To avoid congestion between South Bend In and Chicago reroute over CN Old GTW to dyer In and use the same trackage as the Hoosier State into chicago.
ROBERT WILLISON Johnny, its the scheduled time for the lsl. Toledo would be good end point, with connecting buses to Detroit.
Johnny, its the scheduled time for the lsl. Toledo would be good end point, with connecting buses to Detroit.
Thank you, Don Nadeau for stating a truth that needs to be heard. For only a 5th post I'd vote yours a home run! Welcome aboard.
It seems to me that if Detroit needs train service to NYC and Boston (and without the hassle of Customs & Immigration), all Amtrak has to due is re-institute the Detroit-Toledo connection to the Lake Shore Limited and the Capitol Limited. Of course, that's been tried before and has failed, but to me it makes a heck of a lot more sense than an Amtrak train across southern Ontario with border crossings/hassles one one or both ends.
Also, a train north from Toledo to Detroit could go much farther north into Michigan, or maybe further south into deepest, darkest Ohio.
Not very likely, though.
For Chicago - Buffalo and east it would probably be somewhat slower, but right now Kalamazoo, Jackson, Ann Arbor, as well as Detroit, do not have rail service directly to the east. These are the cities that would benefit.
ghCBNS The route that train would have to use today is neither the same route the fast New York Central limiteds ran on 50 years ago nor the same route Amtrak used across southern Ontario in the 1970s between Detroit and Buffalo. That track is now mostly abandoned. A train today would probably follow VIA’s (CN) route from Windsor (CP to Chathamfrom the tunnel).....onto Bayview (Hamilton) then CN to Niagara Falls (the Maple Leaf’s route) IMHO.....it won’t happen. This is the reverse of what VIA’s Atlantic did crossing Maine. It was sealed while in the US which took years to negotiate....and all pre 9-11. Admittedly the whole idea sounds like fantasy, but there is no need to go by way of Niagara Falls. It could go from Bayview Junction to Fort Erie on the CPR (Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo) and cross the river directly into Buffalo. Either way I doubt it would be any faster than the present route.
Some tend to think of Amtrak long-distrance trains as its passengers getting on at one end point and getting off at the other.
In reality, these trains depend on a great amount of intermediate point business, e.g., Denver to Salt Lake City, etc. In fact, it's the lack of sufficiently large intermediate point populations that hurts the financial performance of such trains as the SWC (in this case from Kansas City until you reach Riverside and San Bernardino).
In the case of the LSL, a Canadian reroute would take away the combined potential passenger populations of metro Cleveland and Toledo of 2.7 million. That would not be good for the viability of this train.
While I reacted negativly to the thought of changing the Maple Leaf to a Cleveland service, I have since reconsidered. In a related thread about a Detroit-Buffalo service, it was mentioned that the Maple Leaf took about 2 hours to get thru customs, and that some people would get off in Buffalo, take a taxi across the border quicker, and have a leasurly lunch, while the passengers staying on the train sat at the border. It might be quicker to shuttle the passengers in multiple vans for quicker border crossing, and take VIA to Toronto. Airline passengers essentially have to do the same thing when they transfer from a domestic flight to an internatonal flight. The train would then be free to continue on to Cleveland. Of course this will not happen in the near future, since Ohio won't support corridor service.
The reality is the maple leaf is an extension of the empire service. As is the Boston section of the lsl is a extension or a section of the lsl. The train runs combined to Albany and the sections are separated in Albany for their final destinations.
ROBERT WILLISON I am suggesting a simple extension of an existing train over an existing route to better serve the north coast. ... With that said I am not suggesting we discontinue service to toronto. Merely suggesting a Cleveland section added to the maple leaf... Operations like this were designed to lower costs and provide better service.
I am suggesting a simple extension of an existing train over an existing route to better serve the north coast.
...
With that said I am not suggesting we discontinue service to toronto. Merely suggesting a Cleveland section added to the maple leaf... Operations like this were designed to lower costs and provide better service.
Please acknowledge, as you mentioned in your later paragraph about adding a Cleveland section, that it's not a simple extension of an existing train. That was my quibble in my first post about your proposal when you first mentioned extending. There's a big difference between extending a Buffalo train to Cleveland and adding a Cleveland section to a Toronto train.
Also adding a section to a train does not lower costs. The resulting 2 section train may have lower costs than 2 separate trains, but it does not have lower costs than the existing 1 section train. And one of the costs is the extra time involved in separating and joining the 2 sections.
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
I am not suggesting we rewrite the Amtrak map or discontinuing any existing services as some have suggested. The north coast continues to reinvent itself. Such events as the Republican national convention and other events coming to Cleveland, its time to look At restoring better service to the area.
Cleveland is finally looking at replacing its current am shack with a new inter modal facility. New hotels and energy coming downtown.
With that said I am not suggesting we discontinue service to toronto. Merely suggesting a Cleveland section added to the maple leaf. These kinds of trains were very common at one point. Buffola central station was an important hub, with cars being switched from train to train for their final destination. Operations like this were designed to lower costs and provide better service. Do really need to reinvent the wheel?
I can't support re routing the lsl to save a few hours if any .
The "Maple Leaf" is a joint Amtrak-VIA operation, although Amtrak provides all of the equipment.
gardendance And please don't call changing a New York-Toronto train to a New York-Cleveland train an extension, it's a reroute that eliminates a very big population destination for a much smaller one.
And please don't call changing a New York-Toronto train to a New York-Cleveland train an extension, it's a reroute that eliminates a very big population destination for a much smaller one.
Deggesty ... Cleveland to Detroit is shown to be 107 miles; westbound time is 2:10 and eastbound is 2:15.
Cleveland to Detroit is shown to be 107 miles; westbound time is 2:10 and eastbound is 2:15.
Cleveland-Toledo is 107 miles. Add about 50 miles more to Detroit.
OK johnny, perhaps some dwell time in Cleveland as well, still not s bad schedule. Not the old empire state express for sure.
Robert, I was looking at your statement that the train would arrive in Cleveland "fiveish." Since the train currently leaves the Depew station at 3:01, and the current time to Cleveland is 3:28, the arrival time in Cleveland would be more like 6:30. Eastbound, the current time is 2:56. Perhaps the westbound time could be reduced. Amtrak shows 187 miles Depew to Cleveland.
Johnny
bill613a For operational and patronage reasons the western terminus of this extension should be Toledo.
For operational and patronage reasons the western terminus of this extension should be Toledo.
ROBERT WILLISON Extending the morning maple leaf ( 715am departure from nyc) from buffola to Cleveland for 5:30 ish pm arrival. This would add daylight service onto the nocturnal lake shore limited better serving western new York and nw pa.
Extending the morning maple leaf ( 715am departure from nyc) from buffola to Cleveland for 5:30 ish pm arrival. This would add daylight service onto the nocturnal lake shore limited better serving western new York and nw pa.
I think the issue here is not rerouting the MAPLE LEAF but adding a section to run along the south shore of Lake Erie. For operational and patronage reasons the western terminus of this extension should be Toledo.
Just as with Dave Klepper's timing, why do you expect your train to make it in 2 hr 29 min when the current schedule Buffalo to Cleveland is 3 hr 28 min? Does the Lake Shore's baggage handling at Buffalo take an hour? The schedule shows 4 minutes at Buffalo and no baggage at Erie. I don't remember dwelling anywhere but Albany for half an hour when I rode it.
daveklepper I might leave New York around 2, get to Pittsburgh around 8:30
I might leave New York around 2, get to Pittsburgh around 8:30
You might, but why would you expect to take only 6 hr 30 min when the current schedule says 9 hr 13 min?
For an interesting point of view on this campaign, read the plaques on the battlefield memorials in the Niagara region, especially the Battle of Lundy's Lane.
The United States and Canada have had a largely peaceful history. But during the War of 1812, U.S. forces invaded their northern neighbor, only to be stymied by a series of embarrassing mishaps. Find out what went wrong on the 200th anniversary of the start of the Canadian campaign, which took place on July 12, 1812.
http://www.history.com/news/how-u-s-forces-failed-to-conquer-canada-200-years-ago
The opportunity to easily implement the shortest route from Buffalo to Detroit was missed years ago.
When I said reviving the Broadway, I meant running it via a route that is now possible, which probably should include Cleveland. I might leave New York around 2, get to Pittsburgh around 8:30, and Cleveland around midnight, better for its Chicago passengers than either the Lake Shore or Capitol.``This would put it into Chicago around 9 in the morning. Returning, it would leave Chicago around 8pmget to Cleveland around 7AM, and then be a day train to NY, arriving about 5pm. I suspect half the through passengers would be Philadelphians, for whom this would also have convenient times, but shorts between Philly and NY would easily fill the empty seats in that leg. It would Pennsylvanian the second west-of-Harrisburg train it is requesting, as well as giving the Cleveland market a chance in both directions.
The "Pennsylvanian" operated as a Chicago-Philadelphia day train with coaches, a snack bar, and lots of mail and express in express boxcars and Roadrailers.
Correct, the Pennsylvanian was essentially extended as a mail train. All three Cleveland to Chicago trains avrrived and departed in the wee hours of the morning. When Amtrak stopped handling the mail and express cars, the train was cut back to Pittsburgh. Did it carry sleepers, I don't remember?
The BROADWAY LTD never was scheduled thru Cleveland. The expanded PENNSYLVANIAN later ran over this route Chicago-Philadelphia.
The present day LSL was inagurated in October 1975. The "state" supported LAKE SHORE started several weeks after May 1, 1971 and was discontinued in early January of 1972. The states that had promised to pay for the service balked when Amtrak initiated the the NORTH COAST HIAWATHA and POTOMAC SPECIAL due to political pressure and were not designated as pay as you go as the LAKE SHORE was.
The BROADWAY LTD was forced off the ex-PRR in 1990. It was rerouted over the ex-B&O to Chicago. IMHO Amtrak made a mistake in not routing this train west of Fostoria, OH via the ex-NKP thru Fort Wayne which historically always had good ridership as did Lima and Canton. The combination of President Downs and the Mercer Report sealed the Broadway's fate
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.