# A Silver at South Station



## Tlcooper93 (Jun 30, 2021)

If this has already been discussed, please link and disregard.

Is it a silly idea to have one Silver service train continue up to Boston?
As I was riding it north on Monday, and then changing to an Acela on Tuesday morning (along with about 10 other people from the same train going north to Boston), it occured to me to ask what the reasons are for both Silvers terminating at NYP. I assume the tracks are congested north of NYP and perhaps there isn't room. Could South Station take such a long train, especially now that the tracks have been shortened? Perhaps there really isn't a market for it to continue north and that day was just an unusual occurence.

Boy it would have been convenient.


----------



## OBS (Jun 30, 2021)

I think part of the reason lies with Metro North. There is a contractual limit on how many trains Amtrak can operate on M/N.
Thus it is much more lucrative to operate Regionals/ Acelas within the time slots that are available.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jun 30, 2021)

I don't think it's silly at all.

At one point there was through Boston-Florida service, the Champion, operating in 1973, the year I was born.

The Museum of Railway Timetables (timetables.org) 

50 Years of Amtrak--Champion (on-track-on-line.com) 

In addition, Amtrak had posted in a timetable that "Through train service between Boston, Springfield, and Florida will begin in Summer 2000" although to my knowledge it never did.

The Museum of Railway Timetables (timetables.org)


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jun 30, 2021)

OBS said:


> I think part of the reason lies with Metro North. There is a contractual limit on how many trains Amtrak can operate on M/N.
> Thus it is much more lucrative to operate Regionals/ Acelas within the time slots that are available.




I guess.
From Amtrak’s perspective however, it seems like a win-win. One of their long distance trains can behave sort of like a lucrative NE regional at least until it hits Richmond.

All they would have to do is swap a silver service with a NE regional to make it work (correct me if you think it’s not that simple).

could they finagle the silver schedule so that it fulfills the same time slot vacated by the regional?


----------



## PVD (Jun 30, 2021)

A Silver would likely be too unreliable as a Northbound to serve as a regional. You are also adding major costs by having the crew run another 5 hours, as well as not having adequate facilities in Boston to service and turn the train. Could it be done, yes. Within a rational cost benefit structure, highly doubtful.


----------



## Mystic River Dragon (Jun 30, 2021)

New England at one end and Florida at the other, without having to change trains in NYC? That sounds wonderful.

Lots of logistical problems, as pointed out above. But it would be nice.


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jun 30, 2021)

PVD said:


> A Silver would likely be too unreliable as a Northbound to serve as a regional. You are also adding major costs by having the crew run another 5 hours, as well as not having adequate facilities in Boston to service and turn the train. Could it be done, yes. Within a rational cost benefit structure, highly doubtful.



Could a southbound regional be hooked up to a Silver Service (and vice versa), and basically behave somewhat like the LSL. Or perhaps have the coaches portion of the train continue to Boston?

It's a shame diners and more sleepers can't be serviced in Boston. They once could, as the Night Owl had a diner at least in 2000 (i think they ditched it in 01). It would make sense to expand Boston's railway abilities, but of course, I'm biased. 

At this point though, I definitely see how in Amtrak's mind, this just isn't worth it.


----------



## OBS (Jun 30, 2021)

Tlcooper93 said:


> Could a southbound regional be hooked up to a Silver Service (and vice versa), and basically behave somewhat like the LSL. Or perhaps have the coaches portion of the train continue to Boston?
> 
> It's a shame diners and more sleepers can't be serviced in Boston. They once could, as the Night Owl had a diner at least in 2000 (i think they ditched it in 01). It would make sense to expand Boston's railway abilities, but of course, I'm biased.
> 
> At this point though, I definitely see how in Amtrak's mind, this just isn't worth it.


Slight correction. The Night Owl didn't have a diner. It was an Amfleet dinette car dressed up to provide diner like service. This was during its "Twilight Shoreliner" days.


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jun 30, 2021)

OBS said:


> Slight correction. The Night Owl didn't have a diner. It was an Amfleet dinette car dressed up to provide diner like service. This was during its "Twilight Shoreliner" days.



Yes, I suppose I used the word diner too liberally.
I do recall having a meal in the car you described (during its TS days) that resembled a traditional dining experience of sorts (certainly the equivilant or better than what is currently provided on the SS with flex), and probably would require the same servicing as today's regualr diners.


----------



## Cal (Jun 30, 2021)

Looking at it without the problem of slots, facilities, and crews, it makes perfect sense. Before I got into Amtrak logistics I saw 0 reason for them to stop at NYP. 

However, it's just another pipe dream.


----------



## bratkinson (Jun 30, 2021)

Perhaps the most likely reason for no Silver Service trains to BOS is the lack of equipment (cars) as well as adequate facilities to properly 'turn' the train in BOS. Throw in OBS time-on-duty and rest cycles, to add to the limitations that need to be addressed.

Also, would said train be 'discharge only' WAS-BOS like they are WAS-NYP today? And what about 'shorts' BOS-WAS like there is NYP-WAS today? Another consideration...can LD car doors be set to open all simultaneously like Amfleet I cars on the NEC? Would coach seating then be a 'free for all' like NEC Regional trains? What about supplies for the diner and lounge cars over and above what's needed NYP-MIA? Another consideration to be made is would it be an 'all stops' Regional train or 'limited' that mimics Acelas?

At a minimum, one entire 'set' of Silver Service equipment would be required to keep a reasonably fluid schedule even when 3-4 hour delays happen enroute. Right now, Amtrak barely has sufficient single level long distance coaches to meet demand while 'excess' brand new sleepers sit and rust in Florida. I haven't done any counts of how many Viewliner II diners are needed to service the 4 NYP-based routes using them (SS, SM, Crescent, LSL), but they'd likely have to put a spare in BOS as well as those in Sunnyside Yard (NYP). So, at a minimum, 2 more diners would be required. 

A wild idea hit me while typing this...how about making a 'full' CHI-BOS LD train (the New England States?) in addition to the CHI-NYP LSL and use that equipment for the next mornings' Silver Service departure (and vice versa)?


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jun 30, 2021)

bratkinson said:


> A wild idea hit me while typing this...how about making a 'full' CHI-BOS LD train (the New England States?) in addition to the CHI-NYP LSL and use that equipment for the next mornings' Silver Service departure (and vice versa)?



This would just about make my decade if it became a reality.
Doubt there is a market for that though... Unless LSL/Ohio becomes the rail corridor it has the potential to be.


----------



## jis (Jul 1, 2021)

Tlcooper93 said:


> Could a southbound regional be hooked up to a Silver Service (and vice versa), and basically behave somewhat like the LSL. Or perhaps have the coaches portion of the train continue to Boston?


Any car shuffling will have to be in Washington DC. I doubt they will ever allow car shuffling in Penn Station NY.


> It's a shame diners and more sleepers can't be serviced in Boston. They once could, as the Night Owl had a diner at least in 2000 (i think they ditched it in 01). It would make sense to expand Boston's railway abilities, but of course, I'm biased.


In 2000 it would have been the Northeast Direct Twilight Shoreliner, and no it did not have a Diner.


> At this point though, I definitely see how in Amtrak's mind, this just isn't worth it.


The basic problem is that the Northbound would be too unreliable to substitute for a Regional. Also, one would need to add many more Coaches to it at Washington DC since you cannot substitute a train with 6 or 7 high density Coaches by one that has 2 or 3 or even 4 low density Coaches. It miht be more feasible to switch a Sleeper to a Regional at Washington DC, but with the unreliability caveat. Moving a Sleeper and a Coach would be a much bigger challenge.

Indeed the trouble and added cost at Southampton St. will never be recovered in terms of the additional revenue generated. Southampton St. has not serviced a Diner after it was downsized a rebuilt targetd towards Corridor and Acela service. Basically the most non Coach that they have serviced is two Sleepers (LSL and 66/67 NED or NER). Actually, I am not even sure that they have a storage track available to service an extra LD set at presnt. There may be some capital investment needed too possibly.


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jul 1, 2021)

jis said:


> Any car shuffling will have to be in Washington DC. I doubt they will ever allow car shuffling in Penn Station NY.
> 
> In 2000 it would have been the Northeast Direct Twilight Shoreliner, and no it did not have a Diner.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info.
Kind of like I used the word diner too liberally, I also used the name Night Owl too liberally.
The ticket from November of 2000 reads Twilight Shoreliner, but I’ll take your word for it on the nomenclature.

Yes, as someone else mentioned, the dining experience I had in 2000 was a dinette dressed up to provide a semblance of traditional dining. By today’s standards however, it was essentially traditional dining.


----------



## west point (Jul 1, 2021)

MNRR has the problem of being a 4 main track RR with portions only 3 main tracks and for several months every other year only 2 main track sections. It all about the various swing bridge replacements. Right now it is Walk bridge that will be replaced by 2 independent lift spans.


----------



## Brian Battuello (Jul 1, 2021)

west point said:


> MNRR has the problem of being a 4 main track RR with portions only 3 main tracks and for several months every other year only 2 main track sections. It all about the various swing bridge replacements. Right now it is Walk bridge that will be replaced by 2 independent lift spans.


Got to say one thing about metro north, they keep up on their track maintenance.


----------



## MARC Rider (Jul 1, 2021)

Brian Battuello said:


> Got to say one thing about metro north, they keep up on their track maintenance.


Yeah, for the last 20 years they've been doing enough track work to ensure that there are always tracks out of service and slow trains due to congestion. It's not just the Acelas that poke along at 35 mph, I've ridden Metro-North trains that also creep along while the cars on parallel I-95 just whiz right by. Traffic and parking in Manhattan must be really bad that enough people still ride Metro-North to keep it in business.


----------



## cocojacoby (Jul 1, 2021)

One thing not mentioned is the baggage situation. When my wife and I traveled to and from Florida, we had to bring our luggage to South Station the night before and go back and pick it up the day after we arrived. A big hassle and not something most people would be willing to do.

We would have loved to have a through service on a Silver train. It could have even run via the inland route to serve bigger cities (Worcester, Springfield* and Hartford) and avoid the drawbridge restrictions in Connecticut.

* Note: Springfield is only a 4 hour and 40 minute drive from Montreal. Ambus?


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Jul 2, 2021)

Of course there should be a thru-train from Boston to Florida. There should also be a Boston to Chicago train separate from the Lake Shore that would cancel out the long dwell time to split the trains. 

So many things that Amtrak does only make sense for their own convenience.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Jul 2, 2021)

There should also be an Atlanta to Boston train as well (in addition to the Crescent)


----------



## Seaboard92 (Jul 2, 2021)

crescent-zephyr said:


> There should also be an Atlanta to Boston train as well (in addition to the Crescent)



If I were to do that I would actually say turn the Night Owl into that train because you could get a day train from WAS-ATL which would be amazing for ridership. It would be a long day but doable. 

As far as a regular Silver to Boston the problem you don't have a super large equipment problem if you would run identical Stars and Meteors because they don't same day in NYS. So in theory you could have 98 become 91 and 92 become 97 at Boston. Which would mimic the crew rotations the OBS used to have.


----------



## railiner (Jul 3, 2021)

This discussion about extending the Silver's, and previous discussion's we've had about extending east/west trains coast to coast has made me question just what percentage of traveler's going thru the current New York, or Chicago, or (New Orleans) transfer points, would truly make these extensions cost-effective, or viable?


----------



## MARC Rider (Jul 3, 2021)

Seaboard92 said:


> If I were to do that I would actually say turn the Night Owl into that train because you could get a day train from WAS-ATL which would be amazing for ridership. It would be a long day but doable.


 
The problem with that is that, based on prior experience, keeping the train to schedule would be difficult, and if the northbound is also the Night Owl, then it's possible that the "Night Owl" might become a day train most of the time and thus lose its utility.


----------



## jis (Jul 3, 2021)

MARC Rider said:


> The problem with that is that, based on prior experience, keeping the train to schedule would be difficult, and if the northbound is also the Night Owl, then it's possible that the "Night Owl" might become a day train most of the time and thus lose its utility.


For exactly those reasons I think it is a horrible idea to extend the Night Owl beyond Virginia in any way shape or form. If we want a day train to Atlanta we should handle that separately and make it a Washington DC to Atlanta train, or even NY to Atlanta train departing and arriving NY at some godawful hour, to ensure that it remains a day train south of Washington and arrives in Atlanta at something earlier than godawful hour. There should be no problem finding one more slot between Washington and New York at Oh-dark-thirty hours.


----------



## enviro5609 (Jul 3, 2021)

MARC Rider said:


> Yeah, for the last 20 years they've been doing enough track work to ensure that there are always tracks out of service and slow trains due to congestion. It's not just the Acelas that poke along at 35 mph, I've ridden Metro-North trains that also creep along while the cars on parallel I-95 just whiz right by. Traffic and parking in Manhattan must be really bad that enough people still ride Metro-North to keep it in business.



It is really bad. Parking especially. A monthly garage permit alone usually costs more than a monthly train pass.


----------



## Seaboard92 (Jul 3, 2021)

MARC Rider said:


> The problem with that is that, based on prior experience, keeping the train to schedule would be difficult, and if the northbound is also the Night Owl, then it's possible that the "Night Owl" might become a day train most of the time and thus lose its utility.



Actually I wouldn't be too worried about an Atlanta north train and scheduling issues. For the most part NS is pretty fluid Atlanta to the north. Especially once you get to Charlotte it becomes really fluid after that point. The problem on the Crescent is Atlanta south.


----------



## jis (Jul 3, 2021)

Seaboard92 said:


> Actually I wouldn't be too worried about an Atlanta north train and scheduling issues. For the most part NS is pretty fluid Atlanta to the north. Especially once you get to Charlotte it becomes really fluid after that point. The problem on the Crescent is Atlanta south.


Still I don't think the Night Owl should be changed. It is OK to add another train. There will be additional rolling stock available pretty soon, so that should not be an issue, and finding an additional slot in the middle of the night from New York should not be an issue. Sleepers will always be in short supply and there is no need to send one on a day journey to Atlanta. The Atlanta train should be like the Palmetto, not like the Night Owl.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Jul 3, 2021)

Extending existing trains seems like a favorite game with railfans. Sometimes that is a good idea, but often it negatives the reason for operating the existing train. Extending the Night Owl beyond Virginia is just a bad idea. Making the Night Owl part of a Florida train is a bad idea for both operations.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jul 4, 2021)

MikefromCrete said:


> Extending existing trains seems like a favorite game with railfans. Sometimes that is a good idea, but often it negatives the reason for operating the existing train. Extending the Night Owl beyond Virginia is just a bad idea. Making the Night Owl part of a Florida train is a bad idea for both operations.



The other favorite game is adding new trains which requires more equipment which is already in short supply and even more staff and even more money. It's like when I say Amtrak should cut certain trains to add others. Sure, the idealist would say why not just add them? We all know the answer to that question. Same logic here. Some posters here want to post the most pie in the sky ideas and others the most cost efficient improvements.


----------



## sttom (Jul 4, 2021)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> The other favorite game is adding new trains which requires more equipment which is already in short supply and even more staff and even more money. It's like when I say Amtrak should cut certain trains to add others. Sure, the idealist would say why not just add them? We all know the answer to that question. Same logic here. Some posters here want to post the most pie in the sky ideas and others the most cost efficient improvements.



There is also the kill joy who thinks pointing out Amtrak needs new equipment is a got ya and not just basically everyone's assumption at this point.


----------



## AFriendly (Jul 4, 2021)

Maybe a cross-platform connection at NYP with an Acela from BOS would be a good start? Sleeper could even be cross-marketed with business class. The Acela would have to figure out how to handle checked baggage but that doesn't seem like a showstopper...remove some seats from a coach and call it good.


----------



## jis (Jul 4, 2021)

AFriendly said:


> Maybe a cross-platform connection at NYP with an Acela from BOS would be a good start? Sleeper could even be cross-marketed with business class. The Acela would have to figure out how to handle checked baggage but that doesn't seem like a showstopper...remove some seats from a coach and call it good.


Acela won't handle Checked Baggage. The Checked Baggage will go by the 65/66/67 popularly known as the Night Owl among railfans.


----------



## MARC Rider (Jul 4, 2021)

AFriendly said:


> Maybe a cross-platform connection at NYP with an Acela from BOS would be a good start? Sleeper could even be cross-marketed with business class. The Acela would have to figure out how to handle checked baggage but that doesn't seem like a showstopper...remove some seats from a coach and call it good.


Sleepers are already cross-marketed with business class for connections, as I found out when I booked my sleepers for the Gathering. I didn't mind booking business class for my Baltimore-New York Northeast Regional leg to connect to the Lakeshore Limited on my way out, but business class Washington to Baltimore for the connection from the Capitol Limited on the way home seemed like overkill, but I had to do an extra click to get a coach seat for my Northeast Regional connection. In both cases, there's a layover, but they are both in comfortable stations with a Metropolitan Lounge or Club Aclea to wait out the layover.


----------



## cocojacoby (Jul 6, 2021)

I always thought a simple solution was to split a northbound Silver at NYP. Send half up to Boston (sleeper, coaches and cafe) and end the New York section (sleepers, coaches and diner) there to overnight at Sunnyside.

The next day those two sections become the westbound Lake Shore Limited and reunite in Albany for the trip to Chicago.

Southbound you reverse the drill using the Boston section of the LSL as the Boston section of the Silver. They reunite in Penn Station and head south together.

No extra equipment needed and it also satisfies the winter practice of sending equipment south for thawing if they still even do that.


----------



## Brian Battuello (Jul 6, 2021)

Great idea! Far too sensible for Amtrak.


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jul 6, 2021)

cocojacoby said:


> I always thought a simple solution was to split a northbound Silver at NYP. Send half up to Boston (sleeper, coaches and cafe) and end the New York section (sleepers, coaches and diner) there to overnight at Sunnyside.
> 
> The next day those two sections become the westbound Lake Shore Limited and reunite in Albany for the trip to Chicago.
> 
> ...



This was more or less what I had in mind, but I guess there are too many hiccups for Amtrak to take on.


----------



## jis (Jul 6, 2021)

cocojacoby said:


> I always thought a simple solution was to split a northbound Silver at NYP. Send half up to Boston (sleeper, coaches and cafe) and end the New York section (sleepers, coaches and diner) there to overnight at Sunnyside.


It is not a solution at all, since no train will be split and joined at NYP. or at Harold for that matter  It has literally been decades now since any splitting or joining has happend at NYP, including switching locos.

There was a time when two Metroliners were turned on the same track bysimply unhitching the loco from one and running it around to hitch onto the other end of the other consists while, that ones loco was moved over to the first consist. But that ended sometime in the late '80s. I don't think there is even a crew to do such at NYP anymore on a regular basis.


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jul 6, 2021)

jis said:


> It is not a solution at all, since no train will be split and joined at NYP. or at Harold for that matter  It has literally been decades now since any splitting or joining has happend at NYP, including switching locos.
> 
> There was a time when two Metroliners were turned on the same track bysimply unhitching the loco from one and running it around to hitch onto the other end of the other consists while, that ones loco was moved over to the first consist. But that ended sometime in the late '80s. I don't think there is even a crew to do such at NYP anymore on a regular basis.



Since Seimens is going to be building trainsets rather than cars for Amfleet replacements, I'm curious how this will effect trains that get split and rejoined, as well as future prospects such as what is being discussed.


----------



## cocojacoby (Jul 6, 2021)

Tlcooper93 said:


> This was more or less what I had in mind, but I guess there are too many hiccups for Amtrak to take on.



Well it may be easier to swallow than just extending a Silver to Boston. No argument about if Boston can service a real diner for one. No diner crew issues. Also the equipment works perfectly with the smaller Boston sections probably "right sized". I guess it's way too logical.

BTW - I thought when the Star went to a no diner status that was a good time to experiment with running it to Boston at least.


----------



## jis (Jul 6, 2021)

Tlcooper93 said:


> Since Seimens is going to be building trainsets rather than cars for Amfleet replacements, I'm curious how this will effect trains that get split and rejoined, as well as future prospects such as what is being discussed.


No trains get split and rejoined on the NEC at present AFAICT. Or is there one that does so at NHV still? Of course that will stop if there is one.

The reason that Silver(s) will not get extended to Boston on the Shore Line is that the only way to do it would be as a replacement of a Regional due to Amtrak being at slot limit based on their agreement with rich Connecticut boat owners. Of course they could be sent via the inland line CSX willing. Nice thought, but frankly I do not see that happening.


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jul 6, 2021)

jis said:


> No trains get split and rejoined on the NEC at present AFAICT. Or is there one that does so at NHV still? Of course that will stop if there is one.
> 
> The reason that Silver(s) will not get extended to Boston on the Shore Line is that the only way to do it would be as a replacement of a Regional due to Amtrak being at slot limit based on their agreement with rich Connecticut boat owners. Of course they could be sent via the inland line CSX willing. Nice thought, but frankly I do not see that happening.



What about LSL? I presume the amfleet replacements will apply to eastern LD trains. Or are those cars going to remain/Seimens is building single cars as well as trainsets?


----------



## jis (Jul 6, 2021)

Tlcooper93 said:


> What about LSL? I presume the amfleet replacements will apply to eastern LD trains. Or are those cars going to remain/Seimens is building single cars as well as trainsets?


Nope. LD trains are not part of the equation. These are Amfleet I replacements at present. Not Amfleet II replacements. Only Regional trains affected + Extended Regionals like the Palmetto, Pennsylvanian and the Carolinian. This is actually spelled out in some detail in the relevant press releases. These will have no effect on the Silvers either.


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jul 6, 2021)

jis said:


> Nope. LD trains are not part of the equation. These are Amfleet I replacements at present. Not Amfleet II replacements. Only Regional trains affected + Extended Regionals like the Palmetto, Pennsylvanian and the Carolinian. This is actually spelled out in some detail in the relevant press releases. These will have no effect on the Silvers either.



Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Cal (Jul 6, 2021)

jis said:


> due to Amtrak being at slot limit based on their agreement with rich Connecticut boat owners.


Why? This doesn't make sense to me. I know the train runs along the coast, but so does the Surfliner and they don't have to negotiate time slots with any third parties AFAIK.


----------



## jis (Jul 6, 2021)

Cal said:


> Why? This doesn't make sense to me. I know the train runs along the coast, but so does the Surfliner and they don't have to negotiate time slots with any third parties AFAIK.


Opening of drawbridges. It was part of the deal involved in getting approval for electrification of NHV - BOS.


----------



## Cal (Jul 6, 2021)

jis said:


> Opening of drawbridges. It was part of the deal involved in getting approval for electrification of NHV - BOS.


Alright, makes sense. Thanks


----------



## Brian Battuello (Jul 6, 2021)

I take that route frequently, and did not know that. Don't bother asking to have a bridge opened on the Harlem river.


----------



## west point (Jul 6, 2021)

When does the bridge limit agreement expire ?


----------



## jis (Jul 7, 2021)

west point said:


> When does the bridge limit agreement expire ?


When the next agreement supersedes it I guess. There is as such no expiry date, and it is a highly politically charged thing. In the past even Senator Blumenthal, who is otherwise a staunch rail supporter has stood steadfast with his constituents on this matter. I don't think he can retain his seat in the Senate if he changes his tune. The funny thing is that at present it places a solid cap on the number of trains that ConnDOT can run on the Shore Line East Service to New London. Connecticut may manage to raise the limit some to allow more Shore Line East trains before Amtrak gets any further relief.

One of the things Amtrak has been doing is, as they rebuild the Bascule or Swing bridges they are raising the track bed 10'-15' and using lower beams of more modern material and structure allowing the base of the structure to be higher providing greater clearance, so as to allow many more small boats to pass underneath the higher bridge without requiring an opening. But that does not handle the issue of sailboats, which what the rich folks like to run across the railroad from their home piers to the ocean and back. Most of it is locatead between New Haven and New London - the prettiest part of the route according to many. Anyway if it can be documented that the bridges need to be opened fewer times a day then there can be a basis for re-negotiating the number of trains upwards some.

Alternatively, they could just upgrade the Inland Route including electrification and acquisition from CSX of the Worcester - Springfield segment, and get a full fledged second route to run as many trains as they wish. State of Connecticut and Massachusetts would have to spearhead the effort. Maybe it will happen sooner rather than later.


----------



## Cal (Jul 7, 2021)

jis said:


> Alternatively, they could just upgrade the Inland Route including electrification and acquisition from CSX of the Worcester - Springfield segment, and get a full fledged second route to run as many trains as they wish. State of Connecticut and Massachusetts would have to spearhead the effort. Maybe it will happen sooner rather than later.


How would that effect travel times?


----------



## jis (Jul 7, 2021)

Cal said:


> How would that effect travel times?


That will depend on how much upgrading they do


----------



## Cal (Jul 7, 2021)

jis said:


> That will depend on how much upgrading they do


Okay, to the same level as the current New Haven-Boston section is?


----------



## jis (Jul 7, 2021)

Cal said:


> Okay, to the same level as the current New Haven-Boston section is?


The distance between Boston and New Haven appears to be within 3 miles of each other by the two routes, via Springfield being 3 miles longer. I don't know if its profile allows as much higher speed operation as the Coast Line.


----------



## west point (Jul 8, 2021)

Well the average BOS -<> New Haven times of approximately 2:00 Acela and 2:20 regionals is not great as well. If Inland route could average 60 - 65 then it could be 2:20 - 2:30. IMO not likely due to curvature BOS <> SPG and MBTA WOR <> BOS


----------



## cocojacoby (Jul 8, 2021)

jis said:


> Alternatively, they could just upgrade the Inland Route including electrification and acquisition from CSX of the Worcester - Springfield segment, and get a full fledged second route to run as many trains as they wish. State of Connecticut and Massachusetts would have to spearhead the effort. Maybe it will happen sooner rather than later.



Should have used the drawbridge opening augment to build the bypass. Probably would have garnered a lot of support from the mariners I would think.

BTW - is there any seasonality to the restrictions? I would guess they are much more necessary during the summer sailing months.


----------



## jis (Jul 8, 2021)

cocojacoby said:


> Should have used the drawbridge opening augment to build the bypass. Probably would have garnered a lot of support from the mariners I would think.
> 
> BTW - is there any seasonality to the restrictions? I would guess they are much more necessary during the summer sailing months.


But there are fewer Mariners than McMansion owners, and they basically scotched the idea of a bypass that was presented to Connecticut more than once, each time, overwhelmingly, even though most of it was going to be in a tunnel deep under their McMansions. The difficulty in finding any alternate routing through Connecticut is well known and nothing has changed.


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jul 11, 2021)

I personally have always wondered why the inland route isn’t more utilized. I’d be curious to study the history of why this became the case. A train from Boston to Hartford could be as useful as a train from Boston to Providence/New London. 

Hartford’s sad state could also be improved with direct reliable service to Boston.


----------



## jis (Jul 11, 2021)

Tlcooper93 said:


> I personally have always wondered why the inland route isn’t more utilized. I’d be curious to study the history of why this became the case. A train from Boston to Hartford could be as useful as a train from Boston to Providence/New London.
> 
> Hartford’s sad state could also be improved with direct reliable service to Boston.


The reason used to be Conrail and then it is CSX now.

It will get fixed only after MassDOT manages get CSX out of the Worcester - Springfield segment.


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Jul 11, 2021)

jis said:


> The reason used to be Conrail and then it is CSX now.
> 
> It will get fixed only after MassDOT manages get CSX out of the Worcester - Springfield segment.



It is pretty unbelievable that MBTA doesn’t go to Springfield.


----------



## DCAKen (Jul 12, 2021)

Tlcooper93 said:


> It is pretty unbelievable that MBTA doesn’t go to Springfield.



Almost as unbelievable as the Boston section of the LSL never properly connecting to the Vermonter.


----------

