About a month a go, I wrote about a new route for the Lake Shore: high speed line Chicago to Detroit; Windsor tunnel CPR/CN to Buffalo. It would be a sealed train with no stops in Ontario and thereby removing custom delays on entering at Windsor and Niagra Falls. Running time Chicago to Buffalo would be in the range of 9 hours. The train would add the major metro area of Ann Arbor/Detroit as well as other cities in Michigan. There would be little loss of existing traffic as South Bend's station would be Niles; Toledo could be served by throughway bus as Detroit is now. Cleveland would continue have the Capitol Limited.
What exists now is late service due to conjestion on the NS in Northern Indiana. Last summer I tried to use the Capitol until I discovered is was running 10 hours late. This is not service most passengers will use. That's why the New York train is called the "Late Shore Limited." Amtrak would directly serve cities with metro areas approaching 6 million, and far surpassing the current route. And on time scheduling using the new dedicated and high speed line would give Amtrak standing.
Some responces to my idea are just strange: running a non-stop across southern Ontario hardly reaches the level of Bolshevic sealed trains. Responding to ideas expressed in our forum with "NO WAY, Forget IT" does remind me at bit of the Bolshevics. If you need to take a deep breath, do so.
zaleski: Challenging the status quo doesn't get a good reception here. Neither does HSR or other frequent, convenient, modern passenger services. New baggage cars and diners are well-received, however.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
That's the way to serve the folks ... with a sealed train. And to double down on the usefulness, run it through Canada.
Others on here have had bright ideas about how to make the Lake Shore useful transportation for U.S. citizens. This, Zaleski's, idea should be bounced off, maybe, VIA. Although I doubt they'd be interested, either.
Cut service to / from NY state to Erie, Cleveland, Elyria, Sandusky, Toledo, to add Detroit ? No way. Granted Detroit thruway not best but don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
zaleski ... What exists now is late service due to conjestion on the NS in Northern Indiana. Last summer I tried to use the Capitol until I discovered is was running 10 hours late. This is not service most passengers will use. That's why the New York train is called the "Late Shore Limited." Amtrak would directly serve cities with metro areas approaching 6 million, and far surpassing the current route. And on time scheduling using the new dedicated and high speed line would give Amtrak standing. ...
...
Amtrak's Michigan high speed route connects to the NS Chicago route at Porter, Indiana, and follows the most congested part of that route.
Amtrak has tried your route thru Canada before and backed out. What it probably comes down to is politics: Cleveland, Erie, Toledo, South Bend, etc., and the states of PA, OH and IN, would derail any plan to divert the route away from their cities.
Both the Capitol and the Lake Shore should be rerouited via the Grand Trunk vetween South Bend and Chicago to avoid at least some NS congestion. Should have been done long ago.
zaleski Last summer I tried to use the Capitol until I discovered is was running 10 hours late. This is not service most passengers will use.
Last summer I tried to use the Capitol until I discovered is was running 10 hours late. This is not service most passengers will use.
Since I'm the guy who brought up the Bolsheviks (and it was just in fun, as a historical reference, zaleski), let me again point out that not much would be gained at the price of a great loss by running an Amtrak train through southern Ontario. Most of the eastbound Lake Shore Limited's delays are caused by Amtrak itself as it delays #49's departure for hours to collect passengers from way-late Western trains arriving at Chicago. If the eastbound trains are late into Chicago, by all means use a different set of tracks from Toledo west.
But to advocate Amtrak #48 skipping Erie, Cleveland, Toledo, etc. for any reason at all does not make sense to me.
By the way most of us Clevelanders that use Amtrak want to get to NYC or Boston, not Washington (check the numbers). So saying that we would still have the Capitol Limited to travel east will not serve that market.
Even the Bolsheviks, the Mensheviks, the Reds and the Whites would understand the logic of a connecting train or bus from Detroit to Toledo. Why, even Lenin himself said, "Give peas a chance."
Maybe run both? Cleveland's ridership numbers are low: 50, 940 in FYI 2013. Toledo better: 68,463, maybe bus passengers from MI? Erie 18,108.
In Michigan on the route in question: Ann Arbor 158,717 Battle Creek 49,203 Dearborn 81,878 Detroit 70,626 Jackson 31,481 Kalamazoo 129,858 New Buffalo 19,902 Niles 21,306. If you add in the spur to Pontiac, you get Birmingham 23,257 Pontiac 16,813 and Royal Oak 37,158. That is a much larger potential market of proven train riders.
Schlimm, should not Amtrak run one of the Chicago - Detroit trains soiuth to Toledo instead of north to Pontiac? With the current Detroit station location, this would require direction reversal in Detroit, but it could be done.
That routing was attempted some years back as the "Lake Cities". Somebody else may know more about the ridership between Detroit and Toledo.
I don't see any need to reroute the lake shore. It is a well patronized train that serves the north coast, with good connections in Chicago.
If the point is to provide faster service between the end points, its a mute point. No one takes a long distance train because they want to get their destination quickly.
Seems crazy to reduce service on its route, to serve fewer and smaller cities.
May be i am missing something.
daveklepper Schlimm, should not Amtrak run one of the Chicago - Detroit trains soiuth to Toledo instead of north to Pontiac? With the current Detroit station location, this would require direction reversal in Detroit, but it could be done.
Sure why not? Is reversing a train technologically impossible for Amtrak?
ROBERT WILLISON I don't see any need to reroute the lake shore. It is a well patronized train that serves the north coast, with good connections in Chicago. If the point is to provide faster service between the end points, its a mute point. No one takes a long distance train because they want to get their destination quickly. Seems crazy to reduce service on its route, to serve fewer and smaller cities. May be i am missing something.
Running through Michigan would serve more and larger cities with a proven record of patronizing Amtrak, not fewer.
The Boarder Crossings and the use of tracks under zero obligation to meet the terms of the original Amtrak authorization are the two problems, and it is doubful that a saving in time would result. Detroit and the cities west to Chicago could benefit with a connecting train that is a properly timed connection at Toledo. This woudl be a first step, anyway. Through service between Detroit and Windsor may have to await a more peaceful world, and that may depend on a reversal of the denial of what the problem the world faces that seems evident in too much effort supposidly in attacking the problem's production of events.
I was suggesting that the LS run through MI and then cut down to Toledo and on its way east. All it would miss are a few places in eastern Indiana, like South Bend, but gain the MI cities of far more population. The longer distance would be compensated for by much faster running speeds in MI and less congested track.
Schlimm, running lsl between Toledo and into Michigan does makes good sense. I was post was aimed at the original post of running the train in southern Canada, thus by passing the north coast cities in the us.
The idea of having the Lake Shore Limited call at Toledo, Detroit, and other Michigan cities with larger populations than those currently served is, indeed, a good one. A tip of the hat to Schlimm. This seems an obvious improvement to current operation because Detroit would be served without a connecting train and also that times into Chicago (and out) presumably would be more or less the same. Bravo!
I hope this good idea gets looked into and pursued.
Need not miss South Bend if it cuts off to the Grand Trunk where the GT and NS cross.
schlimm I was suggesting that the LS run through MI and then cut down to Toledo and on its way east. All it would miss are a few places in eastern Indiana, like South Bend, but gain the MI cities of far more population. The longer distance would be compensated for by much faster running speeds in MI and less congested track.
That might work if they increase the speed of the track and train in MI to 110 mph but right now it would add probably 90 to 120 mins to the schedule. Toledo to Chicago was pretty fast during the latter years of the Conrail era and about 2 years ago when I last rode that route. Michigan you had to slow a lot for the city running. Plus the curve up into MI as well as the curve back down to Toledo takes time.
schlimm Maybe run both? Cleveland's ridership numbers are low: 50, 940 in FYI 2013. Toledo better: 68,463, maybe bus passengers from MI? Erie 18,108. In Michigan on the route in question: Ann Arbor 158,717 Battle Creek 49,203 Dearborn 81,878 Detroit 70,626 Jackson 31,481 Kalamazoo 129,858 New Buffalo 19,902 Niles 21,306. If you add in the spur to Pontiac, you get Birmingham 23,257 Pontiac 16,813 and Royal Oak 37,158. That is a much larger potential market of proven train riders.
Way back in the Conrail era when I worked in Detroit (early 1990s). I would drive to Toledo at 4 a.m. to catch the Lake Shore Limited around 5 -5:30 a.m. Because it would get to Chicago about 8:30 or 9 ish, it was faster and I could watch the sun rise in the Vista Dome. The drive to Toledo was about 45 min to an hour which still made for a shorter trip then Dearborn to Chicago via Michigan. So I would guess yes that Toledo does get a lot of Michigan passengers. Even with a 5 in the morning boarding Eastbound the train would regularly load about 20-25 passengers from Toledo Eastbound......which I thought was pretty decent.
Also back then Conrail would pull the freights over for Amtrak, Amtrak usually did 80 mph easy across Indiana and Ohio and only stopped at a few stations, rarely stopped for other rail traffic back then.
NKP guy The idea of having the Lake Shore Limited call at Toledo, Detroit, and other Michigan cities with larger populations than those currently served is, indeed, a good one.
The idea of having the Lake Shore Limited call at Toledo, Detroit, and other Michigan cities with larger populations than those currently served is, indeed, a good one.
The LSL already stops in Toledo.
An "expensive model collector"
Thank you, I'm well aware of that.
NKP guy Thank you, I'm well aware of that.
Your statement reads otherwise, my mistake.
daveklepper Need not miss South Bend if it cuts off to the Grand Trunk where the GT and NS cross.
CMStPnP schlimm I was suggesting that the LS run through MI and then cut down to Toledo and on its way east. All it would miss are a few places in eastern Indiana, like South Bend, but gain the MI cities of far more population. The longer distance would be compensated for by much faster running speeds in MI and less congested track. That might work if they increase the speed of the track and train in MI to 110 mph but right now it would add probably 90 to 120 mins to the schedule. Toledo to Chicago was pretty fast during the latter years of the Conrail era and about 2 years ago when I last rode that route. Michigan you had to slow a lot for the city running. Plus the curve up into MI as well as the curve back down to Toledo takes time.
Some of that Amtrak-owned track in MI is 110 mph now and much of the rest will be soon, with new equipment coming as well. Currently the LSL cover the 234 miles Chicago to Toledo in 4 hr 20 min. Even with slower track still, Chicago to Dearborn is 271 miles, covered now in 4 hr 30 min. Presumably a train could cut down towards Ohio at Dearborn or even Ann Arbor rather than go to central Detroit?
schlimmPresumably a train could cut down towards Ohio at Dearborn or even Ann Arbor rather than go to central Detroit?
Well the former DT&I line to Toledo I believe terminated at the Ford River Rouge Plant which is just South of the Michigan tracks in Easternmost Dearborn / Western Detroit....not sure if there are interchange tracks there or not or how feasible it would be to junction there.......rough nieghboorhood though. At least that would be after the Dearborn Station stop and yes it would avoid some of Detroit but not all of it.
CMStPnP Way back in the Conrail era when I worked in Detroit (early 1990s). I would drive to Toledo at 4 a.m. to catch the Lake Shore Limited around 5 -5:30 a.m. Because it would get to Chicago about 8:30 or 9 ish, it was faster and I could watch the sun rise in the Vista Dome.
Way back in the Conrail era when I worked in Detroit (early 1990s). I would drive to Toledo at 4 a.m. to catch the Lake Shore Limited around 5 -5:30 a.m. Because it would get to Chicago about 8:30 or 9 ish, it was faster and I could watch the sun rise in the Vista Dome.
Surely you mean the Capitol Limited. When did the Lake Shore Limited ever have a dome?
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
In the early 90's the LSL ran a dome Chicago-Albany. IIRC it was the last regularly scheduled dome car Amtrak ran and came off in 1995-?
bill613a: I'm curious what your source is because I have ridden The Lake Shore Limited several times a year since 1975 and I don't recall ever once seeing, riding in, reading about, or seeing switched at Albany any dome car. I always get out of my room and watch the action at Albany and while I have seen the Boston section added to or subtracted from the consist any number of times, I have never seen a dome car attached or taken off.
I have spent so much time over the years standing and waiting on the platforms at Albany that I think I qualify to vote in their local elections. But I have never seen a dome car in the yard there. I wish I had because dome cars are my favorite train experience.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.