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

The undeerstanding why not completing double tracking is the Hartford station possible relocating platform(s) and tracks. That is due to the interstate highway relocation not being decided. Until that boondoggle is decided anything around finishin the 2 main tracks is in limbo .
That include the RR bridge over the Conn River which at present is one track..

cle wrote: ↑Tue Aug 30, 2022 10:22 amSeparately, I would hope for wires one day - but New Haven to Springfield (and NYP-Albany, FFS!) need doing first.

ElectricTraction is a huge proponent of electrification, but even I can't see the justification for Worcester to Albany. Worcester to Boston needs to be electrified for MBTA, SPG-NHV is debatable, it's right on the line. I'd say do it, run EMU service to SPG, and require a connection but offer much more frequent service with a DMU pair to Northampton. With improvements to the station facilities in Worcester, this transfer could take the people under CSX, eliminating the crossover maneuver.

I'd also like to see extensive freight electrification, including the Cross-Harbor Tunnel to Fresh Pond, Oak Point, and Cedar Hill, West Shore Line on CSX, Albany to Chicago, and points south and west like Jacksonville, Waycross, LA, Seattle, and more, but even then I can't see the value of electrification from Albany given the relatively low traffic levels, especially with CSX buying Pan Am, and DPU monsters likely doing block swap/drops from Selkirk all the way to Mattawamkeag ME.

For inland service, Amtrak dual-modes like the ALP-45DPs that can run on diesel or overhead wire would be ideal. They'd also be great for various other services shooting off of the NEC at various points into lower density diesel territory, but primarily running on AC electrification.

Railjunkie wrote: ↑Tue Aug 30, 2022 2:58 pmBasic 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.

There's been much debate on here about how the blue flag rules affect the switchover, as the New Haven did it in something like 5 minutes going from steam to electric or visa versa. I'm not well enough versed in the rules and safety issues to understand how quickly it could be done today.

west point wrote: ↑Sat Sep 10, 2022 1:42 pmThat is due to the interstate highway relocation not being decided. Until that boondoggle is decided anything around finishin the 2 main tracks is in limbo .
That include the RR bridge over the Conn River which at present is one track..

Hartford is due to our highway boondoggle. The Conn River Bridge has nothing to do with Hartford, it's 12 miles away. They could at least get that single track section at Union Station down to the bare minimum length so that delays are short when they occur.

Remember with the Upcoming siemans order, there will be trailers (with a powered truck, I think) which will provide power to the locomotives when they are in electric territory .

Ther are good suggestions here. Putting up wires on the west side of New York seems to be a no brainer. At least to joining MNRR. The low level swing bridge could be mitigated by a steep approaches to a fly over capable by electric traction.
Do not know when the ALC-42Es are to be delivered and in service but wire to the swing bridge seems easily called for as New York city might like the political visibility of reducing diesel emissions. Actually very little reductioon.

Now as speking going to ALX has much more practicl needs. Suspect that it might be considered at same time the 4 track Long Bridge project is complete. CAT is needed for as of now only one train at a time is allowed in each of the 1st street tunnel cores is allowed . That is because no ventilation shaft e mid tunnel. Mid tunnel shaft would be near some congressional building. CAT would allow high density signaling in the bores. The ocasional diesel LD train should not cause a problem where as now many times diesells are waiting for bores to be cleared of fumes are delayed.

As of New Haven SPG ?? Thaat relocating of the single track from the station to the Conn riveer seems to be beyond any date. 2040 ?????

west point wrote: ↑Fri Oct 07, 2022 11:30 pmTher are good suggestions here. Putting up wires on the west side of New York seems to be a no brainer. At least to joining MNRR. The low level swing bridge could be mitigated by a steep approaches to a fly over capable by electric traction.

I'm not sure what the flyover references, no flyover is needed, but Empire Connection and the Hudson Line should be electrified with 25kV/60 from NYP and Highbridge all the way to Albany! Using overhead wire with M-10 style cars to Highbridge would allow 3rd rail Harlem Line trains to access Yankees Stadium, and eliminate third rail interference for freight heading to Oak Point.

As of New Haven SPG ?? Thaat relocating of the single track from the station to the Conn riveer seems to be beyond any date. 2040 ?????

The section that cannot be double tracked due to the Union Station viaduct is literally 750' long. It goes double track north of Hartford again. The interlockings could be snugged up against each end of the station, and they'd have maybe 1200' of single track to deal with.

And so it begins.

https://www.mass.gov/news/massdot-amtra ... -worcester

Mass Flyer should be a DMU/HMU shuttle so that it could run more frequently, and connect with both New Haven-Springfield as well as inland route NEC trains.

Dual-dual locomotives that can run on AC electrification would be ideal for the inland route, so that they could run diesel between New Haven and Boston, and eventually all but Springfield to Worcester should be electrified.

Aren't these likely to be extensions of two current DC/NYC - Springfield Amtraks?

Isn't another Boston-Pittsfield/Albany frequency coming too? per that other thread.

cle wrote: ↑Tue Dec 06, 2022 11:28 am Aren't these likely to be extensions of two current DC/NYC - Springfield Amtraks?

Isn't another Boston-Pittsfield/Albany frequency coming too? per that other thread.

This is the first step bringing service from Boston to Springfield which will be in the form of inland service - exactly what yet is unsure. The improvements east of Springfield are also necessary for Albany - Boston so this has to happen no matter what.

https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/ ... 741656.php

...
The total project cost is estimated to be $135 million. The Massachusetts DOT plans to contribute more than $18 million and Amtrak $9 million toward the project if the grant is received. The new construction will allow for two daily round-trip connections between Boston, Worcester and Springfield.

Connecticut riders could access the new connection by taking the Hartford line north to Springfield. Hartford riders who now try to reach Boston take a commercial bus or car, Bronin said.
....

I recently moved to the Hartford area and have been needing to go to Boston a few times over the last few months.

Wild that to get from Hartford to Boston, Amtrak shows a trip plan of taking the train to New Haven and then up to Boston.

Just baffles me that there is no direct train from Hartford to Boston

In this case, I-84 is more direct than rail, a diagonal route, whereas the rail line heads north to SPG and then east
on the B&A/CSX main line.

Greyhound and Peter Pan run direct service via I-84/90.

R36 Combine Coach wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 4:10 am In this case, I-84 is more direct than rail, a diagonal route, whereas the rail line heads north to SPG and then east
on the B&A/CSX main line.

Greyhound and Peter Pan run direct service via I-84/90.

Maybe so but the presence of Greyhound/Peter Pan service does not mean no one would use rail. It's not the most direct rail but it still makes sense to have Hartford connected into this corridor.

Amtrak did offer Hartford to Boston services but stopped when Boston-New Haven was electrified.

IIRC Congress also changed the rules for Amtrak, requiring state support for shorter-distance services about the same time, and Mass didn't pony up to continue the Inland Route. At least once I rode that way returning from business down the Corridor, but the sun set somewhere around Hartford...