Adirondack June '23 cancellation, and September restoration, state of Upstate NY service

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

enviro5609

Train Attendant
Joined
Jun 10, 2021
Messages
77
Location
New York
We were supposed to take the Adirondack to Montreal and back on June 30 and July 3. I got an automated call this morning that the 69 on June 30 is cancelled. No explanation. Nothing is posted on Amtrak’s website as of this morning.

There are alerts that 69 and 68 terminate and originate in Albany today due to “excessive heat restrictions” and it looks like there were some serious delays yesterday. But nothing on why the train is cancelled for at least a week out.

Very disappointing, obviously. But my first instinct here is that it’s probably CN’s fault. Maybe the track wasn’t sufficiently reconditioned to handle the summer heat and something has broken?
 
Yesterday the southbound showed up at the border about 2.5 hours late and ran late all the way to NYP, and the northbound was delayed north of the border, eventually reported by Amtrak to be about 1:40 late on the approach to St. Lambert. Southbound was still in the system as running today but cancelled every day thereafter through June 30. Northbound canceled today through June 30.

Perhaps a coincidence: Today's eastbound Maple Leaf is canceled between Toronto and Albany.
 
According to posters on the Empire State Passenger Association are reporting it’s due to heat restrictions in Canada.
 
I was just reading discussion on this elsewhere. Some figure this is CN playing hardball about their degraded track which, with two daily passenger trains now instead of a weekly local freight, is showing the wear that could should have been addressed before the Adirondack was restored. Failing government stepping in with upgrade money, the answer (as discussed both here and elsewhere) was to remain on CP tracks shared with commuter trains into Gare Lucien L'allier. As pointed out by @fdaley in another thread, it's not like the Adirondack connects with anything and it's literally a few block walk (underground in winter) to the same hotels and transportation that serve Gare Centrale and to Centrale itself if so desired. Amtrak, and NY State who are paying for this, need to put their foot down. If mild summer weather can cause such problems imagine what winter will be like.
 
Last edited:
jiml said:
I was just reading discussion on this elsewhere. Some figure this is CN playing hardball about their degraded track which, with two daily passenger trains now instead of a weekly local freight, is showing the wear that could should have been addressed before the Adirondack was restored. Failing government stepping in with upgrade money, the answer (as discussed both here and elsewhere) was to remain on CP tracks shared with commuter trains into Gare Lucien L'allier. As pointed out by @fdaley in another thread, it's not like the Adirondack connects with anything and it's literally a few block walk (underground in winter) to the same hotels and transportation that serve Gare Centrale and to Centrale itself if so desired. Amtrak, and NY State who are paying for this, need to put their foot down. If mild summer weather can cause such problems imagine what winter will be like.
Click to expand...
What can Amtrak and NY honestly do? Amtrak has power only within the border of the US. The best thing going forward is try to make a deal with CP about a Re-route.
 
I think unless the Canadian Government and/or the Government of Quebec takes some interest and gives some support to this service, it should be discontinued. This is completely ridiculous. NY State should consider re-jiggering it as a service to Plattsburgh or even Rouse's Point genuinely serving a less served region of NY State and let it be just that.
 
Last edited:
TransitTyrant said:
What can Amtrak and NY honestly do? Amtrak has power only within the border of the US. The best thing going forward is try to make a deal with CP about a Re-route.
Click to expand...
Exactly. With the bulk of the route north of Albany already on CP this should be a no-brainer. As has been discussed in multiple AU threads previously, the only justification for involving CN at all is having the train terminate at Montreal's Central station for connections that no longer exist and hypothetical traffic at suburban St. Lambert station (which has been discounted in several previous posts). Get the EXO commuter agency to service and turn the train and we might have a viable service.
 
jiml said:
Exactly. With the bulk of the route north of Albany already on CP this should be a no-brainer. As has been discussed in multiple AU threads previously, the only justification for involving CN at all is having the train terminate at Montreal's Central station for connections that no longer exist and hypothetical traffic at suburban St. Lambert station (which has been discounted in several previous posts). Get the EXO commuter agency to service and turn the train and we might have a viable service.
Click to expand...
Amtrak did at one time go so far as to run a test train to Lucien L'Allier, but then it sort of vaporized and nothing came of it. This is not the first time that significant problems have been faced with CN.
 
jiml said:
I was wondering the same thing. Insufficient passengers to justify or difficulty turning the train?
Click to expand...
NY State has to figure out whether they lie when they say that the Adirondack Route is for providing service to an under-served area, if they would run it only if it goes to Montreal. Do the needs of the Adirnodack region ebb and flow depending on whether the train can run to Montreal or not?

It is the equivalent of Vermont saying that they won't run the Vermonter unless it can run to Montreal.
 
Last edited:
I understand the really bad part is between Cantic and Rouses Point, which CN doesn't use much and is little more than an industrial lead.

I also seem to recall that that stretch is also jointed stick rail. Jointed rail is much less subject to heat kinks than CWR since there are joints every 39 feet to absorb expansion. So I am wondering what's going on. This is a case where a crap railroad ought to be an advantage.
 
zephyr17 said:
I understand the really bad part is between Cantic and Rouses Point, which CN doesn't use much and is little more than an industrial lead.
Click to expand...
Seem to recall CN abandon a bridge that Amtrak is now responsible for maintaining and may own the bridge. The route of the Maple Leaf. Of course a bridge over a river is so much cheaper than track. (Sarcasm on.)

Can’t spend NY taxes on project over the state line, guess we can’t spend Amtraks fund over the US border either. At least the bridge had a some of it located in the US. The other end in Canada.
 
Just-Thinking-51 said:
Seem to recall CN abandon a bridge that Amtrak is now responsible for maintaining and may own the bridge. The route of the Maple Leaf. Of course a bridge over a river is so much cheaper than track. (Sarcasm on.)

Can’t spend NY taxes on project over the state line, guess we can’t spend Amtraks fund over the US border either. At least the bridge had a some of it located in the US. The other end in Canada.
Click to expand...
Yes, CN wanted to stop maintaining the Whirlpool Bridge, since they don't use it at all. They use the International Bridge between Fort Erie and Buffalo exclusively now. Amtrak maintains it and I think they own it now. Maybe NYS. In any case, since the bridge is partly in the US, it would fall under the provision of the law thar requires Amtrak to pay any avoidable cost incurred by Amtrak service, so that would require 100% of the maintenance cost of a bridge only Amtrak uses.

I do not know about restrictions for New York, but the State of Washington paid for a new siding at Colebrook, BC where the BNSF New Westminister Sub meets the busy BCR Port Sub which BNSF required in order to add the second Vancouver train. BC did not kick in.
 
Except for Sunday being 85 degrees, it won't be over 79 the rest of the week in Montreal. Train 68 came down just fine on Friday. I do not believe the heat excuse. CN is up to something, like throwing a fit over access fees. That would explain Amtrak's silence in their Alerts.

The train needs to be rerouted to Lucien L'Allier. Face the reality that Preclearance in Montreal Central Station will never happen, nor will the Vermonter ever be extended. A stop at Montreal West would be more productive than St Lambert.

July 1 and 2 trains are not showing sold out, but 100% load factor. They might have been moving some people from cancelled trains.
 
Just-Thinking-51 said:
Seem to recall CN abandon a bridge that Amtrak is now responsible for maintaining and may own the bridge. The route of the Maple Leaf. Of course a bridge over a river is so much cheaper than track. (Sarcasm on.)

Can’t spend NY taxes on project over the state line, guess we can’t spend Amtraks fund over the US border either. At least the bridge had a some of it located in the US. The other end in Canada.
Click to expand...
The Niagara Falls Bridge Commission - a joint US-Canada agency - owns the bridge. Amtrak maintains the rail line on the upper level. The lower deck is used for Nexus auto traffic.
 
enviro5609 said:
We were supposed to take the Adirondack to Montreal and back on June 30 and July 3. I got an automated call this morning that the 69 on June 30 is cancelled. No explanation. Nothing is posted on Amtrak’s website as of this morning.

There are alerts that 69 and 68 terminate and originate in Albany today due to “excessive heat restrictions” and it looks like there were some serious delays yesterday. But nothing on why the train is cancelled for at least a week out.

Very disappointing, obviously. But my first instinct here is that it’s probably CN’s fault. Maybe the track wasn’t sufficiently reconditioned to handle the summer heat and something has broken?
Click to expand...
"Excessive heat restrictions"??? It barely made 70 the past week in New York. It's been a cool June in the Northeast, below average.
 
Bonser said:
"Excessive heat restrictions"??? It barely made 70 the past week in New York. It's been a cool June in the Northeast, below average.
Click to expand...
The rails have range of temperatures that are adjusted for. This is a more of a CWR continuously welded rail thing. However a super hot or cold day will cause issues for the tracks.

I am thinking this is not the reason for delays and cancellation, but not it the loop on why.
 
As to New York’s commitment to the line qua Montreal or Upstate New York, I think it’s a question of both. Traffic between Montreal and upstate stations may be necessary for the train to be financially viable. The new RPA stats aren’t helpful to figure out anything about the Adirondack because they are based on FY21 when the train didn’t run, but these upstate stations have so little ridership, that it might be that without traffic between them and Canada, the train is unsustainable. Without traffic to Canada, ridership would fall by half. In 2019, only about 25,000 passengers originated or terminated between Whitehall and Canada, about 35 per train, half a coach. Presumably a chunk of those 25,000 were Canada bound, maybe 20%, just a guess. That leaves 28 per train above Westport. That would make the unique segment of the no-Montreal Adirondack least used service nationwide by a mile. Right now, it’s the Heartland Flyer at around 75. Is it really the best use of limited equipment to drag four empty coaches and a lounge hundreds of miles to serve 28 passengers per train. Anywhere else in the country that would be a Thruway connection from Albany. That may actually be the best solution, which I never thought I would say, as multiple trips could be offered at the same cost. The bus would also likely be significantly faster and could facilitate a better overall schedule. Maybe it would make sense to convert the train to a second daily Ethan Allen? In any case, I think that Montreal traffic is entirely necessary to justify train service to that region over that route. The ridership simply isn’t there.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I haven't seen any figures since the service restarted, but before the pandemic, at least half the ridership north of Albany was people going to/from Montreal. Otherwise, north of Saratoga Springs, the most significant source of riders is Plattsburgh, and much of that is driven by the calendar of the local SUNY campus, with little traffic in midweek. I don't think a daily stub train to Plattsburgh is going to cut it economically.

If CN has become too difficult or its line is too decrepit, it would be smarter to work out a deal to use the CP line and wind up at Lucien L'Allier. The track is in much better shape and should allow passage from downtown Montreal to the border in about an hour, or about half the 2:05 the current schedule allows. The distance is only about 40 miles.

The downside is that Lucien L'Allier is a rather bare-bones facility, with low-level outdoor platforms and no canopies. Boarding and detraining there with luggage would be difficult, particularly in winter weather, which Montreal has a lot of. Also Amtrak passengers would lose access to the station staff and assistance that VIA provides at Central Station. The location is pretty good, though, still right downtown, within easy walking distance of Central and connected to the underground city.
 
Last edited:
jis said:
I think unless the Canadian Government and/or the Government of Quebec takes some interest and gives some support to this service, it should be discontinued. This is completely ridiculous. NY State should consider re-jiggering it as a service to Plattsburgh or even Rouse's Point genuinely serving a less served region of NY State and let it be just that.
Click to expand...
I agree. I'd like to point out that Greyhound timetables at like 1.5-2.0 hours less than Amtrak does Plattsburgh-Montreal, so if Amtrak decided to start running buses it's entirely possible that they could actually make some better connections in Montreal. I suspect that an Adirondack which has workable connections at both ends would be to the benefit of everyone involved.

Also, while I'd prefer service into Montreal, the fact is that almost all of the best scenery is south of the border.
 
fdaley said:
Yeah, I haven't seen any figures since the service restarted, but before the pandemic, at least half the ridership north of Albany was people going to/from Montreal. Otherwise, north of Saratoga Springs, the most significant source of riders is Plattsburgh, and much of that is driven by the calendar of the local SUNY campus, with little traffic in midweek. I don't think a daily stub train to Plattsburgh is going to cut it economically.

If CN has become too difficult or its line is too decrepit, it would be smarter to work out a deal to use the CP line and wind up at Lucien L'Allier. The track is in much better shape and should allow passage from downtown Montreal to the border in about an hour, or about half the 2:05 the current schedule allows. The distance is only about 40 miles.

The downside is that Lucien L'Allier is a rather bare-bones facility, with low-level outdoor platforms and no canopies. Boarding and detraining there with luggage would be difficult, particularly in winter weather, which Montreal has a lot of. Also Amtrak passengers would lose access to the station staff and assistance that VIA provides at Central Station. The location is pretty good, though, still right downtown, within easy walking distance of Central and connected to the underground city.
Click to expand...
Do the tracks still go under the Bell Center? I ask because if so, that's literally across the street from Marriott Chateau Champlain (and access to Gare Central via the underground city), so while not ideal it's not disastrous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top