Railroad Forums 

  • Montreal - Portland passenger service, past and future

  • Pertaining to all railroading subjects, past and present, in New England
Pertaining to all railroading subjects, past and present, in New England

Moderators: MEC407, NHN503

 #733035  by gokeefe
 
Mr. Nelligan,

You are right in many ways Portland - Montreal service is a really questionable proposition. There are several factors present now, which 40 years ago did not exist, to encourage improved ridership on this line. For some time now the Canadian dollar has been at rough parity or stronger than the American dollar. The change in the traditional trading band fluctuations of the two currencies has had an effect on the travel of Canadians to Maine, even going back now for almost 20 years. The cost of driving now is far more than it used to be making it a less attractive option for travel in either direction. The other major factor that has changed is the demographic shift in the population, which on average is much older than it used to be and less tolerant of long, difficult drives.

The question of the customs arrangement is obviously a serious one. I don't think however it is impossible to overcome. Whether or not it would damage the ability of this train to compete on timekeeping with driving would depend on weather conditions. I agree with you that in the summer this train would have ongoing difficulty making better time than driving, unless it is precleared.

On the matter of upgrading the former Grand Trunk, happily it is one of the best maintained private railroads in Maine. The amount of work that would need to be done to upgrade this line is far less than what had to be done to the GRS/PAR main line to Plaistow when the Downeaster service began. SLR has already laid CWR on several sections of their line, and if you have ever seen the line in person you'll notice the large quantities of clean ballast and the well maintained rails and grade crossing signals. I believe the low need for capital investment is one of the most attractive pieces of the entire proposition to Maine. As far as equipment goes Amtrak always seems to find something for Maine, probably because our service arrangements are financially very attractive to them, with the continued work being done now to bring more Amfleets back into service I would imagine they'll be able to scrounge up at least a few cars for us.

The funding is a more problematic question. I haven't heard any models proposed for how this service would be funded. However, I do believe that the old lessons and assumptions of the post-war era no longer apply as they did in 1968 when the GT finally abandoned even seasonal service to Portland. I don't think that just becaue things are 'different' answers the money question in of itself I do think it is no longer a certainty that the service would lose money hand over fist. I just keep reminding myself that the Downeaster was never a sure thing. There were many people who doubted whether or not this service could succeed against modern and very well maintained interstate highways. Contrary to the expectations of some it has done quite well and in the meantime established it self as one of the premier, if not the premier, corridor service in the United states. This train will have no such competition from roads. It will start the game at about parity against the roads and if it survives for more than five years will probably begin to make steady progress on this too.
 #733532  by MikeVT
 
Some of the abondoned (but still in place) track would make a nice speeder or rail bike run. The line from St Johnsbury to Whitefield would be really nice depending on time of the year. Wish they would do somethign with it, even pull the rails and open to bikes and sleds. At least then it would be getting some use.
 #733537  by Dick H
 
One of the reasons for ending the Montrealer was the excessive charges made
by Canadian National to operate in Canada and high terminal and service charges
in Montreal. When the Vermonter was established, the state of Vermont could
not justify subsidizing the Canadian National charges. If Maine was subsidizing
this train, it would be difficult for Maine as well to pay high CN costs.

CN charges are also an issue with the current Adirondack operation. In fact,
earlier this year, Amtrak ran a test train from Rouses Point to the former
Winsor Station in Montreal, as costs on CP rail would be less. However, the
facilities at Winsor Station are far below those at Central Station and the
operation of the Adirondack would require a long move west to a wye to
turn the train for the return trip the next day. NY state does subsidize the
Adirondack and was even threatening to cut the subsidy in half. Amtrak
said that would mean the end of the Adirondack. At the moment, the train
appears safe for the remainder of the fiscal year.

Dick
 #733556  by gokeefe
 
I read at length about the Adirondack problems in the threads that were discussing it.

Is Windsor Station accessible when approaching Montreal from the East, as I assume a Montreal - Portland train would do? If there were more than one Amtrak train accessing service at this train station does anyone think there might be impetus for improvements by the Canadians?
 #733626  by Cowford
 
You would be surprised how well that level of service would meet demand!
But what is the demand? There are neither direct flights nor bus services between Portland and Montreal - a strong indicator that whatever demand IS out there doesn't warrant either service. It's safe to say any potential demand would be overwhelmingly tourism-oriented (read seasonal between June and September). Auto takes about 5.5 hrs and can be done primarily via interstate highway (95 to 89, connected via Rt 101) so it's an easy drive, costing about $100 (on a variable cost basis) per vehicle round trip. This service would be a money pit.
Last edited by Cowford on Tue Nov 03, 2009 7:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
 #733649  by SLR 393
 
gokeefe wrote:I read at length about the Adirondack problems in the threads that were discussing it.

Is Windsor Station accessible when approaching Montreal from the East, as I assume a Montreal - Portland train would do? If there were more than one Amtrak train accessing service at this train station does anyone think there might be impetus for improvements by the Canadians?
Windsor Station no longer has tracks - they built the Bell Centre on the platform location - there is a courtyard between Bell Centre and the old Station building, some of the old platform structures were left up and you can still get a sense of the place. The tracks stop on the other side of the Bell Centre, and it is now called Gare Lucien D'Allier. I think there are 6 tracks - not much in the way of services, its just a place for commuters to get on and off. Tickets are sold in one of the Bell lobbies with a glass wall facingthe tracks.

To get into Windsor from the CP, no problem, there are wyes where the tracks come up from Delson and go into St. Luc Yard, they pass over the CN mainline. Getting from CN to CP to the Westmount Sub into Lucien D'Allier might be a little trickier, although a train running into Montreal on CN can go into Taschereau Yard and there are crossovers into St. Luc yard. Check out the Canadian Railfan forum - thread on montreal railfaning - for some really nice photos of the area including D'Allier.
 #733726  by Ridgefielder
 
Cowford wrote:
You would be surprised how well that level of service would meet demand!
But what is the demand? There are neither direct flights nor bus services between Portland and Montreal - a strong indicator that whatever demand IS out there doesn't warrant either service. It's safe to say any potential demand would be overwhelmingly tourism-oriented (read seasonal between June and September). Auto takes about 5.5 hrs and can be done primarily via interstate highway (95 to 89, connected via Rt 101) so it's an easy drive, costing about $100 (on a variable cost basis) per vehicle round trip. This service would be a money pit.
I think he was referring to the tongue-in-cheek idea of providing freight and passenger service over the Mountain Division with speeders...
 #733889  by gokeefe
 
Ridgefielder wrote:
Cowford wrote:
You would be surprised how well that level of service would meet demand!
But what is the demand? There are neither direct flights nor bus services between Portland and Montreal - a strong indicator that whatever demand IS out there doesn't warrant either service. It's safe to say any potential demand would be overwhelmingly tourism-oriented (read seasonal between June and September). Auto takes about 5.5 hrs and can be done primarily via interstate highway (95 to 89, connected via Rt 101) so it's an easy drive, costing about $100 (on a variable cost basis) per vehicle round trip. This service would be a money pit.
I think he was referring to the tongue-in-cheek idea of providing freight and passenger service over the Mountain Division with speeders...
15-LOVE Ridgefielder, Mr. Ridgefielder to serve please!

Draft Proposal for New Signature: gokeefe - Official Speeder advocate of the Mountain Division!
 #733892  by gokeefe
 
Cowford, I think you've pretty much got it right vis a vis demand for service, at least initially, however as noted before the competitive dynamics between this route and other transportation modes are significantly in favor of rail. I would further add that the fact that ground transportation to Montreal does not exist at present is not in my mind a good indicator of a lack of demand for service. As a general rule there aren't any common carriers other than airlines that operate service across the border between Maine and Canada.

Is this an 'indicator' of demand or simply a decision by the airlines that the routes wouldn't generate 'sufficient' revenue to cover the cost prohibitive fares involved, given the relatively low per capita income of Maine. Travel by train to Canada has as you say 'potential'. I think it has far more 'potential' than we are giving it credit for, again for the reasons stated above.

I do think that the 'potential' demand is worthy of significant study prior to the expenditure of tax payer dollars on new construction. I also think that there are situations where sometimes demand for travel is more likely to occur if the route and modes of travel are easier, i.e. to make this route a 'path of less resistance'. Therefore, what I'm postulating is that current travel between Montreal and Portland, or Southern, Western, and Central Maine in general does not well represent 'potential' travel if the service is created. As has often been shown in the airline market through the Southwest effect, access to low-cost and high frequency service of good quality creates 'new' demand where previously less was believed to exist.
 #735760  by Cowford
 
GO'K - I stand corrected in my reference to your first statement on demand...

I agree with you that, as additional and viable, i.e., price- and service-competitive transportation options are added between two points, some incremental demand is generated, and Southwest is a good example of that, at least for long-haul lanes. I suppose we'll have to disagree on what that incremental amount would likely be in this case. Ok, I'm always up for having fun speculating: let's say the train is only convenient to Mainers living in the greater Portland area up to as far as, say, Augusta... call it an area of 600,000 population. I'd guess that fewer than 5% of Mainers have ever been to Montreal. However, let's say that with new rail service, 10% of Mainers in the area have their curiosity piqued about taking a trip. And they love it so much that they go back once every five years. One more assumption: say a third of those folks take the train. Grab the calculator: that's ((600k*10%)/5yrs)*34%. Which equals 4,080 riders per year, or 11 riders a day on a 7 day/wk basis. Now, this doesn't count folks from Montreal coming to Maine, but it can't be assumed that all (or even most) of Maine's Canadian tourists would find the train a convenient option... and it certainly would only have "southbound" potential about three months out of the year.

And just like Maine does now with the Downeaster, they would be subsidizing the export of discretionary consumer spending from the state... with the Downeaster, it's "just" out-of-state, with this service it would be a REAL export!!
 #735775  by gokeefe
 
Cowford, a couple of key points in regards to the service to Montreal. Keep in mind that as proposed it would be very convenient to the Lewiston-Auburn area. I'm pretty sure your estimate of 600,000 includes that area. If it doesn't the number should be increased.

Your calculations are a reasonable estimate of some portion of the leisure travel market to Montreal, this calculation is the same one that many people made with the Downeaster. So and so many people travelling so and so many times etc. to Boston to go to the Science museum. This is not what the Downeaster has become. I'm not going to postulate here that we are dealing with a corridor model for service. In fact it seems pretty clear to me that this would be some kind of single daily frequency and perhaps in better circumstances, twice daily frequency, for a total of four trains creating two roundtrips a day, probably using only two trainsets.

The proposed service would capture significantly more than just the leisure travel market. Your calculations generously assume 1/3 of such travel to be by train. This is pretty reasonable for new incremental travel generated by the service. There are however many other possibilities. There most certainly are some segment of weekly commuters who live in Maine and work in Quebec or, perhaps even more likely, vice-versa (for ex-patriot citizens). How many is tough to tell.

Boston sports teams have been a substantial source of travel for the Downeaster. During hockey season there is potential for additional ridership. Finally it is also very important to remember that this route passes through Bethel which was the terminus for the modern New England Ski Train out of North Station to Sunday River for a number of years. There would be very significant ridership from Quebec to Bethel during the winter and summer seaons. Given the excellent foliage country on the northern and western parts of this route, this train would attract tourists from Quebec on a three seasons basis. Late April, May and early June would be the weak points in the schedule.

I am more concerned that total annual ridership is something in the range of 40,000-60,000. This number is still fundamentally unsustainable. Even the Downeaster at almost 500,000 a year still isn't where it really needs to be to have a critical mass form around it for explosive growth up and over 750,000 to 1 million a year.
 #735898  by Cowford
 
Comparing POR-MTL with POR-BOS is apples and oranges. One is domestic, one is international; one is ~100-mile length, one is nearly 300 miles in length. Boston has a strong tie with Portland, being the closest large city to Maine. Montreal has very few ties to Portland, or Maine for that matter. And some of the Downeaster stats are telling. In FY 2009, only 28% of passengers ride between POS-BOS... that's 132,000 riders. Add in non-BOS traffic over POR and you'd probably not break 175,000... less than half of the 471,000 riders for the year. The train has largely turned into a Boston commuter train for residents living in NH. Saying that there are commuter possibilities on the SLR is beyond that of a reasonable assumption.

The Montrealers have northern Vermont and the Laurentians in which to ski - why come to Sunday River? And since you brought up the Sunday River Ski Train... it didn't work from Portland... so it'll work from a (significantly) more distant locale?

PS: How do you figure the 40-60k estimate?
Last edited by Cowford on Mon Nov 09, 2009 1:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 24