Higher-speed Adirondack??

[Alphaboi]

True High-speed rail between NYC and Montreal isn't on table, but what about higher-speed conventional rail with diesel-electrics or dual modes? Would it be feasible to (assuming preclearance at Gare Centrale) get travel times down to the 5-6 hour range? That would be faster than bus and competitive with driving time (& most New Yorkers don't own cars). It'd also allow twice daily service not just to Montreal but to everywhere north of Albany. As much as I like the idea of a night train this could be even more practical. What kinds of infrastructure improvements would need to be made?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[bostontrainguy]

How about trying a couple of unloved Series 6 Talgos?

[Matt Johnson]

I took the Adirondack from New York to Montreal and back in 2006, and made the same trip by auto in 2007. I believe 5 to 6 hours is about right for driving, and as I recall, in 2006 at least the Adirondack run was scheduled for 10+ hours (and ended up taking 12). It would take a lot of investment to bring the trip down to auto competitive times - probably more than current traffic demand warrants. More feasible would be an overnight run with sleeper service.

[west point]

I took the Adirondack from New York to Montreal and back in 2006, and made the same trip by auto in 2007. I believe 5 to 6 hours is about right for driving, and as I recall, in 2006 at least the Adirondack run was scheduled for 10+ hours (and ended up taking 12). It would take a lot of investment to bring the trip down to auto competitive times - probably more than current traffic demand warrants. More feasible would be an overnight run with sleeper service.

Overnight leaving NYP at 7 -8 would give all stations up to Albany good times to board. Then just a slow poke to Montreal. South bound slow to Albany with arrival there at 0600 and NYP about 0830.

[west point]

CP might persuaded to allow long dwell times at various station so arrival southbound and departure north bound would always be on time.t

[Greg Moore]

I doubt you'll improve things much north of Schenectady, other than by finally getting Pre-Clearance approved.
That should be a no-brainer.
That said, I really think this is a route for two trains as I've said in the past. The current, which is more for tourists to enjoy the view further north.
And then as someone suggested, an evening/overnight train. I would definitely take an overnight train to Montreal from Albany.

[StLouSteve]

Wasn't there recent talk of extending the Montrealer back up to Montreal? Then you would have two trains to Montreal again.

What's the hold up with pre-clearance in Niagara Falls/Toronto and Montreal?

[exvalley]

You won't see a Montrealer until a preclearance facility is constructed in Montreal.

There is a proposal to operate a private overnight Montreal-New York train service.
https://montrealgazette.com/news/local- ... -and-n-y-c

The news about it has gotten pretty stale, though.

[njtmnrrbuff]

Even when the preclearance facility gets constructed in Montreal, that won't make the train ride on the Adirondack to NYC and back time competitive with driving. Amtrak will still have to play around with CP Rail's right of way which probably can't be upgraded in many spots, especially along the lake. Maybe in the short term, there could be speed upgrades north of Rouses Point given the fact that there are some very straight sections of track along flatland. I wouldn't mind seeing speed improvements on the stretch of CP Rail between Schenectady and below where the lake ends, I think just north of Whitehall.

[Jeff Smith]

We're already somewhat talking about that here: CUOMO PROPOSED HIGH SPEED SYSTEM IN NY.

Basically, you need a new routing, off MNRR's Hudson ROW. Which is not a bad idea. Run it up the median of the NYS Thruway (I-87) on the west side of the river. The new TZB (#NotTheMarioCuomoBridge) has a provision for rail in the center of the two spans. On the East of Hudson (EoH) side continue it down the Thruway into the Bronx. To bring it into Manhattan, you could connect it at "BN" yard in the Bronx, do a little reversal across to Spuyten Duyvil and the Empire Connection (operationally problematic). A more elegant solution is a connection to the Hudson Line at BN as noted, but let it run into GCT. You're not talking about too many frequencies, so the short run into NYC on the shared EoH side shouldn't be that bad.

In Albany, maybe even use the old Union Station on the WoH side, and bring it back across to the EoH side on the existing Amtrak route to run it to Montreal through the North Country. Two extended Empire Service trains a day would do it.

And let Virgin operate it! How to pay for it? Increase the tolls on the NYS Thruway. Or for that matter, Virgin might be willing to do it with just using the ROW rights to the Thruway and overhead rights once on the Hudson below BN.

Okay, I know, what do you replace the EoH service with? An extended MNRR or NYS operation (MNRR only operates into Dutchess County by law) with limited stops covering the old Amtrak stops, with more LD type equipment. And contract it to Virgin .

You're killing two birds with one stone: Empire Corridor as far as Albany, and Adirondack.