Questions About Acela Express Station Stops

Hello, this is my first forum post on Amtrak Unlimited! I've been railfanning for quite some time now (about 7 years), and I've always had some questions about the stations that Acela Express trains stop and don't stop at. I'll give a list of stations in order from BOS-WAS and explain my wonderings, about their service. I'm not saying there is no explanation for Acela service, I'm just wondering why from what I know. I'm pretty sure there are probably explanations fro most if not all of my wonderings?

Back Bay - I could understand why most Acela trains would stop there, but not all of them. If South Station is only about a mile away, why wouldn't Amtrak think about axing it as a stop on a few or one Acela trains?

Route 128 - One that I've always had in question. I still don't see why ALL Amtrak trains would want to stop there, as the only thing that I've heard of that might explain its "importance" are some businesses, but I still don't see that being enough to make it an essential stop.

Bridgeport - I think I might have a slight understanding why none stop at Bridgeport but I'll explain that after I wonder at first why. It would seem to make sense to have some Acela trains stop at Connecticut's largest city, but I think because of the city's reputation for being rundown and urban, that's why it's off the timetable.

Stamford - I was surprised when I first learned there were some Acelas that skipped New Haven, and even more when I found out that all of them stopped at Stamford. New Haven is a lot busier than Stamford (By Amtrak Passengers Only) and has many more business districts within it. So wouldn't it make more sense to have all Acela trains stop at New Haven and most but not all at Stamford?

Metropark - All Long-Distance trains (except Palmetto), most Keystone Service trains, the Vermonter on weekdays, the Pennsylvanian, and only a few Acela (and also I think a few NERs) trains skip this station. If it is regarded as "not important enough" to be eligible for service from the trains I just mentioned (excluding AE and NER) why would a large number of AE trains want to stop there?

Trenton - It would make more sense to me if the frequencies between Metropark and Trenton were swapped, meaning Metropark would only have 1 or 2 AE trains stopping there. The state capitol is usually a busy stop on any Amtrak route, and Trenton is no exception, which is what raises my question about Trenton.

Wilmington - I don't have too much question about why all Amtrak services stop there. But I have thought that, wouldn't Amtrak want to bring back one of those "Express" Acela Express trains, that don't make stops within a certain distance of one another? I'm not talking about what they did a decade ago with those trains only stopping at NYP-PHL-WAS, I'm thinking maybe axing stops that are within short distances of each other, ex: NYP-NWK, PHL-WIL, BWI-WAS, etc.

Quite a bit of business, the Hynes Center, and many hotels are on the Back Bay side. Stamford has suffered recently, but is considered a major business location. A look at passenger figures might shed some light on some of the answers.

PVD said:

Quite a bit of business, the Hynes Center, and many hotels are on the Back Bay side. Stamford has suffered recently, but is considered a major business location. A look at passenger figures might shed some light on some of the answers.

Click to expand...

Some figures are high, but I think it might have to do more with service frequency than actual demand.

One thing to consider with a location such as Metropark is the ridership demographic. Acela Express trains tend to attract business travellers whereas long distance trains attract more leisure travellers, and the location around Metropark is more used by businesspeople. As to Route 128, many of the southern suburbs of Boston such as Westwood have very wealthy areas full of potential Acela passengers. If they had to drive (or use the MBTA) to Boston or Providence, many of them would fly instead. As to Back Bay, well over 25% of passengers using Amtrak to Boston choose it over South Station. Although South Station is only a mile away, the few extra minutes from stopping in an area that is slow trackage already is worth the added convenience of direct access to a major area of Boston (also a wealthy area). In addition, this stop provides direct access to the Orange Line, which in turn provides a one-seat ride from the Acela Express to the Downeaster.

One word answer for everything. Ridership.

Another factor is the station set-up. The lack of Acelas at Bridgeport confused me as well, but it turns out Bridgeport has four tracks passing through but two of them lack platforms, so for a train to stop there it must be on the local track, meaning additional congestion and time lost if Acelas were to stop there.

brianpmcdonnell17 said:

One thing to consider with a location such as Metropark is the ridership demographic. Acela Express trains tend to attract business travellers whereas long distance trains attract more leisure travellers, and the location around Metropark is more used by businesspeople. As to Route 128, many of the southern suburbs of Boston such as Westwood have very wealthy areas full of potential Acela passengers. If they had to drive (or use the MBTA) to Boston or Providence, many of them would fly instead. As to Back Bay, well over 25% of passengers using Amtrak to Boston choose it over South Station. Although South Station is only a mile away, the few extra minutes from stopping in an area that is slow trackage already is worth the added convenience of direct access to a major area of Boston (also a wealthy area). In addition, this stop provides direct access to the Orange Line, which in turn provides a one-seat ride from the Acela Express to the Downeaster.

Click to expand...

Completely my fault for forgetting about the BBY-BON transfer. It definitely now does make sense for the connecting passengers heading to Maine, or New Hampshire. I didn't know there were a lot of wealthy areas around Back Bay as I didn't notice any when I transferred last year, it all adds up now. The commuter travel adds a lot to the reasoning but I still think maybe a mid-day sacrifice of Metropark (Assuming Little to No Commuters) wouldn't be a bad option.

brianpmcdonnell17 said:

Another factor is the station set-up. The lack of Acelas at Bridgeport confused me as well, but it turns out Bridgeport has four tracks passing through but two of them lack platforms, so for a train to stop there it must be on the local track, meaning additional congestion and time lost if Acelas were to stop there.

Click to expand...

Ridership isn't even that high from Bridgeport on the Regionals...I can't imagine what the Acelas would (not) bring.

Triley said:

brianpmcdonnell17 said:

Another factor is the station set-up. The lack of Acelas at Bridgeport confused me as well, but it turns out Bridgeport has four tracks passing through but two of them lack platforms, so for a train to stop there it must be on the local track, meaning additional congestion and time lost if Acelas were to stop there.

Click to expand...

Ridership isn't even that high from Bridgeport on the Regionals...I can't imagine what the Acelas would (not) bring.

Click to expand...

That's true, I was just mentioning another factor as well. It is the largest city in Connecticut but in a huge urban area such as Southwestern Connecticut the cities can blend together so the population figures can be more politcal than anything else. The same situation occurs in New Jersey, where some of the largest cities don't even have Regionals stopping in them.

brianpmcdonnell17 said:

Triley said:

brianpmcdonnell17 said:

Another factor is the station set-up. The lack of Acelas at Bridgeport confused me as well, but it turns out Bridgeport has four tracks passing through but two of them lack platforms, so for a train to stop there it must be on the local track, meaning additional congestion and time lost if Acelas were to stop there.

Click to expand...

Ridership isn't even that high from Bridgeport on the Regionals...I can't imagine what the Acelas would (not) bring.

Click to expand...

That's true, I was just mentioning another factor as well. It is the largest city in Connecticut but in a huge urban area such as Southwestern Connecticut the cities can blend together so the population figures can be more politcal than anything else. The same situation occurs in New Jersey, where some of the largest cities don't even have Regionals stopping in them.

Click to expand...

I should have clarified that I guess I decided to amend to my other post, but did it as a reply since you mentioned Bridgeport. Sorry!

Also note that the suburban Acela stops of BWI and MET are “directional,” favoring day trips from BWI to NYP and from MET to WAS. The weekday Acela schedules don’t really support a day trip in the opposite direction.

As Triley said, ridership.

Triley said:

One word answer for everything. Ridership.

Click to expand...

Technically, revenue more than ridership.

If too many stops slow a train down to the point where it can no longer command a fare premium, they can still carry a bunch of people, but they'd be folks that would otherwise ride Northeast Regionals rather than folks paying Acela fares for a faster ride.

brianpmcdonnell17 said:

One thing to consider with a location such as Metropark is the ridership demographic. Acela Express trains tend to attract business travellers whereas long distance trains attract more leisure travellers, and the location around Metropark is more used by businesspeople. As to Route 128, many of the southern suburbs of Boston such as Westwood have very wealthy areas full of potential Acela passengers. If they had to drive (or use the MBTA) to Boston or Providence, many of them would fly instead. As to Back Bay, well over 25% of passengers using Amtrak to Boston choose it over South Station. Although South Station is only a mile away, the few extra minutes from stopping in an area that is slow trackage already is worth the added convenience of direct access to a major area of Boston (also a wealthy area). In addition, this stop provides direct access to the Orange Line, which in turn provides a one-seat ride from the Acela Express to the Downeaster.

Click to expand...

Metropark for the last several years has had a faster growth of ridership and revenues than Trenton. It is conveniently located right off a major highway unlike Trenton, the location of which leaves a lot to be desired.

All plans for improvement of the NEC through NJ includes rather expensive plans for building platforms serving the center track at Metropark, which would enable all Acelas to stop there, so notwithstanding what AU-dom might think, Metropark will continue to serve high fare paying services, and more so, not less. It is quite unlikely that there will be any major shift of Acela stops from Metropark to Trenton. Now if the stop was a Hamilton rather than Trenton, that could be a different matter altogether. Also it would be plausible to revert back to a larger number of trains stopping at Princeton Jct, even at the cost of Trenton if that is what it takes.

From NJ-ARP we have even proposed to possibility of doing alternate trains stopping at Metropark or Princeton Jct at least for NERs, and Having all Keystones at least stop at Princeton Jct. Amtrak lost a whole chunk of ridership and revenue when it abandoned Princeton Jct, soon after the demise of the Clockers. There were some significant operational reasons for doing so given the sorry state of the outer tracks in that area back then causing trains stopping at Princeton jct. to lose quite a bit of time doing so. With the upping of the track speed to 125mph on the outer tracks west of Delcan/Adams and high speed crossovers at those locations between the inner and outer tracks, it may become operationally more feasible to stop at Princeton Jct. at least for NERs with minimal loss of time, provided they can be kept from getting stuck behind that lumbering NJT expresses. Incidentally those also are supposed to get upto 125mph though many say that it will require proper amount of tail wind and careful sail setting to get them upto that speed unless NJT decides to provide them with top and tail double locomotives.

Thank you, jis--

I see so many businesspeople at Princeton Junction when I commute to/from there, and I have long thought what a waste it is that more trains don't stop there. You have made the argument for that very eloquently. Hamilton, too, has lots of businesspeople, but I'm not sure it has the travel connection options (like the Dinky) that Princeton Junction has. The few times I've taken NJT to/from Hamilton, I've been dropped off/picked up by car, and that seems to be true for most people there.

NJT does go pretty fast sometimes, by the way. Usually as soon as they say, "If you're toward the back, start walking forward." Then as soon as people get up, the train speeds up and starts swaying on the rough tracks as you near Trenton--it feels like they're going 125 mph. I've always thought they do it on purpose . Then they remember to slow down again to make sure everyone misses their connection. (Well, you know it's been a while since I've lit into NJT--too busy complaining about the picnic-in-a-basket food at Amtrak, and I got sidetracked--so I couldn't resist .)

However, to address your point about the lumbering NJT trains, most of the time when I've been on NJT, we have to wait for Amtrak, not the other way round. For example, at my usual commuter time, the Meteor often passes us and we stop til it leaves TRE and we then come in on the same track. So slow trains in front of them probably wouldn't be a problem if everything was dispatched to make sure they weren't arriving at the station at the same time.

I've sometimes wondered why Amtrak doesn't stop in Elizabeth at least one or two times a day...I believe some Clocker's did way back when.

I suppose for the same reason they don't stop any more in places like Aurora, Illinois....too close to other nearby stations with good service...

Once you say OK Elizabeth, then the next question is OK, why not Rahway? etc. etc. and yes in the very earlyd ays of Amtrak Clockers did stop at Rahway too when it even had a platform onn the fast tracks which Elizabeth never did. It is impractical to expect Amtrak to stop at every NJT stop. The best solution is through ticketing between Amtrak and NJT. But of course perish the thought about two essentially government outfits actually working together to serve customers better As for a new station where Amtrak could stop to get significant additional ridership, that stop is Secaucus Jct. which is operationally even worse!

Elizabeth would have the same issue of forcing the stopping train to be on the outer track in the mess of NJT local trains. The clean separation between Intercity and NJT outer zone expresses on the one hand and the middle and inner zone local on the other which helps keep things moving would be broken and and the consequences of that are not pretty. Anyone who has ever tried dispatching the NEC even on a toy dispatching program like Train Dispatcher mentioned by Seaboard elsewhere can see that within minutes.

Amtrak moved its western suburban stop from Aurora to Naperville after Metra switched its Aurora terminal from the traditional CB&Q station to a new station not on the BNSF main line. Also, Naperville has a bigger population than Aurora. It's like the third or fourth biggest city in Illinois.

MikefromCrete said:

Amtrak moved its western suburban stop from Aurora to Naperville after Metra switched its Aurora terminal from the traditional CB&Q station to a new station not on the BNSF main line. Also, Naperville has a bigger population than Aurora. It's like the third or fourth biggest city in Illinois.

Click to expand...

Yeah. And all this happened before the current revival of Aurora got going too. I remember Aurora back in the waning days of the Amtrak stop there was a pretty dismal place around the station.

MikefromCrete said:

Amtrak moved its western suburban stop from Aurora to Naperville after Metra switched its Aurora terminal from the traditional CB&Q station to a new station not on the BNSF main line. Also, Naperville has a bigger population than Aurora. It's like the third or fourth biggest city in Illinois.

Click to expand...

Not that it takes away from your larger point, but Aurora has ~50,000 more people than Naperville (approx 200k for Aurora, 150k for Naperville). Aurora is the second most populous municipality in Illinois.

Mystic River Dragon said:

However, to address your point about the lumbering NJT trains, most of the time when I've been on NJT, we have to wait for Amtrak, not the other way round. For example, at my usual commuter time, the Meteor often passes us and we stop til it leaves TRE and we then come in on the same track. So slow trains in front of them probably wouldn't be a problem if everything was dispatched to make sure they weren't arriving at the station at the same time.

Click to expand...

There is a reason that several NJT trains are scheduled for 10 mins or more between Hamilton and Trenton. That is to allow an Amtrak to platform at Trenton first.

Trenton is a bit of a mess specially when the westbound outer platform is rendered unusable because it is occupied by a SEPTA train in order to minimize the need for crossing it over from the other side at Fair (or is i8t Ham? I forget) and hold it at Barracks Yard until it is close to departure time.

jis,

Thanks for even more information on my NJT commute! It makes a boring trip much more interesting. What/where are Fair, i8t Ham, and Barracks Yard? I have always wondered where SEPTA wanders off to after it drops the Philly commuters off in Trenton.

I already had figured out on my own that we regularly wait for the Meteor to clear track 4. They rarely announce why we are stopping, and I love it when someone says out loud, "NOW what are we stopping for?" and I pipe up and say, "We're waiting for the Silver Meteor, the Amtrak Florida train, to leave because we will come in on the same track," and they all look at me like I'm (1) a genius, or (2) one of those darned railfans!

For back-bay and route-128, I've always heard that the reason those stops are made, even though they are all close together, is to compete with Logan Airport.

They want to make it super convenient for people south of boston, for trips to NYC. Its quicker to get to central NYC via amtrak, then Logan Airport, which is on the northern side of Boston, and no direct routes in southern Boston.

That said, if I'm coming down from Portland, I'll still connect at South Station. It has a ClubAcela, and is dramatically nicer then Back Bay.

jis said:

MikefromCrete said:

Amtrak moved its western suburban stop from Aurora to Naperville after Metra switched its Aurora terminal from the traditional CB&Q station to a new station not on the BNSF main line. Also, Naperville has a bigger population than Aurora. It's like the third or fourth biggest city in Illinois.

Click to expand...

Yeah. And all this happened before the current revival of Aurora got going too. I remember Aurora back in the waning days of the Amtrak stop there was a pretty dismal place around the station.

Click to expand...

And I remember Aurora back in the Burlington Route days. It was an almost "perfect" suburban stop...a substantial station and platforms, the end of the commuter line with easy connections to local trains making all stops, and it was where the Denver line and the St. Paul line diverged, as far as passenger's were concerned...

The Route 128 station was started way back in the New Haven days --- to provide parking and easy access to Route 128, allowing people who don't need to go to downtown Boston a hassle-free way to use the train. Metropark is also designed to allow lots of parking.

I think a lot of you are forgetting that stations like RTE,STM,MET and although they aren't mentioned BWI and NCR are considered "beltway" stops. In other words, these stations are "park and rides" which are typically located outside city limits which are a stone's throw from major highways. In a lot of cases, the population built up around the train stations.

Another thing is operational flexibility. Some tracks aren't easily accessible during certain periods. That is a huge problem for Metropark and Trenton. In Trenton's case, there is so much local service, there isn't a real reason to sacrifice the schedule to make the stop on a regular basis.

Mystic River Dragon said:

However, to address your point about the lumbering NJT trains, most of the time when I've been on NJT, we have to wait for Amtrak, not the other way round. For example, at my usual commuter time, the Meteor often passes us and we stop til it leaves TRE and we then come in on the same track. So slow trains in front of them probably wouldn't be a problem if everything wasdispatchedto make sure they weren't arriving at the station at the same time.

Click to expand...

I think you mean scheduled. The dispatcher will generally follow the schedule.