Railroad Forums 

  • Proposal for additional service on Springfield Line

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
It is currently Fri May 03, 2024 12:56 am

Proposal for additional service on Springfield Line

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

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

New Rochelle Junction

  by Noel Weaver
 
In the 1957 timetable, the speed to/from the "branch" at New Rochelle
Junction was 25 MPH. By the time of the last New Haven timetable in 1968
the speed had been reduced to 20 MPH. It was further reduced under
Penn-Central. I think it was as low as 10 MPH at one time.
Noel Weaver

  by mattfels
 
DutchRailnut wrote:Wow hold the horsies
An excellent way to describe what happens to Acelas at CP216.
the New Rochelle interlocking has been 15 mph since it was constructed in New Haven Days, and nobody balked.
This amazing assertion doesn't paint a very flattering portrait of either the New Haven Railroad or its passengers.
DutchRailnut wrote:Matt get your facts straight for a change.
Question a few baseless assumptions, and the response is churlish personal insult. Why do they go so personal and so negative so fast?

  by DutchRailnut
 
Basicaly Matt cause you know sh** from Shinola on New Haven line and are a legend in your own mind.
Noel it may have been 25 in late New Haven days but was Cabsignal active ?? what code did you get going onto Hellgate line. with todays Cabsignal ATC it would be Restricting (15mph) or Medium(30) and MNCR won't give some Acela Jockey a Medium, one already had problems keeping to speeds not to long ago.

  by hsr_fan
 
Nasadowsk wrote:Push pull != MU.
True, but I don't see how that's a factor in rated speed, at least when the cars are being pulled. I could see a 100 mph restriction for push mode, but when being pulled, why would they be rated for any less than an Amfleet coach?

Etc

  by Noel Weaver
 
Several points here:
The speed at New Rochelle Junction was cut from 25 MPH to 20 MPH in the
New Haven Railroad days in the fall timetable of 1962.
This was not cab signal territory in the New Haven days, there was no
official cab signal territory west of New Haven except going to Penn.
Station where the cab signals picked up at about "Bowery Bay". Former
New Haven Railroad engines in the New Haven days were not equipped
with speed control.
I still maintain my position that the speed on the New Haven Railroad at
this location was higher than it has ever been since. It would seem to
me that the best solution at least in the short term would be to do what-
ever is necessary to bring the speed from the Amtrak Line to Metro-North
at CP-216 up to what is was under the New Haven, namely 25 MPH. I'll
bet it would not take a fortune nor an act of congress to do that. I doubt if
a flyover would really be practical in the available space and with the
constraints that exist in this area. Up-grading to 25 MPH and giving the
signals in time to avoid a major slow down for Amtrak would be a big help
to the passengers who pay to ride Amtrak through this area.
The New Haven may have paid a premium for a late Merchants Limited but
it was never done in my time and I do not have anything that shows that
it ever actually was. It was a high class train but I do not have anything
that shows such a premium service that a refund was paid for a late train.
New Haven Railroad service was of a good class up until about the mid
1950's when the arrival of McGinnis along with a few other things made
things go downhill. I personally think McGinnis/Alpert were responsible for
most of the downhill ride.
For the most part, in the later days of the New Haven Railroad the service
offered was not as good as what Amtrak offers today between New York
and Boston. I hope to have some figures together for the New Haven
Railroad sight on the NHRHTA forum giving comparisons before too long.
Noel Weaver

  by CSX Conductor
 
nobody answered a question posted, which was "what does A.C.S.E.S. stand for?"

Advanced Civilian Speed Enforcement System


also, the track speeds displayed on the ACSES radio screen should not be relied upon......might be some errors occasionally.....still have to know speeds by memory.

Merchants Limited

  by Noel Weaver
 
I have a lot of timetables form the New Haven Railroad going back into the
1920's and I do not recall seeing in any of them that a refund would be
offered if the train was 2 minutes late.
No one said in the previous link that a refund would be made if the train
was late.
The timetable of 1957 (#3) showed the following trains timed in one
half minute intervals at non stop points:
6 New Rochelle Jct., Port Chester and Stamford
24 New Rochelle Jct., Port Chester and Stamford
360 New Rochelle Jct., Port Chester and Stamford
26 New Rochelle Jct., Port Chester, Stamford and SS-44
The same timetable did not show any westbound trains timed in one half
minute intervals.
The "Comet" was timed at various points between Boston and Providence
in seconds as well as minutes.
I think we all have to remember the New Haven Railroad for just what it
was. Those of us who have been around long enough to remember what
working for it was like do remember. The railroad was basically a good
operation but the equipment was not in good shape and trouble was not
infrequent. We ran a lot of trains but in most cases, not as many trains
as are operated by Amtrak and Metro-North at least between New York
and New Haven. In those days, part of the stuff a fireman would carry
were household tools, popsickle sticks, rubber bands, paper clips, a
decent magnet and probably other stuff that I do not recall right at the
moment. We did all that we could do to keep the engine running and a
balky steam generator puting out steam to keep the cars comfortable in
cold weather. Sometimes we succeeded and sometimes we did not but
for the most of us, we always tried. Believe me, the days of getting dirty
did not end with steam engines and I never worked on steam engines.
Noel Weaver

  by hsr_fan
 
CSX Conductor wrote:nobody answered a question posted, which was "what does A.C.S.E.S. stand for?"

Advanced Civilian Speed Enforcement System
Civil, actually, although it is used by civilians! :wink:

  by Otto Vondrak
 
Are we still talking about the proposal for increased service to Hartford and Springfield? Let's swing it back to that topic, please.

-otto-

  by mattfels
 
Here's another question that still needs answering: "Why do they go so personal and so negative so fast?"
When I posed this question, DutchRailnut wrote:Basicaly Matt cause you know sh** from Shinola on New Haven line and are a legend in your own mind.
That's a reason? And what's with those asterisks?
And when I wrote:This amazing assertion doesn't paint a very flattering portrait of either the New Haven Railroad or its passengers.
David Telesha wrote:What's that supposed to mean?
and without waiting for the answer, David Telesha wrote:Do the 1955 Floods, Patrick B. Mc Ginnis, and Interstate 95 mean anything to you? If you would like to bash the New Haven Railroad for no reason, I would ask you to do that on a New Haven Railroad forum - we would like to know the reasons for your biased and uncalled for bashing of this 1st Class Railroad.
Biased? Bashing? New Haven? YOUR? No. Here's the bash, such as it is:
DutchRailnut wrote:[T]he New Rochelle interlocking has been 15 mph since it was constructed in New Haven Days, and nobody balked.
NOBODY? I say that's an amazing assertion. if true. Is it?

  by DutchRailnut
 
Otto Vondrak wrote:Are we still talking about the proposal for increased service to Hartford and Springfield? Let's swing it back to that topic, please.

-otto-

  by mattfels
 
It's always good to see some acknowledgement, however belated, that personal attack is off topic.

Re: Amtrak

  by JayMan
 
David Telesha wrote:Two more questions..

If the trains run at 30-minute intervals and the proposal says four train sets, are there enough passing tracks? Won't there be Northbound service in the morning too? Or will the four all be Southbound which means they wouldn't need extra tracks?

Can the station in Springfield handle the extra traffic - both on the rails and on two legs?

Oh yes, it is just something under consideration by the state, but if it were to happen, if it were to be PROPERLY ADVERTISED, it might lead to packed trains. 30 second TV spots, signs along I-91 (Like SLE does), and maybe even in the newspaper (?).
If they want this to work it has to go in both directions in peak hours and should be timed to meet Metro-North trains. I'm more than willing to bet that there will be a lot of traffic from Hartford heading to points south on the NHL and NYC. (It would sure be useful for me to give another alternative to get to NY besides picking up the train at Old Saybrook.) And yes, it should indeed be properly advertised. (Can you believe there's residents in Waterbury that don't know about the Waterbury branch?)

They aren't presently enough passing sidings to allow bi-directional service, according to the report. It sums up some alternatives, of which the last, which calls for peak hour only bi-directional service to/from Springfield with Amtrak scheldules adjusted to allow improved headways and better connections with Metro-North being the most logical, and the one they recommend.

http://www.nhhsrail.com/alts_report_chap6.pdf

Now, the questions are will we get everyone to go along with it:

1. Will CDOT pickup the plan?
2. Will CT commit the $$$ (trainsets, trackwork, station rehab, operating costs)
3 Will Amtrak allow operation on their line?
4. Will Amtrak accept contact to operate this like they do with SLE?
5. Will the necessary track/platform work at New Haven (add another platform for State St Statioion, track reconfiguration) get done?
6. Will Amtrak allow their scheldules to be fiddled with?

I'd like to know where the equipment is going to come from myself. They could use the SLE locos and coaches, the trouble with that is that that would involve replacing the SLE trains (presumably with M-8s, long way off) and will not be quite enough for (they'll still need 2 loco, I believe).
Last edited by JayMan on Tue Jul 20, 2004 4:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.

  by ansontripp
 
If the trains run at 30-minute intervals and the proposal says four train sets, are there enough passing tracks? Won't there be Northbound service in the morning too? Or will the four all be Southbound which means they wouldn't need extra tracks?
On page 2 of a recent publication, a schedule for the proposed service can be found. In short, the service in the AM peak will be dominantly Southbound, and the report indicates that no additional double-tracking is necessary to support this service.
Can the station in Springfield handle the extra traffic - both on the rails and on two legs?
Springfield Union station is currently undergoing a substantial rennovation that includes reinstalling elevators and stairs so that direct access to eight tracks is available. As for linking the station to the rest of the world, the rennovation includes a new parking garage, and will also serve as the new Peter Pan/PVTA Bus Terminal for Springfield. The PVTA still claims a Fall 2006 completion date, but this information hasn't been updated in at least six months, so we'll see.

Etc

  by Noel Weaver
 
Sounds to me like the throttle is in the eighth notch and the wheels are
just spinning away, they will eventually burn a hole right through the rails.
I am not sure that this topic needs much more.
There has been too much sniping on here and too many personal attacks.
Maybe this thread should just be put out of its misery.
Noel Weaver
 Return to “Amtrak”
 - All times are UTC-05:00 -