Join the discussion on the following article:
Indiana kicks off $71 million rail upgrade
Does any of this lead to the bypass of Gary using the former PRR and MC between Porter and Tolleston?
They could reopen some abandoned lines and get Amtrak off NS rails
This will be a win-win situation for all parties involved. Money will certainly be savesd by reducing and perhaps, eliminating delays. I can’t see how passenger train detractors can dispute this.
(OMG. I can’t believe I wrote “excapes.”)
Mr. Hainsworth, reopening old lines is a good idea, but to get the freight out of Amtrak’s way. The current route Amtrak uses really is the best for it.
My perception is that NS is actually using the MC west of Porter less than Conrail did. However, CSX uses it quite a bit from their connection a few miles down (the name of which excapes me at the moment).
The City of Gary would like them to move all the traffic off the MC and onto the elevated IHB branch, which is long dormant through the Tolleston area.
How about a map of the proposal?
Only the existing NS route used by Amtrak trains is being upgraded on this project. The “South of the Lake” Environmental Impact Statement process now underway is evaluating alternate routes for a 110-mph dedicated passenger routing between Chicago Union Station and Porter, Ind., on the some of the lines mentioned by readers; one combination uses both the former Michigan Central west of Porter and the ex-PRR from Tolleston to Gary
One move that would make sense would be to route the CSX Michigan traffic OVER the NS on a diamond at Porter onto the CSX Porter Branch (that NS uses but CSX owns thru Lake Station) Using this route to the B&O line at Willow Creek THEN go west towards Barr would be VERY logical which is why I am NOT holding my breath at this point in time.
I know its only one train each way a day for CSX into Michigan but I think that may change soon. B&O is full and they need a bypass for some of that traffic. read Fraileys commentary in this months TRAINS about the winter meltdown. Explains my logic. ROUTE some of that stuff around and away from the OTHER railroads and remain on your own OWNED rails into Chitown.
As for Amtrak? Unless they build a compleatly seperate line they would do best to stay on NS.
Oh yeah, CP we are still here in Grand Rapids by the way.
Bob, the way I look at the map, that would only bypass about half of the congestion. Better to reroute a good deal of the freight that way; it can get where it’s going more easily that way than Amtrak can.
On a recent trip to Goshen, Indiana I noticed a lot of work along NS tracks that border Route 33. What is being done here? It looks like another track set along the three already there. Maybe a lengthening of a siding? Any information appreciated.
You associate this with the Grow America Act, but our local paper seemed to think it was an artifact of the “Stimulus” a.k.a. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Are these the same?
Speaking of CP, since it’s the largest owner (49%) of IHB, why does it run all its trains over BRC to get to NS? Seems to me it would make more sense to run them from Franklin Park (with less Metra interference than via Cragin) down the IHB to Gibson and the Porter Branch to get to the NS Chicago Line.
Mike Pence has spent his tenure ignoring Northwest Indiana as if it were governed by Illinois or Chicago. The State of Indiana has spent decades green-lighting rail abandonments and downgrades to where the only direct line between Chicago and Indianapolis is the remnants of the Monon and it is hardly direct and not very smooth nor high speed. NS and Amtrak need to partner to create a new CN (ex-IC) connection to the eastbound ex-NYC right-of-way on the southeast side where 3-4 tracks could be relaid easily to completely east congestion along with rebuilding or replacing the bridges over the Calumet. Few places have such a ready-to-rebuild ROW as this section. And the ex-PRR route west of the Dan Ryan is choked with trains. The only high-speed route into Chicago free of rail and road crossings is the ex-IC and the eastern ROW has room for 3-4 tracks on wide centers.