Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
All Aboard Ohio had suggested introducing travel from Michigan to the East Coast via Toledo. An extended Pennsylvanian train (separate from the CL) would travel from Chicago up the Wolverine route up to Dearborn and then to TOL/CLE/PGH/PHL/NYP. They would run another train (Three Rivers) along the same route.
http://allaboardohio.org/2015/09/22/new-report-restore-passenger-rail/
Both trains would allow direct access from Ann Arbor and Dearborn (not Detroit) to cities along the Keystone route as well as PGH. I believe Amtrak and Michigan own the line between CHI and Dearborn so they can run the train faster that way.
Now assuming we don't extend a train, then the question is would this reroute through Michigan be used on either the CL or LSL? Amtrak pointed out the possibility of the train in 2011 but dismissed it due to lost traffic at the skipped stops. Currently that would be Bryan, Waterloo, Elkhart, and South Bend on the LSL and all but Bryan on the CL. If we reroute one of the trains, passengers in each city would still be able to go to Chicago as well as Cleveland and Toledo. 12,700 passengers used the LSL at South Bend but many of them could be to CHI (which I would guess would be the largest % of the 12,700),CLE, or TOL, so they can just take the other train. The other Indiana towns had smaller numbers.
If you reroute the CL to Michigan, you'd lose fewer passengers but you give Michigan fewer choices on the CL (unless you add the Cap-Pennsylvanian through cars). If you reroute the LSL to Michigan, you'd make it more attractive for Michigan (they can go to BUF, ALB, SYR, and NYP) but you'd lose more Indiana passengers (the assumption would be Bryan would be added to the CL).
One way to help the Indiana towns would be to make it possible to transfer from one train to the other at either CLE or TOL. For it to work, you'd have to have the first train reaching CLE/TOL from the East head to Michigan and the second one to Indiana so anyone wanting to go on the first train could transfer in CLE/TOL to Indiana. By contrast, the Indiana branch would have to reach TOL/CLE before the Michigan branch.
Let's say the LSL goes to/from Michigan and the CL remains unchanged. Then the CL would have to get to TOL or CLE first. South Bend passengers would get on the CL, head to TOL or CLE and then catch the LSL to New York/Boston. By contrast, they would have to get off the LSL at CLE or TOL and then catch the CL home. So the LSL would have to reach CLE/TOL first for this to work.
Right now the CL gets to TOL/CLE going in both directions. Now we could move the departure times from NYP/BOS earlier to make sure the train reaches CLE and TOL before the CL. The LSL will need more time to get to CHI from TOL because of the route through Michigan so it might work.
You can also switch it so the CL uses the Michigan route.
Barring a new train, is a reroute of either the CL or LSL worthwhile? The train can run faster on the Wolverine route and maybe Norfolk Southern would enjoy one fewer train on the CHI to CLE route. Plus you introduce a whole new set of pairs. If Amtrak does get the CL/Pennsylvanian connection, passengers would be able to take both trains from IND to NYP so that could help minimize the loss of passengers from Indiana.
http://allaboardohio.org/2015/09/22/new-report-restore-passenger-rail/
Both trains would allow direct access from Ann Arbor and Dearborn (not Detroit) to cities along the Keystone route as well as PGH. I believe Amtrak and Michigan own the line between CHI and Dearborn so they can run the train faster that way.
Now assuming we don't extend a train, then the question is would this reroute through Michigan be used on either the CL or LSL? Amtrak pointed out the possibility of the train in 2011 but dismissed it due to lost traffic at the skipped stops. Currently that would be Bryan, Waterloo, Elkhart, and South Bend on the LSL and all but Bryan on the CL. If we reroute one of the trains, passengers in each city would still be able to go to Chicago as well as Cleveland and Toledo. 12,700 passengers used the LSL at South Bend but many of them could be to CHI (which I would guess would be the largest % of the 12,700),CLE, or TOL, so they can just take the other train. The other Indiana towns had smaller numbers.
If you reroute the CL to Michigan, you'd lose fewer passengers but you give Michigan fewer choices on the CL (unless you add the Cap-Pennsylvanian through cars). If you reroute the LSL to Michigan, you'd make it more attractive for Michigan (they can go to BUF, ALB, SYR, and NYP) but you'd lose more Indiana passengers (the assumption would be Bryan would be added to the CL).
One way to help the Indiana towns would be to make it possible to transfer from one train to the other at either CLE or TOL. For it to work, you'd have to have the first train reaching CLE/TOL from the East head to Michigan and the second one to Indiana so anyone wanting to go on the first train could transfer in CLE/TOL to Indiana. By contrast, the Indiana branch would have to reach TOL/CLE before the Michigan branch.
Let's say the LSL goes to/from Michigan and the CL remains unchanged. Then the CL would have to get to TOL or CLE first. South Bend passengers would get on the CL, head to TOL or CLE and then catch the LSL to New York/Boston. By contrast, they would have to get off the LSL at CLE or TOL and then catch the CL home. So the LSL would have to reach CLE/TOL first for this to work.
Right now the CL gets to TOL/CLE going in both directions. Now we could move the departure times from NYP/BOS earlier to make sure the train reaches CLE and TOL before the CL. The LSL will need more time to get to CHI from TOL because of the route through Michigan so it might work.
You can also switch it so the CL uses the Michigan route.
Barring a new train, is a reroute of either the CL or LSL worthwhile? The train can run faster on the Wolverine route and maybe Norfolk Southern would enjoy one fewer train on the CHI to CLE route. Plus you introduce a whole new set of pairs. If Amtrak does get the CL/Pennsylvanian connection, passengers would be able to take both trains from IND to NYP so that could help minimize the loss of passengers from Indiana.