• Amtrak Downeaster Discussion Thread

  • 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

  • 9078 posts
  • 1
  • 601
  • 602
  • 603
  • 604
  • 605
  • 606
  by gokeefe
 
You can try and make the South Station to North Station as seamless as possible but it will never be able to compete with a cross platform transfer or same terminal transfer. It really isn't a good fit for intercity travelers no matter how much we wish it were ...

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

  by sicariis
 
New Hampshire man dies in Old Orchard train accident
A New Hampshire man was struck and killed by a train in Old Orchard Beach on Saturday night, police there said.

William Grizzaffi, 52, of Lebanon, N.H., was walking with his wife and a friend just before midnight, heading from downtown Old Orchard to a local motel. He stopped on the railroad tracks crossing Walnut Street as an Amtrak train was approaching, and was hit as he moved off the tracks, police said in a news release Sunday.

The signal devices at the Walnut crossing appear to have been functioning when the incident occurred, police said.
https://www.unionleader.com/news/safety ... d0c80.html
  by Arlington
 
markhb wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 4:03 pm I am endlessly skeptical of any Amtrak service running on the Grand Junction; the first MIT partier from a well-heeled family who gets killed on that narrow ROW will bring a lawsuit big enough to put "reopen Grand Junction" further down the list than "daily Sunset through to Jacksonville".
There are currently 4 to 6 trains per day on the Grand Junction, some freight, most MBTA equipment rotation (from Southside CR to Northside CR maintenance). I don't see that lawsuits by trespassers is going to to be a deciding factor.
  by Arlington
 
The NNEPRA Portland Transportation Center page says that the study of new sites was "Phase Two of Study Complete" in September 2020. I can't find a link, nor a reference in the September NNEPRA board meeting. Did I miss it somewhere?
  by artman
 
Arlington wrote: Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:36 am The NNEPRA Portland Transportation Center page says that the study of new sites was "Phase Two of Study Complete" in September 2020. I can't find a link, nor a reference in the September NNEPRA board meeting. Did I miss it somewhere?
My guess is that the study is complete, but yet to be published.

Also, this from the MDOT site:

https://www.maine.gov/mdot/planning/ptl ... tionstudy/

"Currently, Phase II of the PTC study is underway. A draft report is anticipated to be completed in the summer of 2020. A copy of this draft report, along with the opportunity to comment, will be provided on this MaineDOT webpage."
  by MEC407
 
This is, what, at least the third study they've done on PTC sites?

Just what are they expecting to find/learn that hasn't been found/learned in the previous studies?
  by gokeefe
 
I think they're looking at different parcels and configurations. When you do that it starts everything back at 0. The good news is they seem to have a pretty clear mandate to do *something*. The Thompson's Point redevelopment and possible Rock Row service to/from Westbrook muddied the waters significantly. Furthermore the private developers appeared very serious about their proposal to such an extent that "due diligence" required them to take this into consideration.

The railroads would build with or without certainty of success. That's not an option for Maine DOT and NNEPRA.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

  by markhb
 
The most recent study (which was still available on NNEPRA's site at least until the recent redesign) picked "stay at PTC" over moving near the Casco Bay Bridge mainly because of the large impending development at Thompson's Point, including a new arena for the Red Claws. Since then, of course, the Thompson's Point project has changed hands at least once, the emphasis has completely changed, the Red Claws are out of it (and recent versions of the site plan omit any arena) and they are just now completing the first new building on the site, for the Children's Museum. Meanwhile, the Commercial St. site they had looked at is now part of the Eimskip terminal so it's completely off the table, and land on the inland side of Commercial St. that had been bandied about (for those of us who are old-time Mainers, the area where the Freedom Train parked in 1975) is now becoming a new home for the VA clinic. So now they're trying to figure out how to get a spot on the mainline inside I-295, and there's not a whole lot of room to work with.
  by Cosakita18
 
Why not stay at the PTC and go back to the original plan of building a wye?
  by markhb
 
Cosakita18 wrote:Why not stay at the PTC and go back to the original plan of building a wye?
That's still a possibility, but with the brake test, etc. that would need to be done for them to change ends, it would only shave 5 minutes off the schedule. Very low ROI, essentially.

Sent from my HTC U11 using Tapatalk

  by west point
 
My observations of Amtrak back up moves is that they can be accomplished very quickly. 1st for train is going to back in. Have the conductor or assistant conductor placed in rear of train and once switch mooves and signal is received Conductor can signal to back up . From forward to back up move was timed as 37 seconds.

Backing out of station coductor or assistant conductor goes to end of train befor leaving time and signal ready to leave then train backs out until loco clear of switch and then when switch and signal clears then loco procees forward. Again only about 1 minute. That ooperatin does require a power switch. Otherwise conductor or AC will have to manually operate switch proably taking as much as 5 minutes due to walking to from switch.

If there is a problem of dispatch not seting the switch up maybe a tone operated switch can be installed with auto return to main alignment once passenger train clears. Someone who knows the signeling on that potion of track can tell so wel will know what aspect the train may get ? For takking track to station probably either an approach or maybe restricting aspect.
  by west point
 
Since I cannot edit the previous . The proposal would actually reduce the time at Portland TC not having to change ends. The wye would require 2 additional switches that my proposal would not require. As well if switches are manual having to change 2 switches and restortion would take more time.
One power switch instead of either 2 or 3 manual switches is less expensive.
  by markhb
 
Thanks. I'm pretty sure that the existing switch is a power switch already; the added time comes from the fact that the backup move into POR is over a mile long since the station is on a spur.

Sent from my HTC U11 using Tapatalk

  by west point
 
is the spur crossing any streets ? Is the spur signaled now ? If signaled the spur will allow much faster speeds backing in and backing out. restricted aspects at end of platform and an approach signal at intersection of spur and main would be the best.
  by MEC407
 
It is signaled and it crosses one street at grade. The limiting factors for speed on that stretch of track are track curvature and braking for the station stop.
  • 1
  • 601
  • 602
  • 603
  • 604
  • 605
  • 606