Vermonter VT track work completed

[afigg]

There will be a ceremony today in VT with LaHood, various politicians celebrating the completion of the track work in Vermont for the Vermonter route. The track upgrades will result in around 27 minutes removed from the Vermonter schedule north of MA, but the schedule changes will reportedly not take place until the next system schedule change which is now mid-January.

The US DOT put out a press release summarizing the work done and the plans for the Knowledge & NHV-SPG corridors.

This means that VT and Maine on November 1 will be the first states to have completed their portions of the high profile HSIPR projects.

When I searched for news stories on the completion of the VT track work, found this MassLive article "Passenger rail service returns to Palmer for a day" about a group advocating the restoration of passenger service over the New London to Brattleboro, VT corridor. There are no references to passenger service over this line in the New England passenger rail vision, so they have a long way to go to persuade state DOT managers and politicians to support passenger service over that route.

Worth contemplating what passenger train service might look like in New England in 10 years. NHV-SPG line at 110 mph with commuter service, possibly starting on electrification. Several daily Regionals running over the Inland Route. Better trip times on the NEC through CT, although still slow. Vermonter extended to Montreal along with a Boston-Montreal train. Boston to Springfield MBTA or Amtrak service? Ethan Allen extended northward to Burlington. Downeaster service expansion, maybe additional extensions to Auburn and Augusta ME. NH possibly getting serious about a Concord to Boston service.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

I think that a BOS-ALB train is needed separate from the 448/449.

 

[afigg]

I think that a BOS-ALB train is needed separate from the 448/449.

The issue with a stand-alone BOS-ALB train is the slow trip time. MBTA is buying the remaining section of the BOS to Worcester line from CSX and recently announced there will be more daily MBTA trains to WOR. MBTA has plans to make improvements to the BOS-WOR segment, although I don't recall reading specifics. MA wants better service and trip times to Springfield MA for Inland Route Regionals and a possible Boston to Montreal train, so the odds are good in the next 5-10 years that there will be restoration of all or some of the double tracking between SPG and WOR with a new/restored station at Palmer. so the BOS-SPG section should have trip time improvements in the coming years.

But the SPG to Albany section is slow, goes through the far less densely populated part of MA, is an active CSX freight route, and CSX may have no interest in hosting more passenger trains on their tracks w/o major investments. Any proposed new direct service or significant track upgrades over the SPG-ALB segment between BOS and ALB is going to be well down the priority list of MA and NY. Make enough improvements in trip time between BOS-NYP and NYP-ALB, could be faster to go through NYP than on a BOS-ALB train through western MA.

 

[George Harris]

But the SPG to Albany section is slow, goes through the far less densely populated part of MA, is an active CSX freight route, and CSX may have no interest in hosting more passenger trains on their tracks w/o major investments. Any proposed new direct service or significant track upgrades over the SPG-ALB segment between BOS and ALB is going to be well down the priority list of MA and NY. Make enough improvements in trip time between BOS-NYP and NYP-ALB, could be faster to go through NYP than on a BOS-ALB train through western MA.

Boston to Albany is slow because the line is very curvey, and is longer than the highway in distance. No matter how much is done in the way of track upgrades the time will never be very good. To have a good run time will require major realignments.

 

[stonesfan]

Boston to Albany is slow because the line is very curvey, and is longer than the highway in distance. No matter how much is done in the way of track upgrades the time will never be very good. To have a good run time will require major realignments.

I've traveled on the Lake Shore and indeed this line simply isnt set out for any kind of high speed running at all. Most of the running is done at 40-50mph and even this can produce a few bumps and hunting. Have timings on this route always been slow? Was there ever an alternative route from Boston to Albany during the 'golden' days?

 

[jphjaxfl]

The Boston & Maine's route from Boston to Albany was 2.5 miles shorter than the Boston & Albany, but ran north of the B&A. The.fastest running times were 5 hours on either route.

 

[George Harris]

In 1945 there were 10 trains each way between Boston and Albany. The fastest was 5 hours 15 minutes

Distances:

..0.0 Boston

.10.9 Riverside

.21.4 Framingham

.44.3 Worchester

.83.6 Palmer

.98.3 Springfield

125.8 Chester

150.6 Pittsfield

161.8 State Line

177.2 Chatham

200.4 Albany

Recall that at this time the New York Central was very serious about running a good and as fast as practical passenger service. one of these trains was all Pullman, even.

Mapquest says it is 169.4 miles via I-90 and the drive time is 2 hours 53 minutes. I think this contrast explains the issue.

How are we going to pull 30 miles out of the distance? If that is attempted, we might as will go ahead and build a true high speed railroad, as the cost will be most of the way there just to build a railroad that will permit a consistent 79 mph so that an average in the range of 60 mph can be run.

 

[George Harris]

The Boston adn Maine Route: The fastest train in 1945 was 5 hours 52 minutes, and the next fastest 6 hours 10 minutes.

Distances:

..0.0 Boston, North Station for them

..9.9 Waltham

.25.1 South Acton

.36.1 Ayer

.49.6 Fitchburg

.81.9 Athol

.97.3 Miller Falls

105.6 Greenfield

118.6 Shelburne Falls

142.4 North Adams

163.4 Hoosick Falls (is this near Hoosac Tunnel?)

174.1 Johnsonville

190.4 Troy - go to New York Central tracks at this point

196.6 Albany

Mapquest says it is 176.4 miles via State Hwy 2, whch more or less parallels the B&M, and 4 hours 12 minutes driving time. Thus, even though not a limited access highway it is still over an hour faster to drive than to ride the parallel B&M route. Does Massachusetts still have a 45 mph maximum speed limit on non-limited access roads?

Here the rail distance is "only" 20 miles longer than the road distance. Again, how do we pull out the distance?