Amtrak Vermonter / Montrealer

Kilo Echo wrote:

Local bus coverage is excellent between Amherst and Northampton.

Because the nearest local bus stop is in front of the Post Office, lugging heavy bags—especially amid inclement weather—can be quite burdensome. Even if PVTA stopped at Union Station, the bus is often crowded and, more to the point, hasn't a baggage compartment. In addition to facilitating transfers, Amtrak bus service to Amherst would allow a person to purchase a rail ticket through to AMM.

Those are very, very easy fixes. MassDOT needs to increase funding across-the-board for the RTA's so they can buy more equipment, increase frequencies, tweak their high-demand stops with better ADA/shelters/etc. All of the RTA's have a long list of unfunded mandates that tackle exactly the sort of stuff you mention here. Definitely PVTA is angling its future around the increasing train service in its large service area stretching Springfield east to Palmer and north to Greenfield. New Vermonter route, new Hartford Line, potential Conn River Line commuter rail, potential Inland Route service, streamlining the purchasing options with all of the above, and better options for the college students who form the backbone of their non- Springfield Metro ridership. They just need the state to stop keeping their funding levels flat year after year after year and every one of those current deficiencies can be quickly fixed with more/better service.

FYI if your a member of the 5 collage community the buses are free, If you want to travel in style you can get a Peter Pan from Amherst to Northampton.

east point wrote:AAF ( Brightline cars are proposed to have retractable extensions mounted on the cars themselves. Might be the best way in the future for V-2 coaches ?

That's the way to go! I believe this will give them zero gap when extended. I would assume any other providers that someday use their platforms can use similar technology or bridge plates.

Additional thought on extenders for the cars. they can have sensors to stop the extender once touching the platform. Would work well on curved platforms. cars could carry a bridge plate in case of failure of extender. Manual crank to retract any plate that fails extended.

A 1-car mini-high isn't going to be curved. That's all an hands-free bridge plate would be good for, because trying to make that work on a 600+ ft. platform with 5+ cars and 10+ vestibules worth of bridge plates is asking for mechanical trouble even with the most Jetsons Tech automation. Every extra vestibule that has to have one of these machines work in unison is extra probability of a fault, and every extra stop and every extra train frequency you have to do that increases the odds to a point where a schedule-delaying fault is going to be inevitable on any given day. This is why high-boarding commuter systems that run every 30-90 minutes all day 7 days will always have to have platforms flush with the door and no car-side kludges in order to make ADA compliance work without fouling their operations.

All we're talking here are northeastern Amtrak routes of modest schedule who need to do mini-high platforms on a freight clearance route from lack room for passing tracks, and need to build Rutland-style gapped platforms to save on the maintenance cost-and-labor of flipping a platform edge. To the extent the bridge plates are all pushbutton it's still only going to be in 1 car under the supervision of a conductor. But that's literally all you need for every route that runs in 48-inch platform territory at stops where mini-highs are unavoidable for freight clearances. Parts of the Downeaster, Vermonter, EAE, and Adirondack only. That's it. Everywhere else is either game for full-highs or crosses into official 8-inch territory (e.g. Virginia Regionals) where you can't construct mini-highs at all without screwing up local commuter rail rolling stock that shares the same platforms.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:They're seeking this type of flag-stop trial on the Ethan Allen extension to Burlington, which is only going to officially have full stops at Middlebury and Burlington. They're seeking permission for flags to let the intermediate population centers who don't have ready station sites to "audition" for infills, providing it's ADA-kosher to have a shelter-less pavement slab at a grade crossing and staff-assisted boarding accessibility. If that works, and ends up eventually graduating places like Brandon, Vergennes, Shelburne, etc. onto the EAE as full stops it would potentially be worth templating on the other side of the state. At least if the big studied service expansion follows through at adding that shorter New Haven-Vermont slot in addition to the Montrealer and BOS-MTL. Probably don't want to overload the long-haul schedules with too many flags, but spreading the field would work for giving those tryout destinations a bite at the apple.

Shelbourne still has the still relatively new Champlain Flyer station and parking lot perfectly intact (see below). All that's needed is some Amtrak signage/paint and a wheelchair lift.

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.380962, ... 312!8i6656" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Believe there was some sort of ownership snag that had Shelburne claiming they needed help expediting if they were going to be able to commit years in advance to being ready by A-Day on such an aggressive launch schedule for the extension. Wheels churning slowly in a small town, yada yada. The flag stop trial idea was basically crafted with them in mind so there'd no longer be skittishness over due dates.

A public meeting for the DRAFT 2016 State Rail Plan Update will take place at 7:00 P.M. on November 9 at the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission, 60 Congress St (2nd fl), Springfield, MA. This is the only public meeting scheduled for Western Massachusetts before the plan update is made final. Anyone interested in joining the discussion about the future of Bay State passenger and freight rail service is encouraged to attend.

^ Any link to the meeting materials, previous planning materials or planning process?

From the June meeting:

http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Portals/ ... -14-16.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Portals/ ... 071616.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


This fall is the show-and-tell on the plan updates. Final draft gets a public airing by year's end. Ratified and submitted to FRA as the official 2017 MA State Rail Plan in Q1 2017.

Additional meeting info and informational links are available on this Trains in the Valley posting:
https://trainsinthevalley.org/2016/10/2 ... e-meeting/

http://www.etickernewsofclaremont.com/2 ... ont-today/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"CLAREMONT, NH–Today, Friday, at approximately 12:37 p.m., Claremont Emergency Services were called to respond to the rail tracks between the Claremont Junction and Grissom Lane for a report of a man who appeared to deliberately walk in front of the south bound Amtrak train and was hit, said authorities. Upon arrival, emergency responders confirmed that the individual hit by the train was deceased."

That might explain why the Vermonter didn't leave SPG until around 5:30. I was expecting to see the LSL. Didn't see that but I saw PanAm's Plainville-East Deerfield run (held for the southbound Vermonter) and and eastbound CSX mixed freight that mostly crossed the CT river and then stopped (presumably for the LSL).

Anybody know why the Vermonter was cancelled today? And I don't think it ran this weekend either.
Peace,
Jonathan

Trackwork