Railroad Forums 

  • AMTRAK NEC: Springfield Shuttle/Regional/Valley Flyer/Inland Routing

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1605392  by west point
 
Support BOS inlad Springfield to NYP and BOS - Allbany. To prevet too much additional track additions BOS -Springfield why not combine trains BOS <> Springfield , then split part to Albany and part to New Haven / NYP? That would mean 6 cars to ALB and 6 to NYP. Then if loads get too much then individual trains each way.
 #1605502  by STrRedWolf
 
Greg Moore wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 2:03 pm Problem with that is adding something like a 15 minute brake check in both directions. Not sure that's really worth it for such short trips.
Short as in below an hour long? Because MARC does brake checks every time the train is turned for a 1 hour run Baltimore/DC, and they schedule 20-30 minutes of buffer to get passengers off and back on again. Sometimes they will brake test with passengers on.
 #1605567  by Greg Moore
 
If I understand what you're saying, they do the brake test at the END of the trip, not in the middle of the trip. Splitting a train at Springfield on trains continuing (or arriving from) New Haven (and points south) and Albany ADDS time to those trips. That's different from adding it at the end (or start) of a trip which simply postpones your start time.
 #1605571  by RandallW
 
At no point does MARC split trains, so all of MARC's brake tests are at the start of a trip. A more informative example would be knowing when brake tests are performed on Lake Shore Limited at Albany. Are they performed only on the section that gets new power east bound, or on the combined sections westbound and both separated sections eastbound? If the later, adding/removing sections en route only slows the journey.
 #1605576  by Allouette
 
Amtrak normally only does en route switching at three locations (plus New Haven and Washington, where some trains still change between diesel and electric). Those are San Antonio, Spokane and Albany/Rennsalaer. Cars are sometimes added or removed at St Paul and Denver.
In all cases a full brake test is required. All of the named locations have car department folks on hand to do the cable and air connections.
 #1605611  by electricron
 
BandA wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 1:17 am This is an area where technology improvements could make it easier and speed up coupling/uncoupling and brake tests.
Why spend the money on new technology when at these locations where switching occurs the train is also being refueled? It really does not matter how quickly you can couple and uncouple the train cars and locomotives when they are also pumping diesel into the locomotives' tanks.
In Denver Amtrak usually washes the windows on the sightseer lounge car at a minimum while the wb us being refueled. There is a valid reason why Amtrak schedules 40 minutes for refuel breaks.

Which reminds me of another Amtrak recent website development. the new internet based train schedules that do not show track miles or scheduling layovers on pdfs anymore. I much prefer the pdf train schedules for information obtainable.
 #1605672  by RandallW
 
Since railroad reconstruction is needed for the planned frequencies between Springfield and Boston anyway, they could also just complete the double tracking and then run a greater frequency Springfield to Boston.

Amtrak used to do significantly more switching en route than it does now, and it is my impression that is also true in Europe.
 #1605675  by QB 52.32
 
When you look at CSX's watershed accepted conditions made with Amtrak as part of their Pan Am purchase; where the political power is located and where and how it is growing, leading to a $2-3 billion and 2-hour Springfield-Boston ride commitment; and, where demand is located and how Amtrak is targeted to grow, seems pretty clear the "steak-and-potatoes" of the East-West Passenger Rail project will be Springfield & east fueled to a big degree by demand generated in an Northeast Corridor Inland Route. I would also agree with the longer-term possibility of adding service of one type or another serving the market between Worcester & Palmer in some way. Of course, the devil will be in the details as to how this plays out over time, including service scheduling related to demand as well as integration of higher-speed passenger service with CSX's premium intermodal service above-and-beyond and as well as other freight operations.
 #1605690  by cle
 
Agree that double tracking (and line speed improvements) between Springfield and Boston is the core of this, as would benefit today's LS as well as the Inland and Albany additions mentioned.

Separately, I would hope for wires one day - but New Haven to Springfield (and NYP-Albany, FFS!) need doing first.
 #1605698  by electricron
 
QB 52.32 wrote: Tue Aug 30, 2022 7:02 am When you look at CSX's watershed accepted conditions made with Amtrak as part of their Pan Am purchase; where the political power is located and where and how it is growing, leading to a $2-3 billion and 2-hour Springfield-Boston ride commitment; and, where demand is located and how Amtrak is targeted to grow, seems pretty clear the "steak-and-potatoes" of the East-West Passenger Rail project will be Springfield & east fueled to a big degree by demand generated in an Northeast Corridor Inland Route.
Around 90 highway miles between Springfield and Boston, therefore the average speeds of the trains will be at least 45 mph. Since there will be stations in-between, the average speed will be higher. Never-the-less, this inland route will not be competitive for Acela trains with so low track speeds. It would be acceptable for regional trains being pull or pushed by ALC-42 locomotives.
Is a $2 Billion plus price tag for slow trains worth it?
If they could travel that 90 miles in one hour vs two, trains averaging 150 mph, the price tag would probably eclipse that $2 Billion by at least 10 times. Would a $20 Billion price tag for faster trains be worth it?
 #1605714  by Arborwayfan
 
electricron wrote:Is a $2 Billion plus price tag for slow trains worth it?
I don't see it as whether a certain speed is worth a certain amount of money. I see it as whether a certain passenger volume over the life of the things that money pays for is worth the money. Speed is part of what will determine the number of passengers, but that also depends on who wants to ride from where to where, how many cars they own, what the traffic is like, how much it costs to park at their destination.... There's plenty of destinations within a five-minute walk of South Station, Back Bay (and potentially Landsdowne St.), all places where your parking spot or garage might be further from your destination than the train station and cost a lot. Trains would attract pax if total trip time was about as fast as, and less stressful than, driving with the typical traffic of the relevant time of day.

Then again, if Hartford-Boston and Worcester-NY are markets for train travel that Amtrak doesn't really serve now. Each one is possible with a change, maybe including a commuter train, but neither one is really part of anyone's marketing plan on on anyone's list of reasonable trips. Put a few trains a day over the Inland Route and those become reasonable trips. I wouldn't imagine the Inland Route competing with the NEC for people travelling between Boston and stations west of New Haven
 #1605725  by Railjunkie
 
RandallW wrote: Sun Aug 28, 2022 12:50 pm At no point does MARC split trains, so all of MARC's brake tests are at the start of a trip. A more informative example would be knowing when brake tests are performed on Lake Shore Limited at Albany. Are they performed only on the section that gets new power east bound, or on the combined sections westbound and both separated sections eastbound? If the later, adding/removing sections en route only slows the journey.
Basic rule of thumb any time you turn an angle cock on a brake pipe you need to do a brake test. Whether that be adding or subtracting coaches, engines or any other type of rolling stock. If you are going to double up a train you also need to test the back up hose.
  • 1
  • 147
  • 148
  • 149
  • 150
  • 151
  • 155