Amtrak considers extending Wolverine line from Chicago to Toronto via (VIA?) Detroit

[Greg Moore]

https://detroit.curbed.com/2019/4/1/182 ... l-fast-act" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“Amtrak is exploring places it can modernize and expand its services and network,” said Amtrak Spokesman Marc Magliari by email. “A Chicago/Western Michigan–Detroit–Toronto corridor is one of the services where we see promise.”

This could be interesting. Wonder if they could simply extend the Maple Leaf trainsets through to Detroit.

Heck, if you're going to do that, make sure you've got good connections on to Chicago.

[Ken V]

This topic was somewhat covered recently in the Canadian Passenger Rail forum: VIA to Detroit.

[Backshophoss]

A return of the"International" would make sense if routed via Port Huron/Sarnia Access to the tunnel in Detroit via CRSA/CN is hit/miss due to
freight volume on international auto parts trade.
This would also need to operated as the Maple Leaf,Crews change at the border between Amtrak/Via and is operated as VIA train Sarnia-Toronto

[mtuandrew]

Hoss: meaning Toronto-Sarnia-Port Huron-Detroit-Chicago as a new route, or Toronto-Sarnia-Port Huron-Flint-Chicago as The International has run in the past? The former would need extensive track work but would be worthwhile.

[Tadman]

This topic has always fascinated me, I'd love to see the corridors mated somehow. But I don't advocate for a through train, at least not all of them.

Consider first that Amtrak has the Pontiac "branch" which accounts for far more riders than downtown Detroit. Because most travelers start their Wolverine journey in a car anyway, I'm not opposed to sacking the Pontiac branch. It would remove the necessity to use that awful Detroit station (marginal area, utterly grubby station). It would also remove the CN-NS-Amtrak interface, which accounts for a number of delays. It would also shorten the crew and train trips, meaning you might free up crews and equipment.

As far as interline trains go, the Wolverine is a six hour ride Chicago-Detroit and the Windsor trains are four hours to Toronto. Add two hours for layover and customs, you'd have a twelve hour ride, which is a long darn day. That assumes, of course, that the traveler wants Chicago-Toronto service. I'd suggest that, given the business patterns in Michigan and Ontario, the trains are likely to turn over in either Dearborn or Detroit anyway. The surrounding states and provinces are full of auto parts plants and assembly plants, and Detroit has GM, Ford, and FCA headquarters. As such, it probably makes a lot more sense to have either or both railroads run one station across the border. This means a much simpler customs operation like that at Vancouver or Montreal.

Also, I'm against the GTW route. There is far less on-line population in Michigan and Canada, it's far busier with freight, and Amtrak owns their own "high speed" route to Detroit now.

[Backshophoss]

Mtuandrew,Was thinking the original routing,via Detroit is workable,WITHOUT the Pontiac stop
Chicago-Port Huron is still active Amtrak route.

[NIMBYkiller]

I second the sentiment regarding not thru running the service. I'd make Detroit the split point and have Canadian/US customs performed in station prior to boarding the Toronto bound train. Running it as a thru train subjects it to border delays, so now you could very well have people traveling entirely within the US or entirely within Canada being delayed because someone didn't have their paperwork together on the train. Running it as separate trains with customs procedures done off train allow the train to continue on its way on schedule regardless of who did what stupid thing/forgot what document at the border. Your screw up now delays only you, not anyone else.

[Tadman]

Agreed, and I think the train would turn over in Detroit similar to the way Acela heavily turns over in NYP.

[electricron]

The proposals Amtrak is interested in is Chicago to Toronto via Detroit - not just a Detroit to Toronto train. And there is a huge difference between them as far as scheduling is concerned...

The last time Amtrak ran Chicago to Toronto train service in partnership with VIA, the train skipped Detroit by running via Sarnia - Port Huron. While I'm certain Detroit should provide far more potential passenger than Port Huron, will it at the time the train arrives?

Let's assume a similar time schedule as the forsaken International era 2003.
http://www.timetables.org/full.php?grou ... &item=0086" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Eastbound
Departs Chicago at 9:40 am
Arrives Port Huron at 4:50 pm
Departs Port Huron at 5:35 pm
Arrives Sarnia at 5:57 pm
Departs Sarnia at 7:25 pm
Arrives Toronto at 11:27 pm
The train loses over 2 hours at the border.
Westbound
Departs Toronto at 6:35 am
Arrives Sarnia at 11:05 am
Departs Sarnia at 11:10 am
Arrives Port Huron at 11:30 am
Departs Port Huron at 12:20 pm
Arrives Chicago at 5:55 pm.
Train loses over 1 hour at the border.

So a new train should arrive in Detroit between noon and 6 pm assuming a similar schedule. There would be no transfers available for continuing your trip without an overnight stay and catching a train the next day, or an overnight stay catching this train. The train leaves the originating station too early and arrives at the destination station too late for many transfers to be viable.

As far as Detroit area to Toronto train service, VIA already runs 3 round trip trains a day between Windsor and Toronto (morning, noon, and evening) services.

Presently, you can catch the morning Wolverine leaving Chicago at 7:20 am, arrive in Detroit at 1:40 pm, catch the evening VIA train at 19:45 pm and arrive in Toronto at 23:44 pm. You'll have over 8 hours to navigate between Detroit and Windsor and get through Customs.

Would a one seat ride save some time? Yes. How much? Around 3 hours. From the 16 plus hours it takes to ride two trains today to the 13 plus hours the International had back in 2003. You be saving 19% on elapse journey time.
Math = 13/16 x 100 = 81.25 ; 100-81.25 = 18.75

Would this train be worth it? Considering VIA provides 3 round trips a day between Windsor and Toronto and Amtrak provides 3 round trips a day between Chicago and Detroit already, my answer is no! Amtrak wouldn't be providing an additional regional train as much as it would be providing an additional long distance train.

A new long distance train service as long as Michigan will subsidize it. Yes, Amtrak is expecting states to start subsidizing its' long distance trains. First, the existing Southwest Chief, next the potential return of the Sunset Limited east, and now the potential return of the ole' International via Detroit.

Which existing long distance train will hit the chopping blocks next?

[CentralValleyRail]

While this is a great idea in theory, the Tunnel Bus that they have from Detroit to Windsor takes all of 5 minutes. Clearing Customs took another 60 seconds... Continue on the bus to Caesars another 5 minutes. You can taxi from there to VIA Station another 5 minutes. All in all 20 minutes from point to point... I did it last year, was fun had lunch at Caesars and went off to Toronto. Just don't expect much in first class, the salmon was the size of a soda cap.

[Gilbert B Norman]

Why "Uberspinmeister" Maglieri, spoke as he did about revived Chicago-Detroit-Toronto service escapes me. Mr. Central Valley clearly sets forth how any through service, as in "Canadian" - the NYC-CP Chicago-Montreal through train, simply is a no start today.

The only place Article III of the May 1, 1971 Agreement can be applied with the Canadian Pacific (the "must negotiate in good faith" lingo) is on "my" (former) MILW.

Reviewing Mr. Google's mapmaking of the Detroit area shows no direct connection between the CP operated tunnel and the CN. The VIA station is located in Walkerville.

Further, with the auto industry's practice of "just in time" deliveries, the CP would not be happy about opening slots in the tunnel for passenger trains they have no contractual obligation to operate.

[mtuandrew]

In Mr. Anderson’s experience, trans-national service is a matter of getting gates in Toronto & Detroit, double-checking that your fleet meets all FAA and Transport Canada regs (and honestly if you meet one, you probably meet both), and making sure your attendants speak a little French. No dealing with four indifferent or hostile landlords, no detours around five sides of two cities, no backing movements, no conflicting rules and Unions and freight interference and substandard facilities that are just in the wrong side of town.

In other words, maybe he literally needs to come down to earth.

[Tadman]

I disagree with that. Airlines are subject to the same type of problems railroads are. They are heavily unionized, so work rule disputes are fairly common. There are some airports and authorities that are easier to deal with, some that are impossible to deal with. There are more expensive places to land, fuel, and repair jets, and there are less expensive places. If a plane lands at a non-hub with a serious malfunction, you can't just repair it, a new plane has to be found, passengers delayed perhaps overnight, mechanics trucked in, etc... And the weather is far worse for airlines. Every time a thunderstorm comes through there's a catastrophe of delayed passengers.

If it were so easy to run an airline, they'd make money a lot more often.

Regarding the hard points of running Amtrak, IE host railroads and things like that, there's nothing new here. These problems have been around for fifty years now. Every business but Amtrak has been required to solve problems or change in a short period rather than make fifty years of excuses. It's time to assume those problems will be around for another fifty years and adapt, rather than being a political punching bag for another fifty years.

[mtuandrew]

Those are all quite true, Tad, but there are also a number of airlines that seamlessly add seasonal flights to San Juan and the USVI.

My point wasn’t to say that airlines don’t have significant barriers to adding service, but that Amtrak has all of those barriers plus a much smaller fleet without possibility of wet-lease aircraft, code-sharing, or regional partners, fixed routes owned by indifferent or hostile corporate hosts (and without right-of-access in Canada), and a fleet with significantly lower MBTF (from minor faults, not -8MAX catastrophic failure.) Customs may be harder too - airports are already set up to handle international flights, while Amtrak and VIA would need to have their governments establish a new handling facility at any border they chose.

Much of this can’t be solved by Amtrak without the blessing and funding of not only Washington but Ottawa. I’m glad they’re being proactive about it and that they develop enough supporters to make this happen.

[gokeefe]

Why "Uberspinmeister" Maglieri, spoke as he did about revived Chicago-Detroit-Toronto service escapes me. Mr. Central Valley clearly sets forth how any through service, as in "Canadian" - the NYC-CP Chicago-Montreal through train, simply is a no start today.

Mr. Norman,

I would submit that Royal York is perhaps the better analogue
based on timing but note with agreement that CP may very well be the intended route. Why? I believe this may be an early signal of route development efforts by Ford to restore service at Michigan Central Station in both directions. The sudden interest in an admittedly difficult undertaking makes little to no sense otherwise. Few things could be harder than setting up another international route to/from Canada.