Brunswick Branch Activity

It would most probably be an extention of the Downeaster. Acela service needs electricity to run, so that will never happen.

Ah, if we only had MONEY!!

whoops...i meant Downeaster....i guess the Acela would be out of the questions since there isn't a quick rail link between North and South station...

It was announced yesterday that a bond package to fund an upgrade of Pan Am's Portland-Brunswick trackage will be proposed. This would make it possible for passengers to travel from Boston all the way to Rockland, entirely by train.

News article:

http://knox.villagesoup.com/Government/ ... ryID=88909

It would be better if they spent the money to try and re-establish service to Bangor. There would be more regular traffic there as well as the opportunity to connect to the Airport for overseas travel. I suppose any expansion is a good thing, but it looks like Guilford is getting more free track upgrades on the bill of the taxpayer.

Yes. let me know when it becomes possible to take a train from Portland to Lewiston, and when the State of Maine Express is resurrected. I need to recreate train trips I took 60 years ago.


Ocala Mike

Bring back The Alouette!

NRGeep wrote:Bring back The Alouette!

Wrong route; the Alouette went to Montreal via Concord and White River Jct. The "Pine Tree Limited" would be more like it!

Heh.. Yeah, The Alouette is *my* pet train for reviving as I love taking weekends in Montreal and can see the tracks in Nashua from my bedroom across the Merrimack River. I'd love to be able to take a train to Montreal that was only a short cab ride away.

If you want to go to Montreal bring back the Red Wing

Let's try to steer back to the original topic, the proposed bond issue to upgrade Pan Am's Portland-Brunswick trackage.

Good news for points north of Portland, both passenger and freight. I spoke to a Maine lobbyist friend of mine and she told me that the bond issue stands a good chance of passing. Having, in a previous life, been involved in planning and development charettes in both Portland and Brunswick, I can say with some confidence that the state has been eyeing this route for a while, and that it's likely that the state will continue to rehab or outright purchase ROWs that they see as worthy of future passenger expansion. Frankly, I think it's for the best-- yeah, taxpayers are picking it up, but I'm not sure it gets done otherwise.

midnight_ride wrote:Good news for points north of Portland, both passenger and freight. I spoke to a Maine lobbyist friend of mine and she told me that the bond issue stands a good chance of passing. Having, in a previous life, been involved in planning and development charettes in both Portland and Brunswick, I can say with some confidence that the state has been eyeing this route for a while, and that it's likely that the state will continue to rehab or outright purchase ROWs that they see as worthy of future passenger expansion. Frankly, I think it's for the best-- yeah, taxpayers are picking it up, but I'm not sure it gets done otherwise.

That's interesting. I read that the appropriations committee passed out a bond bill that didn't include money for Portland Brunswick or for the proposed improvements at the Brunswick interchange. Senator Edmonds introduced a separate bill to get the Downeaster to Brunswick. Anyone know where that stands?
Also, the total non-highway appropriation for the bill is 26 million, which will be subject to two citizen votes this June and next, each vote approving 13 million.

I was under the impression that the bond packages did NOT include funding for the Brunswick expansion.
In another post, someone said that this was going to be a great year for Maine rr. Maybe, if you don't mind seeing Rigby Yard going the way of Mechanicsville.
c

I posted that before seeing the news about Rigby. Its still going to be a good year for infrastructure upgrades but we'll have to see what happens to Rigby. Do you seriously think they can eliminate it?

They may not eliminate it all, but comtinue to cut it down to the minimumm number of tracks required. Certainly no more roundhouse or other rr buildings or much activity at all.
I think that the environmental issues are signifiacant obstacles in the development of that parcel.
On a similar vein, it would appear that the construction of any new-or expansion of existing- railroad yard facilities may face tough times from neighbors. What has changed since the first attempt to close Rigby? Why should this work now?

c
As I was thinking about the possible reuse of Rigby, it became perfectly clear, a runway for pan am airlines! Somebody knows what they're doing.