I-70 east-west corridor

It has be mentioned several times here that since the National was discontinued, there has been no passenger rail service on the I-70 Midwest corridor between Pittsburgh and St. Louis, with just a limited Greyhound Thruway connection available at PGH. With I-70 being a main east-west corridor (Pittsburgh, Columbus, Dayton, Indianapolis, St. Louis), why has there been limited interest in a "east-west" Midwest corridor? (as opposed to "Chicago Hub" centralized hub/spoke service)

Because Ohio (and likely Indiana) don't want to fund it?

markhb wrote:Because Ohio (and likely Indiana) don't want to fund it?

And neither do Pennsylvania, Illinois, or Missouri.

I've suggested in the past that the Cardinal be diverted to STL instead of CHI and that the Hoosier State become a daily CHI-IND train (or maybe a section of the Cardinal, but that requires a new CHI-NYC train to fill the gap.

And the class I's don't really have the infrastructure.

Since neither the B&O nor the PRR routes to STL remain intact, it would be necessary to cobble a through route from what exists today.

CSX (x-B&O) from PGH to Greenwich and CSX (x-NYC) from there to IND and STL.

NS (x-PRR) from PGH to Crestline, thence CSX (x-NYC) from there as above to STL.

If you try to include Columbus, OH in the route, there is a problem as the former PRR from there westward is long gone. And Columbus is the largest city between PGH and STL.

Mr. Lustig: there's also W&LE from PGH to Mingo Jct., Ohio Central to Columbus, NS to Dayton, and CSX via Hamilton to IND and STL. Most direct, but easily slowest.

Interesting route, but is there a direct connection to access the station at PGH?

shlustig wrote:Interesting route, but is there a direct connection to access the station at PGH?

No, not without a tour of Pittsburgh’s southwestern suburbs or a new (but short) connection to the Chartiers Branch. Probably easier to use NS and follow the banks of the Ohio to Mingo.

I think that's a main freight route for NS, as well as being a helluva long way round. (Maybe Hyperloop to the rescue?) As for a connection with the Chartiers Branch, the SPV Atlas shows the apparent closeness of a possible connection, but the old P&WV ran at a much higher elevation than the PRR, which stuck to the valleys, and it may be that the P&WV line is high above the former PRR at that point. Maybe someone in the area could clarify this.

On this topic, but farther east, does anyone know if it would be possible to introduce passenger service from Baltimore Penn out to Harper's Ferry and Cumberland via the I-70 corridor? Wasn't that the original B&O route before the Metropolitan Subdivision was built? MARC would probably be the best candidate for this type of service, but I could also imagine splitting the Capitol Limited at Harper's Ferry (like the LSL in Albany) and sending a section to Baltimore and potentially onward to Philly and New York-though, of course, you'd need single-levels on the Capitol Limited to run such a service through the B&P tunnels

Metzger wrote:On this topic, but farther east, does anyone know if it would be possible to introduce passenger service from Baltimore Penn out to Harper's Ferry and Cumberland via the I-70 corridor? Wasn't that the original B&O route before the Metropolitan Subdivision was built? MARC would probably be the best candidate for this type of service, but I could also imagine splitting the Capitol Limited at Harper's Ferry (like the LSL in Albany) and sending a section to Baltimore and potentially onward to Philly and New York-though, of course, you'd need single-levels on the Capitol Limited to run such a service through the B&P tunnels

No, it's not possible unless you build a connection between the NEC and CSX Baltimore Subdivision north of the Old Main Subdivision connection at St. Dennis. It's possible to do it at the CSX/NEC crossing around Halethorpe around the WINNANS interlock on the NEC and ST DENNIS interlock on the CSX line.

For extra speed, you could branch off the Old Main along I-70, bridge over a four-stack highway interchange, tunnel under Leekin (pronounced "Lincon") Park, and hook on the NEC at the old B&P... but that's going to get replaced by the Circle Tunnel, and just digging in Leekin Park is going to be expensive because literally that is where the bodies are buried (It's funny because it's actually true, look it up). The forensics alone will double the price of construction.

Of course, this is a single track line and I haven't mentioned that it could use some double-tracking.

If you’re willing to use the WM via Hagerstown, you could rebuild the former WM-PRR connection just west of the B&P Tunnel. That said, the line via DC is faster even with a wye, and has a big ridership base.

I don't think you could split a train at Harper's Ferry. Albany is a large station with dedicated tracks and an engine facility, Harper's Ferry is a simple station on the CSX Mainline.

I'd like to see Baltimore to Frederick service one day. There is also the option to restore the connecting track between Amtrak and CSX that branches off from CSX Mt. Claire yard and travels under 95, Wilkins and Caton Ave.

The onlines of the track and wye can still be seen on Google Maps, and the right of way remains intact as far as I know.

This has been discussed before, using the Claremount branch, to allow camden trains to use penn, and vice versa.

The I-70 corridor goes hundreds of miles without touching any cities with large numbers of people without cars who have money to travel. Actually, hundreds of miles without cities with large numbers of people, period: 250 miles or more from Indy to StL, IIRC, with my Terre Haute maybe being the biggest place, and it's a car place... On the upside, little Effingham, IL, still has an Amtrak station stuck into one angle of the the diamond between the ex IC and the ex PRR (I think; CSX, anyway), so an east-west train could have a station stop there with nice waiting room, parking, etc., with no more investment than a few hundred feet of platform repairs, potentially with reasonable connections to the north and south. If Champaign Urbana were where Effingham is, things might be different; CU generates a lot of traffic.

So that's probably why Amtrak chose to cut the National Limited rather than a Chicago train; as for why the states don't fund it, why would Illinois fund a train whose main nearby stations were in Missouri and Indiana? Why would Indiana fund a train with only one major stop in Indiana, and three or four little ones, esp if it were a long distance train with the same timekeeping as the Cardinal? Etc. It's a pretty good demo of why the state-funding-required PRIAA rule kind of prevents some routes that look logical if you cant see the state lines.