Station in Chicago to the CNW Station.

What routing did BO & CO trains take to the CNW station and why didn't they use Union Station?

Amtrak was two years away.

Ed Burns

Happily retired NP-BN-BNSF from Northtown and an ATCS host in Anoka, MN

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,978 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, April 7, 2014 1:52 PM

The short answer is that B&O/C&O got a better deal from C&NW.  The other reason is that B&O/C&O also got a better route. 

The traditional B&O route also used by C&O trains to Grand Central used a joint B&O/Rock Island line from South Chicago, across the RI main line, over a bit of the RI suburban line and onto the B&OCT main line near Western Avenue.  From there the B&O trains went north to what is now known as Ogden where they turned east on the B&OCT line that led past the B&O's Rockwell Ave. yard to the junction with the St Charles Air Line.  To reach Grand Central the B&O stayed on the now-abandoned  B&OCT line over the south throat of Union Station to the now permanently-up B&OCT bridge, then down the incline to GC. 

To reach the south side of Union Station would have required taking the connecting track to the St Charles Air Line and stopping, then backing down to CB&Q's Union Tower before pulling into the south side of Union Station.  (Today UP's ex-C&NW route would be simpler, but it runs south of the old B&OCT route).

To reach C&NW station the B&O ran north from Ogden on C&NW's line before crossing over to PC's former Panhandle wye (C&NW had rights there) to turn east through the Western Avenue interlocking , then on to North Western Station.  Of course the same route could have been used to reach the north joint approach (CMStP&P) side of Union Station by taking a different route at Western Avenue.

The C&NW deal included servicing trains at the California Ave coach yard.  At Union B&O would probably have chosen to deal with MILW or CB&Q, since GM&O was a tenant, and CB&Q controlled the Union Avenue approach.  PC might have played along since it had rights to both Union Station approaches, and was also a part owner of the Air Line.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,015 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, April 7, 2014 2:02 PM

The B&O always had a rather round-about route into Grand Central, and going into Northwestern made it even more round-about, but not by much.   After the railroad moved out, of GC but just before maintenance stopped and preparations for demolition began, there was an architectural effort to save the station and adapt it to some reuse.  But the property had already been sold for the development of the high rise office building that occupies part of the old site.  Still, Chicago architects organized a dinner dance at the place, and the firm I worked for was asked to contribute and did, and that was my last visit there.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,978 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, April 7, 2014 2:49 PM

It turned out that the C&NW route was actually less time consuming than the old B&OCT approach to GC, since  the only major speed restriction between Ogden and NWT was the wye at Western Ave. tower.

A footnote to the change is that B&O's summer operation of dome coaches on the combined Capitol and Shenandoah was the first regular use of domes into NWT, even though the roof had been raised in 1954 for UP City train dome operation - a change which C&NW used to its own advantage when it bought bilevels in 1955.  The last westbound Capitol had both of B&O's Stratadomes.

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 1,751 posts
Posted by dakotafred on Monday, April 7, 2014 5:23 PM

RC, you are a treasure trove of arcane lore. Salud!Bow

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,978 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Tuesday, April 8, 2014 7:05 PM

I dug out some material from around 1969 to make sure I had my routing correct.  So here's the detail...

B&O/C&O trains entered the joint line with CRI&P at South Chicago, running parallel to and south of the Belt Railway of Chicago.  At Gresham (89th and Vincennes) the joint line crossed the RI main line and joined the Suburban line.  The crossing is no longer there, though the RI lines remain.  At Beverly (89th and Longwood) the B&O line turned northwest, running next to, and east of, the PRR Panhandle line, both now abandoned.  At 79th st near Western Avenue the line joined the B&OCT main line parallel to Western Avenue, still next to and east of the Panhandle.  This is now the NS/CSX line that makes up CREATE's Western Avenue Corridor.  After banging across a bunch of interlockings, at Ogden the B&OCT's line to Grand Central turned off to the east.  A little ways north, the B&OCT line to Forest Park and the C&NW line from Wood St and the St Charles Air Line came in from the east, rearranging themselves so that north of Ogden the B&OCT turned off to the west (now out of service) and the Panhandle and C&NW line swapped places so that the Panhandle line was east of the C&NW line.

In 1969 the Panhandle line tuned east to Western Avenue (no wye), with the C&NW tracks forming their own wye, with a small freight yard between th wye legs along the C&NW West Line.  The B&O/C&O passenger trains used the C&NW line and not the Panhandle.  In the intervening 45 years a lot of the track around in 1969 has been removed, so C&NW has become UP and NS no longer has its own track.

Thanks to John Szwajkart's invaluable "Train Watcher's Guide to Chicago" (1969) and the "Train Watcher's Guide to Chicago Supplement" (1971) for the excruciating detail.

All of this suggests that PC would have been the logical partner if B&O wanted to use Chicago Union Station, with the probable approach from the north on the PC/MILW North Joint Approach.  Even if PC provided coach yard facilities B&O would have had to pay CUS fees like the other owning roads and GM&O, so C&NW's cost structure was probably very favorable by comparison.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 63 posts
Posted by UChicagoMatt on Sunday, July 6, 2014 2:16 PM

The original B&O route is similar to this,but I am struggling to reconcile what was written here and my own experience in living on the South Side of Chicago near what was the former B&O route into Chicago. A route that has largely disappeared and the last big piece--the bridge adjacent to the ex-NYC bridges was smacked by a freighter nearly 20 years ago. 

Read about it here:  http://forgottenchicago.com/articles/south-shore-bo-spur/

Matt McClure

"The Transformation of Metropolitan Chicago's Railway Pattern 1957-1986"

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,978 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Sunday, July 6, 2014 5:08 PM

The Brookdale line in south Chicago was not used by passenger trains after B&O started its long and tortuous relationship with what later became the B&OCT.  B&O was one of the early tenants of Grand Central, which B&OCT later owned.  IC's lakefront line was at one time host to C&O of Indiana as well.

The only significant parts of the B&O route that have been abandoned are the stretch from Beverly to 79th, about 10 blocks, and the stretch from Ogden Jct (Western) to Grand Central.  After 45 years, the B&OCT Bridge over the Chicago River is still in the up position next to the St Charles Air Line.  It has been abandoned longer than it was in service (1930).

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,032 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Monday, July 7, 2014 11:22 AM

Here is the BO&CT bascule bridge in its permanent upright position.  This photo is in the public domain as posted on Wikepedia at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Central_Station_(Chicago)#mediaviewer/File:BandOBasculeBridgeAtChicagoRiver.jpg

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,978 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, July 7, 2014 11:27 AM

For a long time after Grand Central was closed, and maybe even today, the bridge tender's job was split between the St. Charles Air Line (owned by CB&Q, IC, C&NW and NYC - today's BNSF, CN, UP and NS) and the B&OCT (CSX).  This was because both bridges were operated by the same bridge tender.

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,032 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Monday, July 7, 2014 11:48 AM

The BO&CT bridge and the St. Charles Air Line bridge are both bascule bridges, and each has its own counterweight on the outer side, but the two bridges share a counterweight on the inner side.

In the past, this design allowed them to operate in unison.  Now, the old BO&CT bridge cannot be dismantled because the Air Line bridge depends upon that inner counterweight.  So, it remains in that upright position.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • 4,190 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Monday, July 7, 2014 1:30 PM

Excerpt from Historic American Engineering Record (2001)

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/il/il0800/il0837/data/il0837data.pdf

By far the most remarkable aspect of the SCAL bridge was the possibility that it might be moved within a decade. The Union Station ordinance had secured the railroads' cooperation in straightening the Chicago River for fifteen years, or until 1929. Not wanting this period to expire without action, the city dusted off its plans as World War I came to a close. The Railway Terminal Commission submitted another report in 1921, reinitiating the pursuit of a simpler, more rational transportation network.

The excavation of the new Chicago River channel seems like a simple task when compared to the legal wrangling necessary to make it happen. The myriad committees established to discuss consolidation of railroad terminals soon buried that issue under dozens of alternative schemes. Perhaps frustrated by the lack of progress, city officials decided to make river straightening a separate item that could be implemented right away. On 7 June 1924, the U.S. Congress agreed that the old channel could be abandoned as a navigable waterway when the new channel was completed. With this assurance, the City Council passed an ordinance on 8 July 1926 to specify detailed procedures for condemning railroad property, straightening the river, and re-allocating property afterward. All property transfers had to be approved by the Illinois Commerce Commission, a process which lasted until March 1928. Actual construction work did not begin for another four months, but then proceeded quickly. The SCAL bridge was moved to its new location by late 1930, and connecting tracks reached their final configuration in mid-1931. This section of the report describes the process of moving the bridge to the new channel and affiliated grade separation work.

 Although the city initiated the river straightening project, the War Department had significant influence over its design because of the navigable waterway issue. One important consequence of federal involvement was a reduction in the number of separate crossings of the new channel. Whereas the B&OCT previously crossed the South Branch near Taylor Street, about three-quarters of a mile north of the SCAL bridge, the War Department insisted that the two railroads build adjacent bridges over the new channel. This helped to advance the city's goals in four ways. First, it consolidated two railroads onto one alignment along Sixteenth Street, reducing the number of separate street crossings. West of the river, the new alignment could be elevated to eliminate an at-grade crossing of tracks serving Union Station. The new alignment would also make it easier for the B&OCT to join other railroads in a consolidated terminal south of the Loop and abandon Grand Central Station. Finally, the two railroads could use each other's bridges during construction, reducing the number of temporary structures necessary to maintain traffic. The city therefore embraced the War Department's requirement by including it in the river straightening ordinance.

One condition of the War Department's approval resulted in a curious situation, whereby CSX Transportation is currently responsible for operating the SCAL bridge, which it does not own. The permit for the B&OCT bridge over the South Branch required "that the said bridge, and the Illinois Central bridge ... adjacent thereto, shall be operated as a unit in order that they may be raised and lowered simultaneously."  The railroads constructed a single operator's house between the two bridges for this purpose, to be staffed by B&OCT employees. In a 1962 merger, the Chessie System (now CSX) acquired the B&O, the Chicago Terminal division, and the responsibility for operating both bridges over the South Branch. After a freighter destroyed the B&OCT's Calumet River bridge in the 1980s, CSX abandoned the line, removed the tracks, and locked its South Branch span in an upright position. Nonetheless, a lone CSX operator remains to fulfill the company's obligation to operate the SCAL bridge.

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,032 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Tuesday, July 8, 2014 5:08 AM

After the straightening of the Chicago River and the relocation of the SCAL and BOCT bridges, the B&O and C&O entered Grand Central Station from the reclaimed land on the east side of the river.  When the B&O mainline trackage was removed (1970s?), the land remained vacant and, to this day, remains one of the few undeveloped parcels of land south of the downtown Chicago Loop.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Tuesday, July 8, 2014 7:58 AM
Actually the B&OCT line was on the west side of the Panhandle (verified by Historic Aerials photos) note that the 63rd St station and the B&O freight house @ 77th were on the west side. If the B&O were on the east side it would have interfered with PRR's 59th St. engine house.

Also I believe NS still has trackage on the north CUS approach. East of Damen from north to south we have 2 UP tracks used primarily for access to the coach yard/engine house, 2 UP West Line mains. 3 METRA tracks for CUS access and 1 or in some places 2 industrial tracks. These latter tracks I believe still belong to NS.
  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,978 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Tuesday, July 8, 2014 9:09 AM

Buslist
Actually the B&OCT line was on the west side of the Panhandle (verified by Historic Aerials photos)

You are, of course, correct. The B&OCT crossed the Panhandle at Beverly, after leaving the RI suburban line.  All of the interlockings from 79th to Ogden have the B&OCT on the west side of the Panhandle.  The C&NW line to Wood St, and the B&OCT line from Forest Park (SOO, CGW) did cross the Panhandle at Ogden.  The B&OCT passenger line crossed the Panhandle at the south end of Ogden, with a connecting track from the Western Ave. Line to the Forest Park Line.  After 1969 B&O/C&O passenger trains at Ogden trains went on the connecting track to the C&NW line, not crossing the Panhandle at all.

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • 2,332 posts
Posted by timz on Tuesday, July 8, 2014 12:19 PM

richhotrain
the two bridges share a counterweight on the inner side.

In the past, this design allowed them to operate in unison.

Seems like it would require them to operate in unison. Now that one span is open and one is closed, is the shared counterweight up, down or in between?

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,978 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Tuesday, July 8, 2014 1:32 PM

timz

the two bridges share a counterweight on the inner side.

In the past, this design allowed them to operate in unison. Seems like it would require them to operate in unison. Now that one span is open and one is closed, is the shared counterweight up, down or in between?

It's actually a little more intricate than that.  As you can see from the post earlier, each bridge actually has its own counterweight, or they wouldn't be able to operate separately.  Closer photos show that the real issue is that structure that supports the counterweight mechanisms is shared between the bridges, which would require the complete removal of one bridge and a rebuilding of the structure on the side of the bridge that was removed.  Chicago has been pushing to get rid of the St. Charles Air Line since forever, so neither SCAL's owners nor B&OCT and its successors have felt any urgency to spend huge sums on a bridge that is only opened infrequently these days.

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,032 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Wednesday, July 9, 2014 5:31 AM

rcdrye

timz

the two bridges share a counterweight on the inner side.

In the past, this design allowed them to operate in unison. Seems like it would require them to operate in unison. Now that one span is open and one is closed, is the shared counterweight up, down or in between?

It's actually a little more intricate than that.  As you can see from the post earlier, each bridge actually has its own counterweight, or they wouldn't be able to operate separately.  Closer photos show that the real issue is that structure that supports the counterweight mechanisms is shared between the bridges, which would require the complete removal of one bridge and a rebuilding of the structure on the side of the bridge that was removed.  Chicago has been pushing to get rid of the St. Charles Air Line since forever, so neither SCAL's owners nor B&OCT and its successors have felt any urgency to spend huge sums on a bridge that is only opened infrequently these days.

Sorry about that.  I could have said that more elegantly.  Yes, both bridges have their own pair of counterweights, but share some common infrastructure.   Thanks, RCDRYE, for that clarification.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,978 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Sunday, August 17, 2014 8:14 PM

rcdrye

Buslist
Actually the B&OCT line was on the west side of the Panhandle (verified by Historic Aerials photos)

You are, of course, correct. The B&OCT crossed the Panhandle at Beverly, after leaving the RI suburban line.  All of the interlockings from 79th to Ogden have the B&OCT on the west side of the Panhandle.  The C&NW line to Wood St, and the B&OCT line from Forest Park (SOO, CGW) did cross the Panhandle at Ogden.  The B&OCT passenger line crossed the Panhandle at the south end of Ogden, with a connecting track from the Western Ave. Line to the Forest Park Line.  After 1969 B&O/C&O passenger trains at Ogden trains went on the connecting track to the C&NW line, not crossing the Panhandle at all.

Final correction on this...  B&OCT and Panhandle swapped places at 49th St, where both crossed the CR&I and GTW.  B&OCT was EAST of the Panhandle up to Ogden. At 14th St, where the B&OCT line to Forest Park headed west, B&O/C&O trains entered the C&NW line that was WEST of the Panhandle.  Track charts from various junctions confirm this.  CR&I's line from 49th to Wood St (C&NW) was the easternmost of the three parallel lines from 49th to Ogden.

The modern importance of this is that NS ended up with about two thirds of the right of way in CREATE's Western Avenue Corridor.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 63 posts
Posted by UChicagoMatt on Tuesday, April 14, 2015 4:33 PM

richhotrain

After the straightening of the Chicago River and the relocation of the SCAL and BOCT bridges, the B&O and C&O entered Grand Central Station from the reclaimed land on the east side of the river.  When the B&O mainline trackage was removed (1970s?), the land remained vacant and, to this day, remains one of the few undeveloped parcels of land south of the downtown Chicago Loop.

Rich

 

 

For the longest time--as late as 1986 on some of my slides, CSX still "parked" several boxcars on the one remaining weed-choked track at Grand Central Station. The concrete platforms are still in place and visable in spots along with pieces of the old station foundation. Tragically, Bertram Goldberg's "River City" was built on the ROW just to the south. Among the ugliest buildings in Chicago, if not the world. 

SUBSCRIBER & MEMBER LOGIN

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

FREE NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter