Amtrak is finally coming to Scranton!

[jis]

It is still fully grade separated.

 

[John Bobinyec]

At MP 47.0 (West Port Morris) Brooklyn Rd. used to cross under the tracks. After the tracks were removed, so was the underpass. If the tracks are completed at that point, either the crossing will be at grade, or else the underpass will need to be recreated. Right now the roadway is at the same level as the right-of-way.
jb

 

[GDRRiley]

I'd hope soon amtrak and the state patterns start exploring 7-9RT daily. Be good to know what infrastructure investments are needed now to reach that
Every 2 hour departure would be great

Example for 7RT

Depart Scranton	Arrive NYC	Depart NYC	Arrive Scranton
6A	8:50A	10A	12:50P
8A	10:50A	12P	2:50P
10A	12:50P	2P	4:50P
12P	2:50P	4P	6:50P
2P	4:50P	6P	8:50P
4P	6:50P	8P	10:50P
6P	8:50P	10P	12:50A

 

[fdaley]

I'd hope soon amtrak and the state patterns start exploring 7-9RT daily. Be good to know what infrastructure investments are needed now to reach that
Every 2 hour departure would be great

Example for 7RT

Depart Scranton	Arrive NYC	Depart NYC	Arrive Scranton
6A	8:50A	10A	12:50P
8A	10:50A	12P	2:50P
10A	12:50P	2P	4:50P
12P	2:50P	4P	6:50P
2P	4:50P	6P	8:50P
4P	6:50P	8P	10:50P
6P	8:50P	10P	12:50A

One would hope that someone is gaming that out. If they really can deliver the 2:50 travel time to Manhattan, I think this corridor will ultimately be able to support that kind of service. Twenty years ago, when we were still talking about a travel time of 3:20 or more for a train that would wind up at Hoboken, it seemed a lot more speculative.

I was encouraged that in the Amtrak report, even though the Option D schedule they're proposing would only require one train to overnight in Scranton, they discussed a plan and gave cost estimates for having a second layover track, which suggests they are at least thinking ahead to the potential of a schedule with four or perhaps five daily round trips.

 

[jis]

In general they can run more trains as long as they stay clear of the Commission Hours slots at Penn Station. There are others like the Raritan Valley Line with higher priority dibs on those.

After the new tunnels are built and old tunnels rehabbed more slots become available removing this constraint, more so after NYPS South is built.

 

[John Bobinyec]

At MP 47.0 (West Port Morris) Brooklyn Rd. used to cross under the tracks. After the tracks were removed, so was the underpass. If the tracks are completed at that point, either the crossing will be at grade, or else the underpass will need to be recreated. Right now the roadway is at the same level as the right-of-way.
jb

Chuck Walsh replied to my query. It'll be a crossing at grade.
jb

 

[Amtrak25]

I did a Google street view of that. It is hard to visualize an underpass there now.

 

[jis]

Chuck Walsh replied to my query. It'll be a crossing at grade.
jb

That should not be a problem since the speeds that are planned do not require grade separation. I bet everything will be done to keep costs down. This is not Asia where they go all out to build a fully grade separate tracks for routes that expect heavy and fast traffic. of course arguably, this route does not expect that either.

 

[Burns651]

I did a Google street view of that. It is hard to visualize an underpass there now

Brooklyn Rd. was realigned at that spot to eliminate two sharp curves when the underpass was removed, sometime between 1987 and 1991. 1979 photo:

 

[Anderson]

I'd hope soon amtrak and the state patterns start exploring 7-9RT daily. Be good to know what infrastructure investments are needed now to reach that
Every 2 hour departure would be great

Example for 7RT

Depart Scranton	Arrive NYC	Depart NYC	Arrive Scranton
6A	8:50A	10A	12:50P
8A	10:50A	12P	2:50P
10A	12:50P	2P	4:50P
12P	2:50P	4P	6:50P
2P	4:50P	6P	8:50P
4P	6:50P	8P	10:50P
6P	8:50P	10P	12:50A

You could probably run one earlier NYC-Scranton train (you're probably looking at a pre-morning rush hour train) and a later Scranton-NYC train (sometime in the evening). Honestly, you could probably do this with two sets, depending on how you want to fiddle with things...but I'd be looking at something like an 0630 departure outbound paired with a 2000 return. You probably wouldn't even need to add any equipment to the mix to pull that off, and which set(s) ended up in NYC would also still rotate on a daily basis.

 

[George Harris]

Brooklyn Rd. was realigned at that spot to eliminate two sharp curves when the underpass was removed, sometime between 1987 and 1991. 1979 photo:

Cutting out the photo to save space and because you can see it in the post above: If what I have found and show here is the right place, it would be hard to do worse than to have a grade crossing here, as it would be at a low angle with a curve in the railroad. Picture bouncing across the track with superelevtion in the curve at this sort of angle, and worse two tracks. Then think about sight lines. This location cries out for a grade separation, whether over or under. Not having the topo, hard to say which would be better. I can think of a couple of reasonable and practical ways to do it, either over or under, but it would not be cheap.

 

[GDRRiley]

You could probably run one earlier NYC-Scranton train (you're probably looking at a pre-morning rush hour train) and a later Scranton-NYC train (sometime in the evening). Honestly, you could probably do this with two sets, depending on how you want to fiddle with things...but I'd be looking at something like an 0630 departure outbound paired with a 2000 return. You probably wouldn't even need to add any equipment to the mix to pull that off, and which set(s) ended up in NYC would also still rotate on a daily basis.

the 2 sets if they could speed the train up slightly and get high OTP would be good for every 3 hour service. turning trains in 15-20 mins shouldn't be hard here

 

[John Bobinyec]

Cutting out the photo to save space and because you can see it in the post above: If what I have found and show here is the right place, it would be hard to do worse than to have a grade crossing here, as it would be at a low angle with a curve in the railroad. Picture bouncing across the track with superelevtion in the curve at this sort of angle, and worse two tracks. Then think about sight lines. This location cries out for a grade separation, whether over or under. Not having the topo, hard to say which would be better. I can think of a couple of reasonable and practical ways to do it, either over or under, but it would not be cheap.
View attachment 31902

Yes, that's the location.
jb

 

[George Harris]

First cut after riding the road on google: Go over. Dead end Canfield Street. They can access Brooklyn Road via Lloyd Avenue. May or may not need some profile adjustment on Kynor Avenue, but it looks like all could be done without adjusting road profiles that would affect driveways. Suggest large box over railroad.

 

[Anderson]

the 2 sets if they could speed the train up slightly and get high OTP would be good for every 3 hour service. turning trains in 15-20 mins shouldn't be hard here

It may be that turning "should" only take that long, but I wouldn't want to bet on that at NYP. I'm also not certain about OTP - the risk of major schedule cascades is something that it's probably worth an extra set to limit the risk of.

 

[Mailliw]

Eventually, if Scranton-NYC service was fully merged with the Keystone Service, with the same trainsets, AM could run Scranton to Harrisburg via NYC & Philadelphia. The Pennsylvanian could be run Scranton to Pittsburgh! Include connecting trains and Scrantonians could travel as far as Miami or Boston via train. As far as Chicago, Los Angeles, or Seattle! Vancouver, Toronto, or Montreal

 

[railiner]

Eventually, if Scranton-NYC service was fully merged with the Keystone Service, with the same trainsets, AM could run Scranton to Harrisburg via NYC & Philadelphia. The Pennsylvanian could be run Scranton to Pittsburgh! Include connecting trains and Scrantonians could travel as far as Miami or Boston via train. As far as Chicago, Los Angeles, or Seattle! Vancouver, Toronto, or Montreal

What would be the purpose of that convoluted routing, better equipment utilization?

Seems to me, that if Scranton service proves popular, routes direct to Harrisburg or Philly would be a better option…

 

[danasgoodstuff]

What would be the purpose of that convoluted routing, better equipment utilization?

Seems to me, that if Scranton service proves popular, routes direct to Harrisburg or Philly would be a better option…

I would think if Scranton is successful, then the logical next step is extending service to Binghamton, NY. No?

 

[railiner]

I would think if Scranton is successful, then the logical next step is extending service to Binghamton, NY. No?

Sure…

 

[railiner]

And on to Buffalo

 

[danasgoodstuff]

And on to Buffalo

Like Phoebe Snow in her dress so white, on that road of anthracite.

 

[fdaley]

Eventually, if Scranton-NYC service was fully merged with the Keystone Service, with the same trainsets, AM could run Scranton to Harrisburg via NYC & Philadelphia. The Pennsylvanian could be run Scranton to Pittsburgh! Include connecting trains and Scrantonians could travel as far as Miami or Boston via train. As far as Chicago, Los Angeles, or Seattle! Vancouver, Toronto, or Montreal

I do think the main market for the service will be people traveling between Northeast PA and metro New York and NJ. But sure, even being able to connect at New York would open up that part of PA to rail travel throughout the rest of the system. Even without run-through service, a trip from Scranton to Boston, for example, would at least be nearly competitive time-wise with driving, not to mention a lot less tedious. I expect travel to other PA points would be limited, however, by the roundabout routing that would be required.

And yes, I think Chuck Schumer has already heard loud and clear from people in Binghamton and elsewhere in the Southern Tier of New York that they'd like the train to come to them if and when the Scranton service gets rolling.

 

[Amtrak25]

More practical run thru would be Scranton - NYPS - New England. People from the Poconos could go directly to Connecticut and Boston, stay off I80, the Cross Bronx, and I95. The service need not be constrained with cycling the same 2 trainsets, laying up for an hour or so in Penn Station or Sunnyside.

 

[Septa9739]

I think once the Scranton to NYP service is running, it would make sense to talk about BOS. That just seems easy(ish). Then I think Scranton to HAR would be the next relatively low hanging fruit. There is relative little NS traffic on the line (I think 6-8 per day) but infrastructure may be an issue. That Corridor would never support more than two or three round trips per day. Binghamton is pretty much the same story, but the lure of the NYC market will make it more appealing. Scranton to PHL is an ugly proposition. Travel times were historically fairly ugly. There is significant ROW disruption in Bucks and Montgomery Counties. SEPTA will repay AMTRAK‘s (sometimes very unfair) dispatching practices as AMTRAK tries to operate express over the congested with local service ex-Reading trunk from Jenkintown-Wyncote to Center City, although this could be mitigated by restoring the branch from Lansdale to Norristown and using infrastructure necessary for the Reading service to reach the NEC. Problems aside PHL-Scranton could be a very busy corridor, especially Allentown to PHL. It’s a question of dollars and cents.

 

[JoeBas]

More practical run thru would be Scranton - NYPS - New England. People from the Poconos could go directly to Connecticut and Boston, stay off I80, the Cross Bronx, and I95. The service need not be constrained with cycling the same 2 trainsets, laying up for an hour or so in Penn Station or Sunnyside.

I would imagine most people going Scranton to CT or Boston are on 84 than they are trying to grind the horror show above.