Skipping Chicago entirely?

[Anonymous]

like he said, the ex-wabash is very congested. i visit huntington indiana a lot. and there can be trains stacked up two at a time at both roanoke and andrews waiting for a triple crowne train or two.

[Anonymous]

like he said, the ex-wabash is very congested. i visit huntington indiana a lot. and there can be trains stacked up two at a time at both roanoke and andrews waiting for a triple crowne train or two.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by JoeKoh

The old NKP line across Indiana and Ohio is the same way.If ns put the right size trains for the sidings it would ease congestion.Until you got more trains.
stay safe
joe

Joe, what about the old Nickle Plate from west Ohio to St louis? (if it's even still there)

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by JoeKoh

The old NKP line across Indiana and Ohio is the same way.If ns put the right size trains for the sidings it would ease congestion.Until you got more trains.
stay safe
joe

Joe, what about the old Nickle Plate from west Ohio to St louis? (if it's even still there)

[CShaveRR]

I doubt that you'd ever see a new rail line constructed just to bypass Chicago. A lot of possibilities, such as Streator to Elkhart, or the EJ&E line to Porter, existed at one time, but have pretty much fizzled out.

If bypassing Chicago were that desirable, you'd see a lot more stuff going from CSX to UP via St. Louis than you do.

I'm hoping that the recently-announced plan to streamline operations for all railroads in Chicago will provide the basis for some necessary improvements, and that the railroads will take advantage of them by blocking more freights that don't need to be switched in or near Chicago.

[CShaveRR]

I doubt that you'd ever see a new rail line constructed just to bypass Chicago. A lot of possibilities, such as Streator to Elkhart, or the EJ&E line to Porter, existed at one time, but have pretty much fizzled out.

If bypassing Chicago were that desirable, you'd see a lot more stuff going from CSX to UP via St. Louis than you do.

I'm hoping that the recently-announced plan to streamline operations for all railroads in Chicago will provide the basis for some necessary improvements, and that the railroads will take advantage of them by blocking more freights that don't need to be switched in or near Chicago.

[JoeKoh]

The old NKP line across Indiana and Ohio is the same way.If ns put the right size trains for the sidings it would ease congestion.Until you got more trains.
stay safe
joe

[JoeKoh]

The old NKP line across Indiana and Ohio is the same way.If ns put the right size trains for the sidings it would ease congestion.Until you got more trains.
stay safe
joe

[Anonymous]

That ex wabash line running northeast thru Ft Wayne gets pretty heavy use at times, and chokes down to single track in a number of locations, There are days where NS runs two eastbound, then west, then east then west ongoing for hours on end with juse enough time to get the outbounds past the inbounds, then there they come.

Not a lot of slack to contemplate as a dependable bypass, I wouldn't think,... just based upon observations.

The old Pennsylvania to Chicago, on the other hand is nearly dead. If you could use one of the north/south lines in western Indiana to link onto that, you might have a winner....?perhaps? a former NYC route?

[Anonymous]

That ex wabash line running northeast thru Ft Wayne gets pretty heavy use at times, and chokes down to single track in a number of locations, There are days where NS runs two eastbound, then west, then east then west ongoing for hours on end with juse enough time to get the outbounds past the inbounds, then there they come.

Not a lot of slack to contemplate as a dependable bypass, I wouldn't think,... just based upon observations.

The old Pennsylvania to Chicago, on the other hand is nearly dead. If you could use one of the north/south lines in western Indiana to link onto that, you might have a winner....?perhaps? a former NYC route?

[Anonymous]

Well there is the NS (ex Wabash) that goes to St. Louis that by-passes Chicago. It connect with other around Ft. Wayne. But if everything by-passes Chicago at one point then that will become a bottle neck. What to do? Problem is it that a lot of coast to coast trains need to stop in Chicago to drop off and pick up.

[Anonymous]

Well there is the NS (ex Wabash) that goes to St. Louis that by-passes Chicago. It connect with other around Ft. Wayne. But if everything by-passes Chicago at one point then that will become a bottle neck. What to do? Problem is it that a lot of coast to coast trains need to stop in Chicago to drop off and pick up.

[Anonymous]

As many of you know, one of the major impediments to increasing the speed of both passenger and freight trains is the difficulty in getting a train through Chicago. There are horror stories of freights taking three days to get from one side to the other; passenger trains and "hotshots" lose two or three hours in this area at the very least.

Would it be possible to re-route the faster trains so as to skip the mess around the city and instead cross the Mississippi and change railroads in open country, perhaps around Keokuk IA, and then southeast to Peoria IL, and then head northeast to Fort Wayne IN and rejoin the current line? It would save UP about 150 miles on its main line and wouldn't add much to BNSF's line distance. It would be all-new construction and would allow for a very favorable alignment, perhaps allowing freights to run at passenger-train speeds.

[Anonymous]

As many of you know, one of the major impediments to increasing the speed of both passenger and freight trains is the difficulty in getting a train through Chicago. There are horror stories of freights taking three days to get from one side to the other; passenger trains and "hotshots" lose two or three hours in this area at the very least.

Would it be possible to re-route the faster trains so as to skip the mess around the city and instead cross the Mississippi and change railroads in open country, perhaps around Keokuk IA, and then southeast to Peoria IL, and then head northeast to Fort Wayne IN and rejoin the current line? It would save UP about 150 miles on its main line and wouldn't add much to BNSF's line distance. It would be all-new construction and would allow for a very favorable alignment, perhaps allowing freights to run at passenger-train speeds.