Ohio finally starts the process for new Amtrak service

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
There have been some more developments...

Cincinnati leaders meet with Amtrak to discuss expansion of passenger rail service

I know that the 3C+D is still a long shot, but it's great to see more talks happening and possible pursuit of funds (no guarantees, though) to further investigate possibilities of the route.

As the article states, it would be cool to see the iconic Cincinnati Union Station serve more than one train.
 
I think the article here gives me the first hope for expansion in the Buckeye State. I feel like the state government is more receptive to it since the upfront start up costs would be handled, any any concerns will come from long term ridership numbers.

https://www.cleveland.com/news/2023...mtrak-expansion-by-seeking-federal-money.html
With that said, if expansion did happen, what would you all like to see? I’m a fan of having the 3C connector, but more so of a fan of creating additional corridors that would support the long distance lines. I know some in NE Ohio want Cleveland to be a hub for rail traffic, but I don’t see a future at the old Terminal, and without that, I’m not sure where a hub could be kept.
Personally if possible (and for admittedly selfish reasons since I live there), I would love to see the 3C+D corridor connected in some useful manner to Pittsburgh. I know I would love to be able to do a day trip from Pittsburgh to Cleveland, but the current connection with a single daily train, a midnight departure, and a middle of the night arrival is fairly useless. Since I’m dreaming, perhaps at least three trains each way between Pittsburgh and Cleveland, with a morning, midway and later evening departure (which could allow a connection from the Pennsylvanian for travelers from PHL or HAR to Cleveland) would be tremendous
 
Here is another article on Ohio passenger rail. While I would love to see expanded service into Cincinnati Union Terminal mentioned in the article (and my favorite terminal- now the Museum Center), all earlier reports had train service on a new route and station closer to downtown.

I do hope this results in something more than endless studies and reports.
 
There was a good discussion at the most recent MACOG policy board meeting about Amtrak in the South Bend area (start watching at the time of 57:44), including a potential Chicago-Ft. Wayne-Columbus corridor, an enhancing service on the existing Chicago-Toledo-Cleveland corridor. Both are going to be sponsered by local governments as the lead agency, none by ODOT or INDOT.
 
That was a good share there, @SubwayNut ! I appreciate you sharing that.

@Palmland - I too am ready for movement on this, as I know all we've been hearing lately is about studies and reports; however, I know a lot of this takes a lot of time to investigate as the infrastructure will possibly need overhauls to accommodate different speeds, frequencies, etc. for passenger rail.

With me dreaming about the 3C+D coming to fruition, I always think about which route it would take through where I am and if it would take the CSX line near me and then cross over to NS or vice versa.

I know we are still a far ways away as there still needs to be more planning (and more importantly: money) in order for this to happen.
 
There was a good discussion at the most recent MACOG policy board meeting about Amtrak in the South Bend area (start watching at the time of 57:44), including a potential Chicago-Ft. Wayne-Columbus corridor, an enhancing service on the existing Chicago-Toledo-Cleveland corridor. Both are going to be sponsered by local governments as the lead agency, none by ODOT or INDOT.

Do they discuss moving South Bend's Amtrak service to the intermodal (bus) station which is downtown from the current Amshack which isn't?
 
Do they discuss moving South Bend's Amtrak service to the intermodal (bus) station which is downtown from the current Amshack which isn't?
Only peripherally in passing as a future possibility, so not really. The current NICTD station discussion is about moving the station from the East side of the Airport terminal building to the West side of it, thus cutting down about 10 minutes of meandering along Bendix Blvd on the way to the Airport.

It was mentioned in passing that neither Norfolk Southern nor Amtrak is interested in pursuing a move of the station, so if that ever happens it has to be funded primarily from other sources. It was also mentioned that because of the track layout at the downtown location by the old station, Amtrak platform will have to be on the South side of the right of way whereas the old head house is on the North side, and there will probably not be enough space for more than one platform without spending a very large sum of money to expand the right of way at that location.

An interesting comment recognized the fact that if Michigan gets a relatively high speed route between Toledo and Chicago, through Dearborn and Niles up and running in conjunction with Ohio, then there is a risk that Amtrak might abandon service through South Bend and route everything on their own rails through Niles. At least it is a good way to create some scare tactics though I am not sure that given South Bend has NICTD and Niles is but a short drive North, anyone will care enough to get scared.
 
Last edited:
Only peripherally in passing as a future possibility, so not really. The current NICTD station discussion is about moving the station from the East side of the Airport terminal building to the West side of it, thus cutting down about 10 minutes of meandering along Bendix Blvd on the way to the Airport.

It was mentioned in passing that neither Norfolk Southern nor Amtrak is interested in pursuing a move of the station, so if that ever happens it has to be funded primarily from other sources. It was also mentioned that because of the track layout at the downtown location by the old station, Amtrak platform will have to be on the South side of the right of way whereas the old head house is on the north side, and there will probably not be enough space for more than one platform without spending a very large sum of money to expand the right of way at that location.

An interesting comment recognized the fact that if Michigan gets a relatively high speed route between Toledo and Chicago, through Dearborn and Niles up and running in conjunction with Ohio, then there is a risk that Amtrak might abandon service through South bend and route everything on their own rails through Niles. At least it is a good way to create some scare tactics though I am not sure that given South Bend has NICTD and Niles is but a short drive north, anyone will care enough to get scared.
Thanks, but that's weird given that I thought the plan had been all along to move Amtrak to the bus depot, north of the tracks near downtown. South of the tracks between the bus depot and the old Union Station (now repurposed) would be former Studebaker plant territory, some of which has been repurposed and the rest of which may be. A better station with a Studebaker connection in the name or building would please me and other club members, but I don't want to see any more of what's left torn down. Most current residents of South Bend no doubt have other priorities since it will soon be the 60 years since the main Studebaker plant in South Bend closed.
 
Thanks, but that's weird given that I thought the plan had been all along to move Amtrak to the bus depot, north of the tracks near downtown. South of the tracks between the bus depot and the old Union Station (now repurposed) would be former Studebaker plant territory, some of which has been repurposed and the rest of which may be. A better station with a Studebaker connection in the name or building would please me and other club members, but I don't want to see any more of what's left torn down. Most current residents of South Bend no doubt have other priorities since it will soon be the 60 years since the main Studebaker plant in South Bend closed.
The problem at the Union Station site is that NS traffic is on the three tracks on the South side and CN is on the North side. There is no way for a train using a North side track to get to the NS tracks to Elkhart East of South Bend since the High St. Interlocking does not exist any more. All the route shuffling is now done at CP Arnold and Bend, West of the Union Station site. Whoever made plans for a North side platform for Amtrak was apparently not aware of this show stopping fact. It will cause enormous sums of money to build a flyover from a North side platform track across the CN trackage to get to the NS Elkhart Line.

While one could conceivably build one platform on the South side relatively inexpensively, trying to build even a single platform with access from two tracks there would be expensive since it will involve moving the South-most track off the current ROW possibly on an elevated structure at current track level to make room for an island platform, though nothing like the cost of doing something on the North side. Apparently the head house would still be on the north side with the platform on the south side access through a pedestrian tunnel under the NS + CN ROW.
 
Last edited:
Isn't Amtrak already on the north side of the ROW (shared viaduct iirc) in South Bend? Or is the issue that they switch to the south tracks west of downtown and can't be switched to the east?
 
Isn't Amtrak already on the north side of the ROW (shared viaduct iirc) in South Bend? Or is the issue that they switch to the south tracks west of downtown and can't be switched to the east?
Yes. The switchover happens at CP Bend West of Union Station. There is no interlocking East of the Station building anymore. Just two tracks of CN heading North and three tracks of NS heading East. No way to change over among those tracks before they part ways.

Both of those sets of tracks are very congested and they will never agree to putting in conflicting move crossover making the congestion worse.
 
Yes. The switchover happens at CP Bend West of Union Station. There is no interlocking East of the Station building anymore. Just two tracks of CN heading North and three tracks of NS heading East. No way to change over among those tracks before they part ways.

Both of those sets of tracks are very congested and they will never agree to putting in conflicting move crossover making the congestion worse.
Thanks for the confirmation. Looks like there is certainly room on the ROW/viaduct for moving tracks around to add platforms. I assume it all depends on who owns what and where the access points for stairs/elevators up to the platforms would go.
 
More baby steps in Ohio, some money in House transportation bill for 3C+D Corridor and Detroit-Toledo-Cleveland. Still fighting some Republican typical skepticism as one refers to it at the "choo choo train," though the bill passed 74-21. But that this passed is remarkable given the Republican-dominated House has a supermajority of 67-32. Of course some measures addressing the NS accident are also enmeshed in the bill.

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news...portation-budget-passed-by-house/69959608007/
 
So, it looks like there has been another study submitted for a possible Columbus-to-Chicago route (along with the 3C+D studies that are already happening).

It would be interesting to see two routes here in Columbus. I don't think that it would happen, but it would be great to see that here.

Not Just 3C: Columbus-to-Chicago Amtrak Route Also Up for Federal Funding
 
Chicago - Columbus - Pittsburgh sounds like the old Broadway Limited route, at least part of it. That would be great especially if there were connections to the Pennsylvanian, maybe eventually morphing into a return of the Broadway.

Glad to see consideration of the Hyperloop Gadgetbahn is now off the table.
 
Chicago - Columbus - Pittsburgh sounds like the old Broadway Limited route, at least part of it. That would be great especially if there were connections to the Pennsylvanian, maybe eventually morphing into a return of the Broadway.
Broadway Limited never went anywhere near Columbus in any of its incarnations. It ran through Lima - Fort Wayne (ex-PRR), and then when it was moved to ex-B&O CSX it went through Fostoria - Garrett, further North.

No routing through Columbus will ever morph into a Broadway. It will be circuitous slow pokey route compared to any and all incarnation of the Broadway.

However, if the routing from Chicago to Columbus is via Fort Wayne, then the Chicago - Fort Wayne section would be on the ex-PRR segment that was used by Broadway Limited, but nothing beyond that.
 
Last edited:
One interesting point is that Ohio apparently owns the tracks from Columbus to the border with West Virginia. IIRC the Chicago to Fort Wayne route does not have any freight service. This is an opportunity for IMHO for Amtrak to purchase that right of way and with federal money upgrade it to at least 110 mph running. I don't know which freight railroads own the tracks between Fort Wayne and Columbus, and that would be the sticking point for a higher-speed railroad for the majority of the route.
 
One interesting point is that Ohio apparently owns the tracks from Columbus to the border with West Virginia. IIRC the Chicago to Fort Wayne route does not have any freight service. This is an opportunity for IMHO for Amtrak to purchase that right of way and with federal money upgrade it to at least 110 mph running. I don't know which freight railroads own the tracks between Fort Wayne and Columbus, and that would be the sticking point for a higher-speed railroad for the majority of the route.
The CFE (Chicago, Ft. Wayne, and Eastern) is currently in the portfolio of Genesee and Western, so there might be freight moving on it currently. This line has also been envisioned by many, including HSRA, as an opportunity for a true high-speed connection between Chicago and Toledo and points east.

Part of the trouble comes in getting from Ft. Wayne to Toledo, as the current options are either turning due north east of Ft. Wayne, back onto the NS Chicago Line just outside of Waterloo or rebuilding the rattletrap Napoleon, Defiance, and Western (much of it abandoned) right of way all the way to Toledo, which supposedly runs through swampland.

Connecting to Columbus likely would mean continuing east on the CFE to Dunkirk, east of Lima, turning south onto CSX to Kenton, Marysville, and Columbus.

I wonder whether a connection between Chicago and Columbus (and Pittsburgh) wouldn't be better through Indianapolis instead. High-speed rail makes a whole lot more sense when the terminal cities are themselves active rail hubs. Indy could and should serve such a purpose in future.

Yes, that would mean re-establishing a rail connection between Indy and Dayton, but if a high-speed connection between CHI-IND is going to be built, you're then already more than halfway home on a high-speed connection to Columbus and possibly Pittsburgh.
 
Yes, that would mean re-establishing a rail connection between Indy and Dayton, but if a high-speed connection between CHI-IND is going to be built, you're then already more than halfway home on a high-speed connection to Columbus and possibly Pittsburgh.
Just curious, what is the high-speed route between Chicago and Indianapolis you are referring to? I know that there's the happenings of the SSL (this is not high-speed though) happening down to Dyer, so some of that way will be electrified.
 
Just curious, what is the high-speed route between Chicago and Indianapolis you are referring to? I know that there's the happenings of the SSL (this is not high-speed though) happening down to Dyer, so some of that way will be electrified.
The interim "higher-speed" option to Indy would likely utilize the SSL to Dyer (which works if the St. Charles Air Line Connector gets built), with higher speeds (110mph) south of there, employing the current Cardinal (former Hoosier State) Monon route.

In an HSRA video call with Amtrak's head of State-Supported Services, it was mentioned that a higher-speed run to Indy could be held up as "an example of what can be done".

A true high-speed service CHI-IND would likely make use of the current Monon sub (or an alignment close-by), based on conjectural routings. Some have shown a routing similar to the SSL to Dyer. HSRA has suggested converting a set of MED/SSL/CN tracks to high speed for intercity routes and airport express. Metra either had recently explored, or will be exploring, the cost of installing constant-tension catenary on the MED, something that would be necessary if HSR were to ever run on that line in the future.

HSRA has also suggested a connection to the CFE at Tolleston continuing to Wanatah, then heading south on a restored Monon ROW connecting to the current Cardinal routing at the town of Monon. In that scenario, Dyer and Rensselaer are dropped as stops and Gary and Valparaiso become new stops.

In the same video call, it was mentioned that Amtrak is still keeping its options open regarding a dedicated high-speed route out of Chicago to serve markets to the east. The Amtrak rep talked about taking the St. Charles Air Line Connector (if it ever gets built) onto MED/SSL/CN trackage to Grand Crossing, where trains would continue onto a rebuilt NYC ROW, currently being used by Commonwealth Edison for their high tension electrical towers. He then suggested trains would continue onto Porter into Michigan. It is conceivable that same NYC routing could accommodate a connection to the CFE, if it followed the route of the abandoned Ft. Wayne Secondary, which could be picked up around Buffington Harbor.

The only alignment I've seen that does not utilize the Monon is also from HSRA. High-speed trains would run to Champaign, with half heading southwest to Decatur, Springfield, and St. Louis, and the other half running east to Crawfordsville and Indy. Alon Levy posted a map in which Champaign would connect to Indianapolis via Lafayette.

HRSA's other idea would use the same high-speed tracks in Illinois, but instead turning southeast at Kankakee connecting to the Monon alignment at Lafayette on its way to Indy.

It's all just lines drawn on maps at the moment, but considering the distance between Chicago and Indy, as well as Indy's potential to become a vital new rail hub, long-term planning to go to higher-speed rail then onto high-speed rail should start now.

On the subject of the SSL, in a joint presentation before the Sandhouse Rail Group at Northwestern University in February, 2023, Metra's Jim Derwinski and the SSL's Mike Noland discussed how the two railroads are working together for improvements on the MED line, including new bi-directional signaling from 11th Pl to 67th St, and speed improvements to increase MAS from 65mph to 79mph.

Noland presented the SSL's goal of eventually getting South Bend to Chicago service down to 90 minutes or less, making repeated references to the success enjoyed by the towns that are served by the Amtrak Hiawatha Service, with hopes that near identical travel times to South Bend would translate into similar economic benefits for the NW Indiana region.
 
Last edited:
Broadway Limited never went anywhere near Columbus in any of its incarnations. It ran through Lima - Fort Wayne (ex-PRR), and then when it was moved to ex-B&O CSX it went through Fostoria - Garrett, further North.

No routing through Columbus will ever morph into a Broadway. It will be circuitous slow pokey route compared to any and all incarnation of the Broadway.

However, if the routing from Chicago to Columbus is via Fort Wayne, then the Chicago - Fort Wayne section would be on the ex-PRR segment that was used by Broadway Limited, but nothing beyond that.
Did the National Ltd stop in Columbus? I'm thinking it might have but not 100% sure. It did stop in Pittsburgh but veered west toward Kansas City and St. Louis -- not Chicago.
 
Unfortunately, the route between Ohio and Pittsburgh was ripped up by CONRAIL after cessation of the National Limited (or is it the other way around). Today if you want to run the route the options are a long detour on NS along the Ohio River or you could try to run more direct via the Wheeling route through the WV Panhandle but the last few miles into Pittsburgh are a real mess. Also, while the State of Ohio may own the track to the border, from what I understand, they are really only maintained to short-line standard so there is a lot of work needed to get a Columbus to Pittsburgh line to reality.
 
Back
Top