2019 Amtrak Train New York to Pittsfield

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
It was discussed elsewhere here a month or so ago. There's a Youtube video of the recent meeting out there in cyberland somewhere, also. It's about 28 minutes long.

One thing about the schedule: you can board at Yonkers to get to Pittsfield, but you can't get off at Yonkers returning on Sunday.
 
The engines would need to switch ends in Albany and the pax would ride backwards for that part of the route.
Like they do on Keystones many times each day? Does not seem like a showstopper.
Exactly. Or if they just run it with an ex-Metroliner cab car, all they have to do is turn the seats at ALB. And even if they don’t, most pax probably don’t care.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The engines would need to switch ends in Albany and the pax would ride backwards for that part of the route.
Like they do on Keystones many times each day? Does not seem like a showstopper.
Exactly. Or if they just run it with an ex-Metroliner cab car, all they have to do is turn the seats at ALB. And even if they don’t, most pax probably don’t care.
Keystones do not turn the seats anywhere. Half of each car faces one way and the other half the other way. Customers can choose to sit whichever way they want assuming appropriately pointed seat is available.

Whether you run with an ex-Metroliner cab car or you change engines at ALB has nothing to do with what you do with the seats.
 
The engines would need to switch ends in Albany and the pax would ride backwards for that part of the route.
Like they do on Keystones many times each day? Does not seem like a showstopper.
Exactly. Or if they just run it with an ex-Metroliner cab car, all they have to do is turn the seats at ALB. And even if they don’t, most pax probably don’t care.
Keystones do not turn the seats anywhere. Half of each car faces one way and the other half the other way. Customers can choose to sit whichever way they want assuming appropriately pointed seat is available.
Whether you run with an ex-Metroliner cab car or you change engines at ALB has nothing to do with what you do with the seats.
Obviously there’s no connection between the engine situation and the seat orientation. I was just talking about two different things in the same post.
 
IIRC, the line to Pittsfield branches off before reaching ALB. Not sure of the track connection, but I was wondering if there would be enough business to justify just running the train from Hudson directly to Pittsfield, eliminating ALB? It might cut a lot of time off the trip, if so.....
 
They could use a similar consist to the Downeaster, with a converted F9 as a cab car on one end. That train also has half the seats facing each direction.
 
IIRC, the line to Pittsfield branches off before reaching ALB. Not sure of the track connection, but I was wondering if there would be enough business to justify just running the train from Hudson directly to Pittsfield, eliminating ALB? It might cut a lot of time off the trip, if so.....
Negative, you have to run all the way into the station to make reverse back towards PIttsfield.
 
IIRC, the line to Pittsfield branches off before reaching ALB. Not sure of the track connection, but I was wondering if there would be enough business to justify just running the train from Hudson directly to Pittsfield, eliminating ALB? It might cut a lot of time off the trip, if so.....
Negative, you have to run all the way into the station to make reverse back towards PIttsfield.
No, actually there is a cutoff south of ALB to the line between Boston and Selkirk. The LSL used this backup move for years until the cutoff line was built right out of the ALB station.
 
IIRC, the line to Pittsfield branches off before reaching ALB. Not sure of the track connection, but I was wondering if there would be enough business to justify just running the train from Hudson directly to Pittsfield, eliminating ALB? It might cut a lot of time off the trip, if so.....
There is no way to get to Pittsfield from Hudson while moving continuously in a single direction. You have to either back up at ALB or you have to backup from the CSX Hudson bridge/Selkirk.

Negative, you have to run all the way into the station to make reverse back towards PIttsfield.
No, actually there is a cutoff south of ALB to the line between Boston and Selkirk. The LSL used this backup move for years until the cutoff line was built right out of the ALB station.
The cutoff connects to the B&A facing only towards Selkirk. There is no way to get to Pittsfield without doing a backup move then from Selkirk or at least from the Hudson Bridge.

When the LSL Boston section used that routing, it pulled forward onto the bridge past the connection, then backed up down the cutoff to Schodack's landing and joined the Empire Route, and then pulled forward into Albany.

CSX will probably let you even run at 100mph west of Hoffman's before they will allow that move again on a regular basis.
default_wink.png
 
IIRC, the line to Pittsfield branches off before reaching ALB. Not sure of the track connection, but I was wondering if there would be enough business to justify just running the train from Hudson directly to Pittsfield, eliminating ALB? It might cut a lot of time off the trip, if so.....
There is no way to get to Pittsfield from Hudson while moving continuously in a single direction. You have to either back up at ALB or you have to backup from the CSX Hudson bridge/Selkirk.

Negative, you have to run all the way into the station to make reverse back towards PIttsfield.
No, actually there is a cutoff south of ALB to the line between Boston and Selkirk. The LSL used this backup move for years until the cutoff line was built right out of the ALB station.
The cutoff connects to the B&A facing only towards Selkirk. There is no way to get to Pittsfield without doing a backup move then from Selkirk or at least from the Hudson Bridge.

When the LSL Boston section used that routing, it pulled forward onto the bridge past the connection, then backed up down the cutoff to Schodack's landing and joined the Empire Route, and then pulled forward into Albany.

CSX will probably let you even run at 100mph west of Hoffman's before they will allow that move again on a regular basis.
default_wink.png
I guess that is how we went from Selkirk back to New York on last year's Autumn Express....I just couldn't remember the complete track layout at that junction.....

I just took a look at the layout on a map...now it becomes clear...they would have to build a whole new spur to do what I suggested....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IIRC, the line to Pittsfield branches off before reaching ALB. Not sure of the track connection, but I was wondering if there would be enough business to justify just running the train from Hudson directly to Pittsfield, eliminating ALB? It might cut a lot of time off the trip, if so.....
There is no way to get to Pittsfield from Hudson while moving continuously in a single direction. You have to either back up at ALB or you have to backup from the CSX Hudson bridge/Selkirk.

Negative, you have to run all the way into the station to make reverse back towards PIttsfield.
No, actually there is a cutoff south of ALB to the line between Boston and Selkirk. The LSL used this backup move for years until the cutoff line was built right out of the ALB station.
The cutoff connects to the B&A facing only towards Selkirk. There is no way to get to Pittsfield without doing a backup move then from Selkirk or at least from the Hudson Bridge.

When the LSL Boston section used that routing, it pulled forward onto the bridge past the connection, then backed up down the cutoff to Schodack's landing and joined the Empire Route, and then pulled forward into Albany.

CSX will probably let you even run at 100mph west of Hoffman's before they will allow that move again on a regular basis.
default_wink.png
This is exactly right. One proposal was to build connection that would allow a movement onto the B&A to continue running forward, but was deemed too expensive by the study group.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess that is how we went from Selkirk back to New York on last year's Autumn Express....I just couldn't remember the complete track layout at that junction.....

I just took a look at the layout on a map...now it becomes clear...they would have to build a whole new spur to do what I suggested....
On the Autumn Express, we came north on the River Line and turned left into Selkirk Yard. There we reversed direction, went across the Castleton Cutoff bridge across the Hudson and then down the Castleton Connection to Schodack's Landing where we joined the Amtrak Empire Corridor headed towards New York.
 
Yeah, it's probably more likely to restore the old Harlem line all the way to Chatham, before they ever build a new line from Schodack's Landing northeast to connect to the B&A...
default_tongue.png
 
Back
Top