• Amtrak's Thruway Bus Connections

  • 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

  by STrRedWolf
 
It's rather funny/strange that while the NEC does have Thruway service... the connection is at BWI Airport. I would think more services at other places.
  by gokeefe
 
The argument is probably that "we're sold out already". Interesting position for Amtrak in that situation. They literally have more business than they can handle.
  by njtmnrrbuff
 
I know that Bayrunner, a shuttle van which is primarily meant for transportating people from Western Maryland and part of the W. Virginia panhande to BWI Airport also accepts travelers connecting to Amtrak trains at BWI Airport Station. A person who is heading to the Cumberland area from NYC or NWK and wants to involve an Amtrak trip to get there can just take Amtrak to BWI and switch to the Bayrunner Shuttle Van. This would save a few hours as opposed to having to take the train to DC and then getting 29 to CUM or taking 30 back and then switching over in DC. Taking Amtrak to BWI and then Bayrunner and vice versa might be worth extra, but in the end, time is money.

It would be nice to have some more Thruway bus options at Harrisburg for those people heading to Baltimore to catch trains that continue beyond DC. What about those people traveling to York, Pa from NYP, NWK, and PHL to Lancaster on a Keystone-provide more buses to those people between Lancaster and York.
  by STrRedWolf
 
njt/mnrrbuff wrote: Sun Nov 17, 2019 5:02 pm It would be nice to have some more Thruway bus options at Harrisburg for those people heading to Baltimore to catch trains that continue beyond DC. What about those people traveling to York, Pa from NYP, NWK, and PHL to Lancaster on a Keystone-provide more buses to those people between Lancaster and York.
Rabbit Transit provides that service already. It's their rabbitEXPRESS service. The 83N is Harrisburg to York, and 83S connects at York to go to Hunt Valley & Timonium and the MTA Maryland Light Rail to Baltimore. (15N for Gettysburg to Harrisburg)
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
When will finally be time to admit that the Boston & Albany stations would best be served by bus?

I've learned that the Boston Sleeper is now placed in the 448-9 consist directly behind the engines. Boy oh boy; "listen to the music".

Whacking 448-9 in favor of busses would enable Amtrak to eliminate any supply and service for Sleepers at Boston. Possibly a protect car is assigned to BOS; that too could be reassigned. I realize this move would be "curtains" for any restoration of the Night Owl, but when has there been anything more than speculation on that?

The "Gunmen" got rid of the through cars; but they stealthily were restored. No question whatever, Boston has its political "pull". Without it, there never would have been the electrification, and New Haven-Boston would simply been a feeder such as NH-SPF, PHL-HBG, and NYP-ALB.

Naturally, this "busteetoot" could be sweetened to provide connections with the other "three a day" in addition to the Lake Shore, and connection to the Adirondack and the Vermonter at SPF as well.

In short Albany would be "Bakersfield of the East".
  by Greg Moore
 
The Boston-Albany Sleeper has routinely been placed behind the engine. That's not new. This way the Boston section is simply added to the front of the NY section once the engine from NY has been removed.

I believe (one would have to confirm) that any time the 448/449 has been bustituted it has lost ridership.

I think this move would be backwards for Amtrak. For one, I think eventually we will see the "Night Owl" return and with the efforts Mass is making on more passenger trains, I suspect they would not be in favor of this move at all.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Mr. Moore, I'm aware that the 448-9 cars were placed on the head, and that such made for more efficient switching at ALB.

But ever since Amtrak has been confronted with more routes requiring raised axle counts, and with the last H-Bags ceasing to be roadworthy, V-Bags, and even V2-D's, are needed to meet such. As a result, the Bagg that provided some buffer between the Sleeper and "the music" is gone.

At another site more concerned with riding and advocacy than here, they suggest only booking the NYP-CHI Sleeper lines and just ride Coach on the B&A.
  by jonnhrr
 
Given that the BOS-ALB trip is during daylight hours I don't see being behind the engine a big deal. To me the loss of the baggage car itself is a bigger deal given how little space there is for luggage in a Viewliner room.

If 448/449 were eliminated I would advocate replacement by a Boston - Springfield train timed to connect with the Vermonters. Plus the Thruway connection of course. Consider combining that Boston - Springfield train with a Springfield - New Haven shuttle to create an "Inland Route" train.
  by Rockingham Racer
 
mtuandrew wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:14 pm I doubt Massachusetts’ Congresspeople would allow for that. However, you could feasibly run the BOS sleeper via NYP and the Shore Line - it wouldn’t take alot longer than via the B&A.
It would have to be a different route, but it's doable. Boston / NYP / Pit / Chicago.
  by east point
 
Rockingham Racer wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:46 pm It would have to be a different route, but it's doable. Boston / NYP / Pit / Chicago.
Boy Mr. Anderson would really like you. So Amtrak can just forget all the intermediate passengers (O&D) east of Toledo and west of Boston ? That is not the way to go. more contraction of the LD routes is not the way to go.
  by gokeefe
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:46 am When will finally be time to admit that the Boston & Albany stations would best be served by bus?
I think the answer largely depends on what the Commonwealth has planned for East-West service. At this time expansion appears to be on the table "eventually" (much sooner than the "never" of the PC era ... ).

With that being the case I am in agreement with others who feel that the Commonwealth will not allow any further reductions in service.
  by mtuandrew
 
Rockingham Racer wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:46 pmIt would have to be a different route, but it's doable. Boston / NYP / Pit / Chicago.
Why would it have to go via the Broadway route? The Empire Connection dumps trains into the western end of Penn Station, pointed toward Sunnyside Yard. It would only take an engine change to go CHI - BUF - ALB - NYP - NHV - BOS.

All that is beyond Mr. Norman’s proposed Thruway.
  by Rockingham Racer
 
east point wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 7:50 pm
Rockingham Racer wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:46 pm It would have to be a different route, but it's doable. Boston / NYP / Pit / Chicago.
Boy Mr. Anderson would really like you. So Amtrak can just forget all the intermediate passengers (O&D) east of Toledo and west of Boston ? That is not the way to go. more contraction of the LD routes is not the way to go.
I said it was doable. I did not say I think it should be done. Mr Anderson probably would not like me. :wink: