Running trains to run trains is one thing. But it shouldn't be the thing when it comes to Amtrak. Providing service is what Amtrak should be about. And sometimes providing service is a perception rather than reality. Reality may be that with 110 mph running you could take the LS from Toledo to Detroit with no change in time but in perception it is an uneeded dog leg on a straight arrow trip to the Windy City. Plus, under peception, if you can go 110mph west of Detroit, why can't you go 110mph west of Toledo and get to Chi an hour faster. Service and perceptions can make or break you.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Running trains where people aren't because it's a straight line makes no sense unless it's 1938 and the train is the Broadway Limited. But nobody but us railfans are going end to end these days on these trains. Connecting the dots where people are is service.
Amtrak made a change like this for exactly this reason to the Capitol Limited. They took it off the B&O west of PIttsburgh and made a jog north to Cleveland so they could pick up the population centers of Cleveland and Toledo.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
There was more to that move than operations...there was politics at play not to have to deal with the train on by then single tracks across Ohio. But I disagree with your point further for several reasons. First, any casual traveler will look at the dog leg to Detroit and recoil at the thought no matter how fast the trip can be made. Further, a straight line from Toledo to Chicago at 110mph would be better service. We are not talking thousands of miles of line, but what, about 200? Service is straight to Chicago from all points east and not through Detroit. If there is a need for a connection from Toldedo to Detroit for customers from the east, then let the market research prove it, othewise march on!
oltmannd MidlandMike: I don't believe the train would be rerouted via Canada for all the reasons already stated. I think Indiana and its cities served would object strongly to being bypassed. The Toledo-Detroit-Chicago route has already been tried and failed. Even if this new train would eliminate the transfer at Toledo and Michigan speeds were improved, there are so many stops on the present Detroit-Chicago stretch, some would have to be eliminated to keep reasonable time. This is what is done on the present Lakeshore thru NY where many stops are eliminated Buffalo-NY City, and you must transfer to make those stops. So they would effectively recreate the Toledo-Detroit-Chicago scenario, which as we said failed. "Many" = 3. Rome, Rhinecliff, Hudson "Cities" in Indiana = Elkhart, South Bend, Waterloo. (and the South Bend folk would just have to scoot up to Niles) . Kalamazoo, Jackson and Battle Creek easily trump those for market size. Detroit, Dearborn and Ann Arbor are the real prize, though. Other locations in Michigan can be skipped...no biggie. Current running time for the LSL is about 4:30. Current MI trains about 5:30. Drop 1:00 for 110 mph when it happens and add back in 1:00 for Toledo to Detroit. 1:00 total impact - for LD train riders, this is a non-factor. Nobody rides LD trains for their trip times.
MidlandMike: I don't believe the train would be rerouted via Canada for all the reasons already stated. I think Indiana and its cities served would object strongly to being bypassed. The Toledo-Detroit-Chicago route has already been tried and failed. Even if this new train would eliminate the transfer at Toledo and Michigan speeds were improved, there are so many stops on the present Detroit-Chicago stretch, some would have to be eliminated to keep reasonable time. This is what is done on the present Lakeshore thru NY where many stops are eliminated Buffalo-NY City, and you must transfer to make those stops. So they would effectively recreate the Toledo-Detroit-Chicago scenario, which as we said failed.
I don't believe the train would be rerouted via Canada for all the reasons already stated. I think Indiana and its cities served would object strongly to being bypassed. The Toledo-Detroit-Chicago route has already been tried and failed. Even if this new train would eliminate the transfer at Toledo and Michigan speeds were improved, there are so many stops on the present Detroit-Chicago stretch, some would have to be eliminated to keep reasonable time. This is what is done on the present Lakeshore thru NY where many stops are eliminated Buffalo-NY City, and you must transfer to make those stops. So they would effectively recreate the Toledo-Detroit-Chicago scenario, which as we said failed.
"Many" = 3. Rome, Rhinecliff, Hudson
"Cities" in Indiana = Elkhart, South Bend, Waterloo. (and the South Bend folk would just have to scoot up to Niles) . Kalamazoo, Jackson and Battle Creek easily trump those for market size. Detroit, Dearborn and Ann Arbor are the real prize, though. Other locations in Michigan can be skipped...no biggie.
Current running time for the LSL is about 4:30. Current MI trains about 5:30. Drop 1:00 for 110 mph when it happens and add back in 1:00 for Toledo to Detroit. 1:00 total impact - for LD train riders, this is a non-factor. Nobody rides LD trains for their trip times.
"Many" =5. including Amsterdam & Yonkers according to Amtrak TT 11/7/11
"Cities" in Indiana = Elkhart, South Bend, Waterloo. I stated that these cities would strongly object to be bypassed. I'm not sure if you are saying they won't object, or that they are not important enough to consider.
While running times may not be the first consideration in taking a LD train, I don't agree that it's is a "non-factor."
a quick comment.
1.why not originate/ terminate one of the Detroit - CHI trains in Toledo. It could depart 30 Minutes after Lakeshore / and awrrive 30 minutes early in Toledo. ??
2. This would provide a cross platform connection at Toledo and not slow LSL total NYP - CHI times. Eventually a couple thru cars might be added when more equipment is availble in 2015. ?
3. I'm in rehab so have no source to present timetables
4. Keep it simple.
You're right, Blue, there are many simple and more direct and sensible answers than rerouting through Canada.
blue streak 1 a quick comment. 1.why not originate/ terminate one of the Detroit - CHI trains in Toledo. It could depart 30 Minutes after Lakeshore / and awrrive 30 minutes early in Toledo. ?? 2. This would provide a cross platform connection at Toledo and not slow LSL total NYP - CHI times. Eventually a couple thru cars might be added when more equipment is availble in 2015. ? 3. I'm in rehab so have no source to present timetables 4. Keep it simple.
Just do the Lake Cites again....
Two seat ride. Better to do a Toledo to Chicago stub. One RDC should do it.
About 20 years ago I rode the train when they did just that. It did not seem the Toledo-Detroit segment was that well patronized. I don't remember why the experiment was terminated. but shortly there after, the CHI-DET Wolverines were extended past the Detroit end, north to suburban Pontiac (the opposite direction from Toledo). Connections from eastern Michigan to Toledo are covered by Amtrak Thruway bus service.
Perhaps there is some reticence from trying to graft a corridor route like the Wolverine on to a long distance train like the LS. I would rather see a Detroit-Cincinnati train. (The route was killed upon Amtrak start-up.)
NKP guy If ever there was a reason for Amtrak to own or operate an RDC car, Toledo to Detroit would be it. Amtrak used to have a connecting train to meet the LS Ltd. Maybe an RDC car would work this time. Now imagine a railfan group running such a connecting train or car.
Just checked. There currently is an Amtrak Thruway bus that does the Toledo - Detroit connection for the LSL. Bus actually runs all the way to East Lansing...
MidlandMike About 20 years ago I rode the train when they did just that. It did not seem the Toledo-Detroit segment was that well patronized.
About 20 years ago I rode the train when they did just that. It did not seem the Toledo-Detroit segment was that well patronized.
That was the Lake Cities. I rode it, too. Now, it is a Thruway bus. Probably good enough...and only 1:05 running time.
I rode the connection from Detroit to Toledo for the eastbound Lake Shore once. The big Buffalo station was closed. The place where we waited for the Lake Shore was cold, in the middle of winter, and the eastbound Lake Shore was late. I don't remember how long we waited, I think I finally got to sleep in my roomette around 2AM. Not a very good way to build patronage.
There used to be a night train Toronto to Chicago. I havent been on the LS for a long time and planned a trip last year. To get from my residence 2 hours north of Toronto I would have to get to Toronto & sleepover there at an expensive motel to get the early am train Toronto-Buffralo and stick around Buffalo awaitring the evening connection for Chicago. I decided to drive to my daughter's near Harrisburg and travel by the Keystone to NYK and then the LS to Chicago.
Had a great trip... Harrisburg-NewYork-Denver-SanFrancisco-Los Angeles-New Orleans-Philadelphia-Harrisburg.
The year previous I wanted to take the Wolverine Detroit-Chicago. Same problem. VIA only goes Toronto-Windsor You have to stay over in Windsor. I was going to take the bus thru the Windsor-Detroit tunnel, then a taxi from Detroit very early in the am to catch the Wolverine My son decided to drive me to Detroit instead, staying overnight at a motel in Detroit.
That was a great trip also Detroit-Chicago-Seattle-Los Angeles-Denver-Chicago-Detroit to be picked up in Detroit. Overnight in motel in Detroit & back home inm Northern Ontario.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.