Chicago Bypass

One which worked was SF-TPW-PRR.   The TPW had interchanges with several N/S railroads, one of which may have been the IC/ICG.  John in Lansing, ILL

Dominic Mazoch posted:

The one which surprises me is the Central's line which connected with the ATSF.  In the diesel era, run throughs with this would be a natural.

The CB&Q had NYC power running through for a short time.

Rusty

New York Central had by-pass lines around Chicago:  Porter, IN to Joliet, IL and  South Bend, IN to Zearing, IL  (CB&Q interchange).  Believe the second line was known as the Kankakee Belt Line. Think the Joliet line is long-gone, but the Kankakee Belt line trackage may still be heavily used.   

The Kankakee Belt is gone east of Wheatfield Indiana, where it serves a power plant.  NS comes down the old NYC from Gibson and west on the Kankakee from Schneider Indiana, but not a lot of traffic moves that way.   Among the things that worked against the belt were the usual suspects; The ATSF would be slightly short hauling themselves VS Chicago, The crew districts didn't line up very well, and the connection at Streator was a derailment waiting to happen.  The TPW bypass route pretty much died after Conrail tore up the Panhandle through Logansport, meaning that the only real interchange partner would have been NS (Wabash), which pre-Conrail split days wasn't a stellar route for east coast traffic.  Once again, short hauling the western roads, short crew districts and the cost to upgrade the line to true main line status would have been expensive.  For all of the issues in Chicago, the railroads have never really had the resolve to bypass it and move the traffic farther south.

Didn’t the NYC/MC line in Joliet only connect with GM&O in Joliet? Maybe back in the day NYC-Rock Island at Joliet would’ve been the easiest and cheapest to upgrade route to avoid Chicago? Not that it matters now, as MC rail from Indiana to Joliet is gone.

Actually, RI had several possible bypasses:

In Chicagoland, the line to Blue Island.

Kansas City to St. Louis

Menphis to New Mexico along I40.

Dominic Mazoch posted:

Ok, there are beltway railroads in Chicagoland.

But it seems the NYC, PRR and B&O had a few routes which went around the Windy City to the south.

I am surprised none gain any traction as an interchange bypass.

The one which surprises me is the Central's line which connected with the ATSF.  In the diesel era, run throughs with this would be a natural.

I worked for the NYC in various marketing and operating department jobs between 1959 and 1967.  There was some delay caused by switching in Chicago for western connections in 1959 but very little by 1969.  From the time that the new Elkhart Yard was finished in 1958, most western traffic was blocked there.  In 1967, there were blocks for MILW, C&NW, SOO-CGW, IC-west, CB&Q, RI, SF, WAB, and IC.  All of those blocks departed Elkhart between 2:00A and 12:01P and all were delivered to connections the same day.

Streator-SF was one of our most important connections, with a through train from Boston to Streator.  LS-3 left Boston at 7:15P, was classified at Elkhart 24 hours later and arrived Streator at 9:30A, 39 hours after leaving Boston.  Connecting from New York on LS-1 was a Streator-SF block made at 72nd St and departing New York at 12:50A for a 34 hour trip to Streator.

Run-through of power was a secondary consideration.  To us, run-through meant large blocks of cars from Elkhart or Indianapolis to Kansas City, Galesburg, Silvis, Pine Bluff or Little Rock.  Interchanges of trains required crew changes.  If power ran through, then you had to deadhead the crew back to the engine house, so it cost a lot of money to run the power through.

Rusty Traque posted:

Dominic Mazoch posted:

The one which surprises me is the Central's line which connected with the ATSF.  In the diesel era, run throughs with this would be a natural.

The CB&Q had NYC power running through for a short time.

Rusty

In 1967 we had a pair of trains, NYQ and QNY between Elkhart and Galesburg that were interchanged at Englewood.  Looking at the schedules, I see that the power layover was about 12 hours in both directions.  That was enough time for a reliable turn with run-through power.

mark s posted:

New York Central had by-pass lines around Chicago:  Porter, IN to Joliet, IL and  South Bend, IN to Zearing, IL  (CB&Q interchange).  Believe the second line was known as the Kankakee Belt Line. Think the Joliet line is long-gone, but the Kankakee Belt line trackage may still be heavily used.   

The Joliet line was a branch line that doesn't even appear in the Through Freight Schedules.  Zearinf was on a branch off the KKK Belt and was not convenient for a through freight connection with the Q.  By interchanging the Elkhart-Galesburg train at Englewood, that train could also handle Q traffic to/from points bewteen Galesburg and Chicago.

In addition to the Santa Fe train, the KKK Belt also saw a pair of run-through trains with the Rock Island, interchanged at dePue.

Dieselbob posted:

.  For all of the issues in Chicago, the railroads have never really had the resolve to bypass it and move the traffic farther south.

There was no incentive to do so as there was plenty of track capacity in Chicago for run-through trains between eastern railroad yards in Indiana and yards of western roads at places such as Galesburg and Kansas City, 

Yet to this very day, Chicago is where trains go to die.

Dieselbob posted:

Yet to this very day, Chicago is where trains go to die.

The railroad business is about moving cars, not trains.  The notion that a train dies has no meaning.

Wonder if far fewer cars are entering Chicago these days?

mlaughlinnyc posted:

Dieselbob posted:

Yet to this very day, Chicago is where trains go to die.

The railroad business is about moving cars, not trains.  The notion that a train dies has no meaning.

The gazillions spent on CREATE projects, CN having to buy the EJ&E to get their trains across town and the millions of trailers and containers that have been rubber tired across town in the last 60 years would surely say otherwise.  I would also say that the railroad business SHOULD be about serving their customer's needs and not trying to drive their square peg customers through their round hole operating plans.