Ethan Allen Discussion, including Expansion (Burlington)

[dowlingm]

I thought SAB would be a good call once Vermonter was extended to MTR, since layover arrangements are well understood there. But it's a good point that being able to run through Burlington down the road doesn't eliminate the issue in Rutland (assuming continuation of the existing routing to/from NY)

[shadyjay]

Turning the train at Burlington or ESX doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It would already have to reverse direction at Rutland.

A procedure that would make sense to me: change power from a P32 dual mode to a P40/P42 at ALB, add a locomotive to the south end. Enter Rutland. While at Rutland, have crew "change ends". Then the former south end becomes the new north end. Operate north to Burlington. Layover. Then head south in the AM. Reverse procedure in Rutland and ALB. No need to turn the train. Now, if a cab car is used, I could see why they'd want to turn the train at the northern terminus. A lot of farm crosssings along the line between Rutland and Burlington. Would CP want a cab car leading from Schenectady to Whitehall? I wouldn't think so in the winter months.

We know that it will take even more time to get the rest of the western corridor up to snuff between Bennington and Rutland, not to mention the NY connection from Schenectady over PAS trackage to the VT line. If/when that finally occurs, it would be a straight shot through Rutland, with no change of direction, then definitely some sort of "turning the train" consist would have to occur in the Burlington area.

What I would like to see is the Vermonter's northern terminus shifted to Burlington and the Montrealer reinstated. Then the NB Vermonter could become the next day's SB Ethan Allen, and vice versa. No turning of trains would be required. Of course, then you'd have to upgrade the Burlington Branch. But the eventual plan is to (at least) extend the Vermonter to Montreal. If it were to be kept with a northern terminus at SAB, it would be a waste. Not many riders between ESX-SAB. Exposing the Vermonter to downtown Burlington would be a boon to ridership.

"That's our opinion... what's yours?"

[Ridgefielder]

Turning the train at Burlington or ESX doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It would already have to reverse direction at Rutland.

A procedure that would make sense to me: change power from a P32 dual mode to a P40/P42 at ALB, add a locomotive to the south end. Enter Rutland. While at Rutland, have crew "change ends". Then the former south end becomes the new north end. Operate north to Burlington. Layover. Then head south in the AM. Reverse procedure in Rutland and ALB. No need to turn the train. Now, if a cab car is used, I could see why they'd want to turn the train at the northern terminus. A lot of farm crosssings along the line between Rutland and Burlington. Would CP want a cab car leading from Schenectady to Whitehall? I wouldn't think so in the winter months.

Seems like that's a lot of engine-changing for a 300-odd mile trip. Might be simpler (and cheaper) to just put the Rutland wye into such a condition that you could turn the train with passengers on board. That also eliminates the problem of people riding "backwards" for part of the journey, which some apparently dislike quite intensely.

We know that it will take even more time to get the rest of the western corridor up to snuff between Bennington and Rutland, not to mention the NY connection from Schenectady over PAS trackage to the VT line. If/when that finally occurs, it would be a straight shot through Rutland, with no change of direction, then definitely some sort of "turning the train" consist would have to occur in the Burlington area.

What I would like to see is the Vermonter's northern terminus shifted to Burlington and the Montrealer reinstated. Then the NB Vermonter could become the next day's SB Ethan Allen, and vice versa. No turning of trains would be required. Of course, then you'd have to upgrade the Burlington Branch. But the eventual plan is to (at least) extend the Vermonter to Montreal. If it were to be kept with a northern terminus at SAB, it would be a waste. Not many riders between ESX-SAB. Exposing the Vermonter to downtown Burlington would be a boon to ridership.

"That's our opinion... what's yours?"

Problem with running the Ethan Allen and Vermonter as one train looping through Essex Junction is you wind up with at least one Dual Mode stuck in New Haven, where it's not needed.

[shadyjay]

Problem with running the Ethan Allen and Vermonter as one train looping through Essex Junction is you wind up with at least one Dual Mode stuck in New Haven, where it's not needed.

That could be accomplished by an engine change at ALB. The Adirondack changes engines at ALB, the Maple Leaf may as well. The LSL drops its dual mode and picks up the power from the Boston section (straight-up P42s). There's only 18 dual modes so keeping them as close to the ALB-NYP corridor where they're required is critical. Right now the EAE doesn't change engines, but RUD isn't "too far" from ALB. That could change when the extension from RUD to BUR/BTV happens. Amtrak may want to keep its dual modes closer to base, requiring an engine change at ALB for the EAE anyway.

The wye in Rutland is a possibility. I was on a Mass Bay RRE excursion from Burlington to Rutland a few years back and they permitted passengers to remain on board while the train was wyed. Whether or not that becomes a regular occurrence on the EAE remains to be seen. Would make sense as to why they'd want to turn the train up in B-town somewhere.

As for riding backwards, that problem could be overcome with what the Vermonter did from 4/95 until 12/14 - half the seats in the car face one way, the other half face the other. It is kind of ironic, how one Vermont service train went from a reverse move to a straight-on move (Vermonter), while another is being extended in the near future, facing the reverse situation (straight-on to a reverse move)... unless the Rutland wye is utilized.

[dowlingm]

That Amtrak gains by reducing or redirecting DM mileage is a good point. Could EAE use a cab car other than in winter, rather than 2 x locos or 1+NPCU?

[gokeefe]

Interesting to watch what is happening here as the Ethan Allen, the Vermonter's oft neglected lost cousin now suddenly seems to be headed for a future as a service with great relevance to Vermont's transportation network. I wonder what, if any, the network effects could be for Amtrak beyond just a small blip in increased demand for connecting service on Northeast Regional trains.

[Allouette]

Of course the train could also be handled by restoring the pre-1947 D&H route from the wye's tail track to Center Rutland. You'd just have to mow down a couple of businesses, build track through a cemetery and two baseball diamonds, add a bridge and...

[west point]

Amtrak's equipment plan does add rebuilding of 10+ F-40s to NPCU so maybe one or two to Ethan Allen ?

http://necfuture.com/pdfs/2015_tier1_eis_app_a_v2.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[NH2060]

Only if they add/drop them @ Albany. The F40s are too tall for entrance into/out of Penn Station.

[Jeff Smith]

Times Union

The Ethan Allen Express, which connects New York City with Rutland, Vt., carried 0.4 percent fewer passengers, 52,553, but saw a 2 percent gain in revenue, to $2,956,374.

[Jeff Smith]

retitled.

[TrainPhotos]

In my dig for information on passenger trains serving Mechanicville, NY I found this news piece:

ARLINGTON -- The Vermont Agency of Transportation held a public meeting at Arlington Memorial School on Thursday, detailing their recently released study on possible alternatives for extending passenger rail service to Bennington County.

The option proposed in the study would create a new service that would begin at the Albany-Rensselaer Amtrak station and run through Mechanicville, N.Y., Hoosick Junction, N.Y., North Bennington, Manchester, and Rutland. The study, which covers over 800 pages, examines everything from projected passenger estimates, environmental impacts, track upgrades, and crossing improvements. The full report is available on the VTrans website

http://www.benningtonbanner.com/ci_2550 ... ld-connect" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thoughts?

[TrainPhotos]

Page 16. http://vtrans.vermont.gov/sites/aot/fil ... 202015.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Jeff Smith]

Ooh, you guys are slipping....

Albany Times Union

The article's brief, so the "brief, fair-use" quote is kind of most of it.

Amtrak service from Albany to extend to Burlington, Vt.
$10M federal grant to extend Ethan Allen Express in Vermont

Amtrak's Ethan Allen Express service, which now terminates in Rutland, Vt., will be extended north to Burlington, thanks to a $10 million Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery, or TIGER, grant. The funds were announced by U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx and Federal Railroad Administrator Sarah E. Feinberg during a press conference at Burlington's Union Station. They were joined by three of Vermont's top elected officials, Gov. Peter Shumlin, U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy and U.S. Rep. Peter Welch at the event.

The money apparently wasn't a surprise. Vermont's congressional delegation had announced last October the funding would be provided, according to VTDigger.org.

Once service is established, the trip between Albany and Burlington would take three hours, making it competitive with driving.

The money will pay for 11 miles of new track, and to place passenger platforms in Middlebury, Vergennes, and Burlington. Trains would operate at up to 60 mph on the extended route.

[jp1822]

We've heard about this extension "hoping to be" for MANY years now. Hopefully this will finally get it done. I think though they should have considered a stop at Shelbourne as it is a self-contained little town like Middlebury where one can walk to museums, stores, and lodging. Buses from Burlington are somewhat seasonal at best to Shelbourne.

One major obstacle was the junction at Rutland - which was similar to how the Vermonter had to operate in order to get north up to St. Albans at Palmer Jct. Hopefully they will be able to construct a true "Y" at Rutland so no back up maneuver will be needed.

Likewise, I like the Friday early evening departure from NYC to Rutland and the same southbound from Rutland on Sunday. However, in order to be passenger friendly, it would seem that the northbound Ethan Allen would have to leave NYP at around 3:30 pm in order to make it up to Burlington, VT before midnight (and vice versa). Whether this would be the normal schedule - not sure.

Would the train set layover at the yard just south of where Burling Union Station is?