Montreal - Portland passenger service, past and future

Come on guys - Portland to Montreal as a viable service? Early April Fools?

newpylong wrote:Come on guys - Portland to Montreal as a viable service? Early April Fools?

"Viable" is probably not the right word.

However, I think it is more "viable" than Boston - Montreal which as others have mentioned has all kinds of transportation links that work quite well. Portland on the other hand does not, and there is probably going to be a preclearance facility built in Montreal which means that Portland - Montreal by train will proabably be more "viable" than it has been in the past.

I think it would be appropriate to define "viable" here!

gokeefe wrote:

newpylong wrote:Come on guys - Portland to Montreal as a viable service? Early April Fools?

"Viable" is probably not the right word.

However, I think it is more "viable" than Boston - Montreal which as others have mentioned has all kinds of transportation links that work quite well. Portland on the other hand does not, and there is probably going to be a preclearance facility built in Montreal which means that Portland - Montreal by train will proabably be more "viable" than it has been in the past.

I think there's another factor you're missing, though, and that's the population density between the two endpoints and the possibility for ridership from and between intermediate stations.

As I see it, the most likely routing a Boston-Montreal service would take today is Boston-Springfield-Northampton-White River Jct.-St. Albans-Montreal. Worcester, with a population of 181k, is almost 3x the size of Portland; Springfield, at 153k, is more than 2x Portland's 66k. You then add in a ridership base in the college towns of the Connecticut River valley, and the potential for seasonal service to the VT ski resorts, and you have a decent potential ridership base. The old Grand Trunk route to Montreal, by contrast, traverses some pretty darn remote country. What's the biggest intermediate city between the two- Berlin, NH?

Cowford wrote:I think it would be appropriate to define "viable" here!

Whatever the exact word we are using, what I'm postulating is that however unlikely or outlandish the chances are of service to Montreal from either Boston or Portland, Portland has a better chance (however small that additional increment might be) than Boston of getting service due to the general difficulty of travel to Montreal from Portland.

Having a customs preclearance facility also will, in my mind, add an additional incremental chance because the train time from Montreal to Portland would almost without a doubt be time competitive with driving. Regardless I am only referencing really really long odds that ultimately remain really really long odds.

Interestingly enough it seems as though the Vermonter getting extended to Montreal (one the preclearance facility is constructed) is something of a fait accompli, which I find interesting. It isn't even spoken of in tentative terms anymore. I think the public in Maine will notice this change once it happens but it could be years or even decades after that before things change for Maine.

Portland has a better chance (however small that additional increment might be) than Boston of getting service due to the general difficulty of travel to Montreal from Portland.

But the point that several of us have been making is: how many people want to make that trip, by some means other than private automobile? Is the number large enough to justify the expenditure of limited taxpayer funds?

As I have written in the past, I can at least imagine the possibility of a restoration of Boston-Montreal passenger service via the Connecticut River Line and the former Central Vermont Railway. It would be slow as compared with driving, but at least there is a reasonable chance for on-line business. As Mr. Ridgefielder notes, most of those residing along the Grand Trunk/StL&A route are trees, and unlike the CSX-NEC route via Palmer the StL&A would need carloads of money to be brought up to reasonable passenger train speeds (which I define as the FRA's 59mph limit for unsignaled track).

TomNelligan wrote:

Portland has a better chance (however small that additional increment might be) than Boston of getting service due to the general difficulty of travel to Montreal from Portland.

But the point that several of us have been making is: how many people want to make that trip, by some means other than private automobile? Is the number large enough to justify the expenditure of limited taxpayer funds?

There are two strong primary markets, seasonal travel by Canadians from Quebec in the summer to Old Orchard Beach and seasonal travel by Canadians in the winter to Sunday River (Bethel, ME, on the SLR). There are also strong secondary travel markets for Canadians coming from Quebec in the fall for the foliage season.

Canadians also come to visit Maine for the same reasons as other people do, but OOB and Bethel are two very big attractions. Currently their only means to get to Maine is a long drive.

OOB is a Canadian destination, no doubt. Two months out of the year. I've not seen any indication that Sunday River is heavily patronized by Canadians, it's largely a Boston crowd.

A look at Ethan Allen service NYC-Rutland would give an indication of ski-related viability. The service has big points in its favor over any Sunday River service, right? After all, NYC residents are much less likely to have a car; the transit time is not too bad vs. driving (5.5 hrs vs. 5 hr drive); the train also serves Albany, NY (100 miles from Killington with a metro population over 800,000); Killington is a "NYC" mountain (and is twice as large as Sunday River in skier-days); finally, the resort has a convenient shuttle bus connection. (Similar to what Sunday River would require.) So what was the ridership to/from Rutland in FY 2011?

15,848 one-way passenger-trips.

So the only justification is so Canadians can get to OOB (3 months a year) and Sunday River (5 months a year)? I can personally tell you (I used to have a Seasons Pass) there arent many Canadians at all that go to SR, they mostly go up to Tremblant.

That said, the deciding factor isn't "how hard" it is to get to Montreal from Portland and vice versa. It has to do with how many possible riders there are. There are more people within 5 blocks of my office here in Boston than live in all of Portland. That is why if Montreal service ever returns (and I don't see it besides from NYC) it will be from Boston and not Portland.

newpylong wrote:So the only justification is so Canadians can get to OOB (3 months a year) and Sunday River (5 months a year)? I can personally tell you (I used to have a Seasons Pass) there arent many Canadians at all that go to SR, they mostly go up to Tremblant.

Fair enough, thanks for the clarification. I was under the impression that some did go, perhaps even occasionally in groups by bus.

At this point I suppose the only realistic scenario would be a return of seasonal service to/from OOB. Perhaps this might be feasible if/when Amtrak ends up with a reserve pool of coach cars in the next few years.

newpylong wrote:That said, the deciding factor isn't "how hard" it is to get to Montreal from Portland and vice versa. It has to do with how many possible riders there are. There are more people within 5 blocks of my office here in Boston than live in all of Portland. That is why if Montreal service ever returns (and I don't see it besides from NYC) it will be from Boston and not Portland.

Since this is mentioned....could you (or anyone else who might know) please clarify whether or not there are capacity issues on the line between Boston and Springfield?

Since this is mentioned....could you (or anyone else who might know) please clarify whether or not there are capacity issues on the line between Boston and Springfield?

Yes, there are. Worcester-Springfield is largely single track thanks to Conrail, which ripped up most of the second track in the mid-1980s. CSX has historically not been receptive to additional passenger trains on what is still a busy freight route, however my guess is that they could be persuaded to run at least one more passenger train to/from Boston once the Vermonter is rerouted via Greenfield.

East of Worcester the line is all double track, state-owned, and supports MBTA commuter service, and CSX is in the process of shutting down its freight terminal in Boston and eliminating all but one trip east of Framingham. Capacity for added passenger trains would be less of an issue there since CSX no longer controls it.

Thanks!

Does anyone here think that the construction of the preclearance facility might possibly give a green light to the reinstitution of The Atlantic Limited between Montreal and Halifax? The several times I rode it in the '80s and '90s, it was nearly full, and there are many of us in Maine and the Maritimes who sorely miss it.

Unfortunately VIA is further retrenching its long distance services these days by reducing frequency, including cutting the Ocean from six days a week to just three in the offseason. So I wouldn't hold my breath for a restoration of the Atlantic or any other expansions of Canada's existing minimal LD network. And yes, it's certainly a far cry from the VIA of the 1980s.

trainsinmaine wrote:Does anyone here think that the construction of the preclearance facility might possibly give a green light to the reinstitution of The Atlantic Limited between Montreal and Halifax? The several times I rode it in the '80s and '90s, it was nearly full, and there are many of us in Maine and the Maritimes who sorely miss it.

Setting aside the very practical and real reasons why this won't happen as things stand right now. If it were restored it would not have to be as a "sealed" train through Maine. Yes, the masses could travel by train to Jackman once again.