Greetings from Vermont! Some answers and some queries here.
The Vermont legislature meets about half the year (Jan-June) - our representatives are considered part time and paid accordingly.
The legislature has approved the purchase of the dmu's. Last I heard it was waiting on expected approval by the state attorney general and finance person. It's not in the budget because purchase is funded with a federal loan.
Yes, there are estimates of how much ridership a second frequency will bring - I think they are expecting a jump of 35% - in other words, overall the deal is a net improvement in service. However it should be noted that this is just a guess dressed up in fancy language. I'd expect even more than this. The new frequency will be operating at peak times (as measured by traffic on I-91), rather than the middle of the day. The new frequency will allow day trips to New York and connections to Florida service (which used to be a very significant source of ridership) and the Lake Shore Limited (which is not likely to be a significant source of ridership, but everybody counts).
I was told that Vermont wanted the wrap-around windows but Amtrak wanted a standard design across it's system. It's a trade-off and luggage racks are pretty important for intercity travel. Still the windows will be twice the size of the current amfleet I slits.
The picture that appears to be at Princeton station is almost certainly a photoshop job. The photo in trains is very similar, but a Vermont paint job has been applied and grass and autumn foliage substituted.
Two people have said that Florida has not been having a good experience with their CRC dmu's. If you can, will you be more specific? Naturally, that kind of statement sets off alarm bells here - it inspires doubt which is a problem for those of us trying to make the service a success. If it's true, then we need to know and follow up on it. But rumors are a fact of railroad life, as are opinions about the equipment, so it's difficult to put too much stock in vague suppositions. Unfortunately, the public doesn't know that and those rumors can do harm.
I have read on-line (I think it was on the site referenced above) that there has been issues with the dmu's being underpowered for a 2% grade on a new bridge. They were expected to haul two trailer cars, but had trouble with one and are being reconfigured with two powered units and a trailer. Naturally, that will effect their economics (I suppose that would make them only twice as efficient as locomotive hauled trains instead of the promised four times as efficient). We've got a still grade too in Vermont, but our equipment will be single level, presumably not as heavy, and will also only pull one trailer.
That issue does not reflect on their reliability.
One factor that eases my mind considerably is that Colorado Railcar will be responsible for the maintainence of the cars once they arrive in Vermont. It's in their interests to make them work and they'll have the responsibility to do that. That alignment is a good thing.
And lastly, yes we do have folks who want to succeed. They are serious about it too. As you know, we are not the only state about which that could be said. Remember Vermont was independent before, not part of the confederation in the revolution. We have a long "I'm a Vermonta, I do what I wanta" tradition. We are also probably the only state where better than half the rail lines are state owned (good thing or they wouldn't be there at all). We have also contemplating succeeding from Amtrak and getting a private operator (perhaps one of the freight roads) to run the services. That didn't happen, in large part because of the possibility of the dmu to lower costs.
Christopher
(writing from the Bellows Falls train station)
.
