# Given the Perfect Scenario, Could A Train Go BOS-NYP-WAS Non-Stop?



## lo2e (Mar 6, 2018)

This is very much "pie in the sky" thinking, but could an NEC train go from Boston to Washington, only stopping at NYP? Yes, this would be given the right amount of equipment, perhaps a dedicated track, and enough ridership. But I'm wondering if it would be feasible and beneficial for one Acela perhaps to do this?


----------



## jis (Mar 6, 2018)

In the past attempts to even run a New York - Washington non-stop has not met with roaring success, and in each case, has been withdrawn after several months of trying to make it work.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Mar 6, 2018)

lo2e said:


> This is very much "pie in the sky" thinking, but could an NEC train go from Boston to Washington, only stopping at NYP? Yes, this would be given the right amount of equipment, perhaps a dedicated track, and enough ridership. But I'm wondering if it would be feasible and beneficial for one Acela perhaps to do this?


It is definitely feasible but not beneficial from an Amtrak standpoint. A few passengers would probably love it though.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Mar 6, 2018)

How about BOS-NYP-PHL-WAS?


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Mar 6, 2018)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> How about BOS-NYP-PHL-WAS?


Why not BOS-NYP-WIL-WAS?


----------



## Ryan (Mar 7, 2018)

Clearly WAS-BWI-NYP is the only stopping pattern than makes sense.


----------



## Eric S (Mar 7, 2018)

Wasn't NYP-PHL-WAS tried at least a couple of times in the Acela era? And something similar in the Metroliner era as well?

Without digging through old timetables, I don't seem to recall any of those services lasting all that long.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Mar 7, 2018)

Eric S said:


> Wasn't NYP-PHL-WAS tried at least a couple of times in the Acela era? And something similar in the Metroliner era as well?
> 
> Without digging through old timetables, I don't seem to recall any of those services lasting all that long.


You are correct Sir!


----------



## jis (Mar 7, 2018)

Eric S said:


> Wasn't NYP-PHL-WAS tried at least a couple of times in the Acela era? And something similar in the Metroliner era as well?
> 
> Without digging through old timetables, I don't seem to recall any of those services lasting all that long.


Yes. Each time they failed and were withdrawn after a relatively short period.

NYP - PHL - WAS was specifically tried and did not work.


----------



## cirdan (Mar 7, 2018)

lo2e said:


> This is very much "pie in the sky" thinking, but could an NEC train go from Boston to Washington, only stopping at NYP? Yes, this would be given the right amount of equipment, perhaps a dedicated track, and enough ridership. But I'm wondering if it would be feasible and beneficial for one Acela perhaps to do this?


In what way?

Physically, yes, I don't see why not. There is no intrinisc restriction in the equipment that prevents non-stop running over such distances. Pathing conflicts could be eliminated by running this train at night for example. With some careful weaving in the schedules, there are probably also daytime slots that would work.

Would such a train generate sufficient ridership to be economically viable? This is a different question and I would think probably not. It's on the shorter trips that the train is most competitive. Longer trips are more a domain where the plane has the upper hand, and shaving off a minute here and a minute there is not going to change that fundamentally.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Mar 7, 2018)

Certainly ridership and demand is way higher than the Metroliner era and I imagine more trains runs today than back then. Once the Avelia Liberty equipment there might be the enough trains to justify the trains for the occasional "Big 3" (NYP-PHL-WAS) only train. If that train makes only one stop between Penn Station and Union Station instead of 5 or 6, how much time is saved? Certainly you should be able to fill a train with NYP-PHL, NYP-WAS, and PHL-WAS passengers today.


----------



## jis (Mar 7, 2018)

Amtrak wants to run alternate single stop Express (with the single stop varying among the various possible stops) and the regular all stops express once the Avelias are fully deployed. So yes, that is in the plans. As for how well it may work, only time will tell.

The original Shinkansen, which is what got the US to fiddle around with the NEC, runs three distinct services with different number of stops, and varying stopping patterns. Kodamas are the milk runs which stop almost everywhere, though individual trains do some skip stopping. The Hikaris make only the bigger stations, again doing some alternate skip stop, and Nozomis are the fastest with least stop, often non-stop from Tokyo to Osaka. But then again they run 10 or 15 trains each way per hour, so it is a completely different level of service from what is found on the NEC.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Mar 7, 2018)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> Certainly ridership and demand is way higher than the Metroliner era and I imagine more trains runs today than back then. Once the Avelia Liberty equipment there might be the enough trains to justify the trains for the occasional "Big 3" (NYP-PHL-WAS) only train. If that train makes only one stop between Penn Station and Union Station instead of 5 or 6, how much time is saved? Certainly you should be able to fill a train with NYP-PHL, NYP-WAS, and PHL-WAS passengers today.


This was also in the Acela era. They attempted to run an express train between NYP-PHL-WAS. Then, to stimulate ridership, they added MET...which helped. The truth is, downtown to downtown is not the market some of you think it is.

The only benefit is these train ran ahead of previously packed trains. This loosened up space for the not downtown to downtown travel on the congested trains.

However, that is not the concept of this thread. Is a WAS-NYP-BOS train feasible? Sure. Would it be beneficial? Not really as it would also increase the razor thin margin for failures (and cancellations) in exchange for minimal benefit.

When the new trains come online, then we can have this conversation.

Then again, when they come online, you may not have much of a choice but to ride them.


----------



## west point (Mar 7, 2018)

1. Not enough slots available at NYP for this kind of service ahead of the more stops trains.

2. "IF" when Gateway tunnel bores in service and NYP <> WASH service approaches 2:00 then that would bleed off many of the air shuttle riders.


----------



## railiner (Mar 9, 2018)

There may be a market on a limited basis, say on Friday and Sunday afternoon's....they could even attempt an extra fare, all-business class express....


----------



## jis (Mar 9, 2018)

Acelas are extra fare all Business Class plus First Class expresses already.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Just-Thinking-51 (Mar 9, 2018)

Thirdrail7 said:


> Then again, when they come online, you may not have much of a choice but to ride them.


Interesting that Amtrak is talking about getting rid of all other level of service other than Acela. Only Acela makes money thinking. One thinks giving up market share to the bus would be bad idea.

Even limited regional service. Running just few times a day, with a really long train set. With a branding other than Acela. Just to keep the bus people on there toes. One thinks that would be a workable and profitable level of service.


----------



## railiner (Mar 10, 2018)

jis said:


> Acelas are extra fare all Business Class plus First Class expresses already.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


Good point....that, they certainly are...

What do you think about running them on a Friday and/or Sunday afternoon express?


----------



## railiner (Mar 10, 2018)

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> > Then again, when they come online, you may not have much of a choice but to ride them.
> ...


If Amtrak gives up the "bus fare" market, the commuter railroads could fill in the 'gaps' where they are, and run a cheap thru pool train to fill that market...


----------



## jis (Mar 10, 2018)

For those that may not have noticed, Amtrak is really not a serious contender in the bus fare market on the NEC already.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## daybeers (Mar 11, 2018)

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> > Then again, when they come online, you may not have much of a choice but to ride them.
> ...


Who said anything about getting rid of the Regionals? Thirdrail is talking about the retirement of the current Acela sets.


----------



## Anderson (Mar 11, 2018)

IIRC back in the late 1960s there was also a WAS-BAL-NYP Metroliner...but that seems to have (1) been_ very_ specifically timed (it was a once-a-day thing) and (2) I suspect that it was done more to get a showoff end-to-end time than because it made absolute sense.

There's probably room for peak-of-the-peak "extra sections" which make no stops or minimal stops, but don't forget: Most of those expresses that were being run back in "the day" were being run 1-2x daily as part of a broader service, not hourly...and in more than a few cases, there was probably a not-express on the heels of the express.

I do suspect that there's a market for an express NYP-PHL train, but the rub is that you only save a few minutes by skipping Newark (many Acelas skip Metropark and Trenton, but the time savings for dropping both versus serving both is only about six minutes; the savings per stop skipped seem to be in the 2-4 minute range, probably depending as much on the nuances of each stop as the traffic situation).

Back on the "lower" end, I do think there's a case for service to more stops along the NEC. The main problem is that Amtrak can only really run 2-4 trains per hour into NYP. If Amtrak could run, say, 8 per hour (and had the equipment to do so) you might see something like 2-3 Acelas, 2 Regionals, 2 Keystones or Locals, and 1-2 "other" (LD trains, etc.). The best we could, at present, hope for would be for Amtrak and NJT to somehow team up to revive a version of the Clockers...but that would require both there being a sufficient market for them and a level of creative thinking and willingness to work "outside the box" that we (sadly) can't really expect from a transit agency.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Mar 11, 2018)

daybeers said:


> Who said anything about getting rid of the Regionals? Thirdrail is talking about the retirement of the current Acela sets.


I didn't specify anything, Daybeers as this is a long way off. However, let me help you out a little bit by translating Just Thinking's theory:



Just-Thinking-51 said:


> *Even limited regional service. Running just few times a day, with a really long train set. With a branding other than Acela. Just to keep the bus people on there toes. One thinks that would be a workable and profitable level of service.*


Just Thinking's theory is clear to me. if you have a dedicated, confined train set, on a dedicated corridor that has much more capacity than your existing brand, you can push more people to that service by reducing access your competing brand (regionals). Then, you can use the released equipment to support other routes. In other words, you may only run trains on the NEC that will venture off corridor...and there is nothing saying they have to permit local travel between certain points.

This is a long, long way out but I have the feeling that Just Thinking is quite astute.


----------



## Ryan (Mar 11, 2018)

Thirdrail7 said:


> This is a long, long way out but I have the feeling that Just Thinking is quite astute.


----------



## daybeers (Mar 11, 2018)

Thirdrail7 said:


> daybeers said:
> 
> 
> > Who said anything about getting rid of the Regionals? Thirdrail is talking about the retirement of the current Acela sets.
> ...


Ah, makes sense. So the theory is that everyone will eventually use Acela IIs or something? And how far off we talking here, five years, ten years?


----------



## Just-Thinking-51 (Mar 11, 2018)

My insight is just tea leaf readings. Nothing more or less.

Amtrak continue to state Acela is a money maker.

Regionals do not make money per Amtrak.

Buying more Acela type of trainsets.

Been stated before by people other than Thirdrail7 to make more money requires more Acela service. Limited slots available. So replace the money losing regionals trains with the money making Acela trains is a possibility if not the plan.

Also good money on the Slivers + Crescent get turn at Washington DC back to Florida/NOL. Another few slot been used poorly.

My max length regionals idea is a off peak, all stop service. Maybe with baggage. The people who need to connect with trains outside of the NEC, that is a different and lower price point then the Acela trains. Even if you just time it to connect with long distance trains, your going to have a market. Both the connecting trains and a group of people who need to travel but the Acela is outside of there means.

Just two train, one in each direction would be need. Ok maybe 3 each direction for 6 a day. If your including 66+67.

This way more slots are available for the Acela trains, and there a lower cost product for those who dont have a time sensitive travel. If price a few seats at lost leader price point. You get to fight with the bus people for there crowds. First 64 (one coach) seats at one dollars. There your hook. People will check out the times and price available. Still might go with the bus or grab a Acela. But now your in play.

Again Amtrak does really compete with anyone. When the economy tanked, they refused to lower prices as they would just lose more money. There no real supply and demand. There thinking is only the Acela makes money.

So the tea leafs say more Acela less regionals.

However you still have trains going off NEC so you need something other than a long extension cord.


----------



## afigg (Mar 11, 2018)

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> My insight is just tea leaf readings. Nothing more or less.
> 
> Amtrak continue to state Acela is a money maker.
> 
> Regionals do not make money per Amtrak.


Whaaaatt?? The Regionals do make money for Amtrak, good money, based on the Route performance results. In the September, 2017 monthly report (unaudited), which is on the website, and is in the new less informative shorter format, the Regionals generated a net surplus of $206.7 million in operating earnings for FY2017. The Acelas generated more money with a net surplus of $290.5 million, but the Regionals are doing fine. The Regionals also carry far more passengers on the NEC with 8.57 million in FY2017 compared to 3.44 million passengers on the Acelas.

The goal of the 28 trainset Acela II order is to expand capacity and capture more revenue from the Acela set or group of business & well heeled travelers on the NEC, not to replace the Regionals in any way.


----------



## railbuck (Mar 12, 2018)

The quick math says $84/passenger net surplus on Acelas and $24/passenger on the Regionals. Tweaking supply and demand to push some Regional passengers to Acela and extract more revenue from the rest seems like an obvious strategy.


----------



## jebr (Mar 12, 2018)

The question becomes, though: could Amtrak actually net more income (not just revenue, but income) by trying to more heavily handicap the Regionals? Sure, some would switch to Acela, but many on the lower end of the ticket pricing would go to the bus services instead (netting Amtrak $0 in revenue instead of the $50-$75 they get now from low bucket or Saver fares.) Some in the middle might move to either driving or the air shuttles; part of what keeps them on Amtrak is that it's cost efficient compared to the non-bus alternatives, but a significant price increase might shoo them away entirely.

Amtrak may not have the right balance at this moment, but I think any significant move to handicap the Regionals to try and steer business to the Acela would backfire more than it would help Amtrak's balance sheet.


----------



## jis (Mar 12, 2018)

Is the NEC really severely slot restricted except in NJ and CT during certain hours, and part of the CT slot limitation east of NHV is an artificial creation to pander to rich boaters.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51 (Mar 12, 2018)

jis said:


> Is the NEC really severely slot restricted except in NJ and CT during certain hours, and part of the CT slot limitation east of NHV is an artificial creation to pander to rich boaters.


CT slot limitation:

A issue that can be revisited.

A issue for weekends and holidays.

A issue that does not apply to state funded services.

NJ and the tunnel is not a easy fix.


----------



## jis (Mar 12, 2018)

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > Is the NEC really severely slot restricted except in NJ and CT during certain hours, and part of the CT slot limitation east of NHV is an artificial creation to pander to rich boaters.
> ...


But the tunnel related slot limitations in NJ on weekdays are mostly during the morning and evening rush hours. Actually the slot limitation through the North River Tubes on weekends due to single tracking is probably a more severe problem. but that being on weekends also does not have to carry as much traffic. Actually, for the time being most of the slot problems through the tunnels could probably be addressed by simply banishing all Morris and Essex Line trains to Hoboken and dealing with at least a few of the NEC/NJCL NJT train by either turning them in Newark or sending them off to Hoboken instead of NYP

I think there is a lot that could be done with time table juggling, which is possibly socio-politically infeasible due to the fractured nature of governance of the NEC. Perhaps if the NEC Commission had real teeth things could be handled more rationally, both for traffic management and financial management.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Mar 12, 2018)

While a lot of what is being said is true, we are looking at current conditions. We are not look taking the projected future into account. We are not looking at the prospect of more LIRR service entering the station. We are not looking a Metro-North's plan to run through Penn Station. We are not looking at desire to operate RVL trains into Penn.

These will cause FUTURE slot limitations. Personally, I agree with Jis. Sure the tunnels need replacing but if there were reasonable use of the surrounding resources, a lot of this stuff wouldn't be necessary.

I've said it for years: there is too much traffic in NYP and there is NO excuse for it. It shows a lack of imagination and a lack of diversification of resources. The agencies are marching in a straight line, following the tempo, without seeing the crowd around them.

There is no excuse for not using the assets surrounding New York. The "Summer of Hell" was brilliant and showed what I've said for years is possible. Send some of the MidClowns back to Hoboken. Send some the NEC trains there as well. Kill some of the PJC snob expresses and let them stop at North Elizabeth like the Coast Line passengers. Speaking of Coast Line passengers, divert some of them to Hoboken...and let them ride ferries and PATH. NYC is surrounded by water. the only part of NYC not surrounded by water is the Bronx, which is has water on three sides. Now that the 7 train has been extended to Hudson Yards on 11th ave, there is NO excuse for not having a subsidized ferry from Hoboken to that station. You can come right from Hoboken station to the NYC with a direct connection. You can have some of the Coast Line passengers do this from South Amboy and Belford, just as they did when the gas prices exploded. Wrong Island passengers can do the same.

What happened to Penn when all of these trains were diverted? it operated smoothly.

Build the piers!!!!!!


----------



## Bob Dylan (Mar 12, 2018)

Third Rail and jis need to be hired as Consultants for Amtrak and given authority to create realistic,common sense Schedules ALL NE Trains in/out of the Apple.


----------



## MARC Rider (Mar 20, 2018)

Ryan said:


> Clearly WAS-BWI-NYP is the only stopping pattern than makes sense.


No, no. WAS-BAL-NYP-BOS is the only way to go.






By the way, how much time would that really save for through travelers? I recently rode the Acela up to BOS and back to BAL. Stops were: WIL, PHL, NWK, NYP STM, NHV, PVD, RTE, BBY and BOS and it took about 6 hours. How much time would you really save if it ran nonstop (or only a stop at NYP)?


----------

