Connecticut Inland Route and Albany - Boston Corridor (Compass Service)

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.
88 minutes is a huge time savings!
The highway drive time from Boston to Albany is about three hours now -- a full 2 hours faster than the Lake Shore's current schedule. So shaving off 88 minutes would go a long way toward making the train competitive. A travel time of about 3:30, while still somewhat slower than driving, is something a lot more people would be willing to use given the train's superior comfort and the benefits of not having to stare at the road ahead for all of that time. If the train's time is much more than four hours, I think it would be a tougher sell.
 
Although the victims of mostly unfair criticism, Talgo's passive tilting equipment would work well along this route.

In 1980 I had a honeymoon cross-country rail trip send-off for my bridal party at Boston South Station on the Lake Shore Limited. We were invited into the cab once the train reached Framingham and my wife "drove" the train from Framingham to Worcester. The route was a curve then a reverse curve followed by another curve, etc. all the way.

A Talgo passive tilting train would probably reduce travel times substantially. From Trains Magazine:

Tilting reduces trip time only when the route has a reasonable concentration of curves with curve speeds between 50 and 80 mph. In this speed range, a Talgo-type train will be able to negotiate a curve at speeds 5-10 mph faster than conventional cars.

This route seems to be ideal for such technology but it will probably not even be considered. Just some fun food for thought.
 
Here is copy of the study.. IMO reducing the curves for Chapter 4, Alternative 4/5 (figure 4-14 page 79 will have most bang for buck giving long sections of 110 MPH as well as reduce total mileage by 1.6 miles. $400M + would do those improvements and save !!88 minutes without doing Spenser.

https://www.mass.gov/lists/east-wes...#east-west-passenger-rail-study-final-report-

IMO start out with Alternative 1 -2 with agreement by CSX for implementing any improvements when service is already established.
That's the long term vision. The CRISI grant that's actually funded includes a much more modest (but still substantial) work on the track from Springfield to Worcester - probably most similar to alternative 2 in the study (As work on the portion west of Springfield hasn't been identified or requested for grant yet.). Essentially it involves getting the MAS up to 79 MPH from 60 between Springfield and Worcester, speeding up some of the slower curves, and adding some double track and sidings. When complete there will be one long continuous double track segment from Westfield MA to Palmer MA. There is also a siding included in this for the Grafton and Upton short line east of CSX's Worcester yard on the MBTA portion of the B&A to get their interchange off the main line tracks. It will shave a bit under 30 minutes off the Lake Shore's run time. It should be noted additional proposed projects on the MBTA portion of the B&A could result in additional travel time reductions.
 
Double track from Westfield to Palmer will be a big improvement and will certainly help to reduce freight-related delays. Of course, I can remember when this line had double track from Boston all the way to Post Road Junction, 187 miles to the west. Between this and the work on the Hartford line in recent years, it seems we are spending a lot of time and money now to restore capacity that Amtrak and Conrail eliminated in the late 1980s.
 
. . . I can remember when this line had double track from Boston all the way to Post Road Junction, 187 miles to the west . .
I can remember watching New York Central passenger trains on the line when I was a kid. It was four tracks wide all the way from Boston to Framingham.
 
Back
Top