COMPASS RAIL: Pittsfield / Springfield / Boston East-West Passenger Rail

Portions of the MA State Rail Plan (completed in 2018) are out of date now. MA and other states are taking actions beyond what is in their rail plans because of the federal dollars available due to the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

Yes, I think these are the grants Baker was talking about at the Springfield press conference, that he thought would become available in January (after he is out of office) and wanted MassDOT / T to be ready to pounce on the $$$. Biden probably moved up the timeline because Republicans will control the house of reprehensibles in January.

8 Mil per mile seems excessive for new track. I know that's what the T pays for track, but I should think that CSX could do it for half that.

This is also a CRISI grant. They may also put a grant request into the Fed State Intercity Partnership program too - could be for another component of this.

Perhaps the partnership grant will be where the Worcester to Boston improvements are at least partially funded from. The Framingham-Weston triple tracking is basically required to fit any more peak-hour trains given how packed the line is right now during rush hour.

If they ever wanted to return to quad-track, was any of the ROW sold off between Riverside and Framingham? Looked like "infringement" or possible sales in Wellesley.

Thankfully we're not going to find out if people would put up with CR seating for that long given Amtrak will be operating it as an intercity service. At this point this thread should almost be in the Amtrak section as the T really is not going to have anything to do with it (though improvements on the Worcester line could be part of this.)

Komarovsky wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 3:30 pm Perhaps the partnership grant will be where the Worcester to Boston improvements are at least partially funded from. The Framingham-Weston triple tracking is basically required to fit any more peak-hour trains given how packed the line is right now during rush hour.

For the partnership program the improvements would have to be directly for supporting the added west of Worcester Amtrak service as the partnership can't be used for strictly commuter rail projects so there's probably limits on what they could get a grant for on that segment they'd have to be able to substantiate that the improvements are necessary and primarily for adding that service. The IIJA also included a whole slew of cash for transit projects as well though so the T could go after the FTA administered programs too.

lordsigma12345 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 03, 2022 3:20 pm

BandA wrote: ↑Sat Dec 03, 2022 2:44 pm So $135M doesn't include double-tracking??? Will the extended sidings eventually become part of the second track, or will they have to be done over again?

This is a followup on Gov. Baker's ride to Springfield with the Amtrak President. It's a way to exit on a upbeat note that Baker is interested in transportation & the T. Note that everybody was quoted in the article except for the outgoing T chairman, who is getting paid for one more month and is supposed to be working, although technically this isn't a T project.

Phase 1 is for 2 inland route round trips New Haven/ New York to Boston via Springfield. Beyond that they’re talking another 2 RT Albany - Boston as phase 2. At the end of the day we’re talking 5 passenger RT on this segment (including 448/449.) Do they really need to double track it all for that much with the traffic CSX has? If this is what CSX says will accomplish getting the services going no need to spend more.

Does one not include the Lake Shore? So one additional service? Would be nice to extend a NE Regional (no mentions of CTDOT re Hartford Line extension, another option)

And same for phase 2 and Albany-Boston, would it be two net new services? Might they run on anywhere?

It's been presented as two new daily round trips. They will have to decide on a name for it; The Bay State is a decent name but the original took the Inland Route, and can't call it the Lake Shore Limited.

The B&A didn't have a lot of exciting train names - most were either descriptive ("Albany Day Express") or indicating the continuing NYC train ("New England Wolverine"). Their names of "Berkshire Express" (if service is extended to Pittsfield) or "Paul Revere Express" could work. Several state-supported trains use names of famed locals - "Naismith Express", anyone?

Surely they'll be Northeast Regional - the train extensions into VA for example, don't have specific names.

But if net new Amtrak starters (New Haven or Springfield to Boston) they might get names. I think a bit pointless for something with future aspirations of frequency and on existing lines/services. It's already a mess. Named trains are a bit of nostalgia fluff, and useful on a singular (often daily) routing. This is a new service pattern overlaid with a bunch of existing frequent ones.

Amtrak don't name trains on the Hartford Line for instance, or the Hiawatha (a line name).

In a nutshell, Phase I adds two east-west trains, presumably between Boston and Albany. So two additional state-supported clones of the Boston Section of the Lake Shore Limited, except without sleeper cars or food service (probably).

cle wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 1:59 pm
Does one not include the Lake Shore? So one additional service? Would be nice to extend a NE Regional (no mentions of CTDOT re Hartford Line extension, another option)

And same for phase 2 and Albany-Boston, would it be two net new services? Might they run on anywhere?

2 round trips on the inland route which will likely happen first. 2 additional round trips Albany - Boston. Doesn't include the Boston section of the Lake Shore Limited. Including the Lake Shore this would be 5 round trips Springfield - Boston. 3 round trips Albany - Boston.

Five daily roundtrips east of Springfield, might be enough to be usable! Next, we need local stations west of Worcester (will take 25 years)...

lordsigma12345 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 6:59 pm

cle wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 1:59 pm
Does one not include the Lake Shore? So one additional service? Would be nice to extend a NE Regional (no mentions of CTDOT re Hartford Line extension, another option)

And same for phase 2 and Albany-Boston, would it be two net new services? Might they run on anywhere?

2 round trips on the inland route which will likely happen first. 2 additional round trips Albany - Boston. Doesn't include the Boston section of the Lake Shore Limited. Including the Lake Shore this would be 5 round trips Springfield - Boston. 3 round trips Albany - Boston.

Ok so first will be (best guess) - extensions of two Regional services from Springfield to Boston, and return.

Second up will be two unique, new Albany-Boston round trips, which (+LSL) will equate to 5 tpd from Springfield to Boston.

I wonder if the Albany-Bostons could be a Berkshire Flyer - I can definitely see potential there but it's too niche right now. And Chatham reopening would be interesting too.