Passenger Trains > Apparently a lot more folks in Massachusetts than South Dakota...

Here’s what Amtrak’s vision for 2035 looks like for New England...

https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2021/04/01/amtrak-plan-2035-new-england?s_campaign=Email:Extra&SUBID=7820ec9405&AUDID=30155498


 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/03/21 18:22 by Molino.

As a Massachusetts resident, I can say that without fail, the extra trains will be studied and re-studied and re-studied until ALL the funds are gone!  Then the NIMBYs will start screaming, too!

Restoring the 'Inland Route' has been studied multiple times since it ended about 20 years ago.  Still no Inland Route trains.  Blame Mass DOT, blame MBTA, blame CSX, blame local governments, and on and on.  New Englanders seem to move fast when initiating studies, but spending the money and getting it done is slower than a snails pace.

Probably the 1st will be Downeaster to Rockland.

Posted from Android

Hardly bold vision especially for a 15 year or so time frame. Flaccid strikes me as a better description. OTOH I don't see a lot of new opportunities in NE for an intercity carrier as opposed to regional commuter operations eg Boston to Manchester/Concord seems more in MBTA's realm

It's just sad in general Amtrak assumes expanding corridors only's the wsy to go, EXPAND THE LD TRAINS TOO YOU JERKS!

Posted from Android

BRAtkinson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As a Massachusetts resident, I can say that
> without fail, the extra trains will be studied and
> re-studied and re-studied until ALL the funds are
> gone!  Then the NIMBYs will start screaming,
> too!
>
> Restoring the 'Inland Route' has been studied
> multiple times since it ended about 20 years
> ago.  Still no Inland Route trains.  Blame Mass
> DOT, blame MBTA, blame CSX, blame local
> governments, and on and on.  New Englanders seem
> to move fast when initiating studies, but spending
> the money and getting it done is slower than a
> snails pace.

As someone who lives outside of New England, but follows rail happenings there, I'd say New England is one of America's passenger rail hot spots in the past 50 years.

MBTA

The Fitchburg Line service has been extended 4 miles to Wachusett in 2016

• Service on the former Boston & Albany line was extended from Framingham to Worcester in 1994
• Service along two Old Colony rail lines was reestablished in 1997
• Service on the Greenbush Line returned in 2007
• Weekend Cape Flyer trains began running in 2013
• Service to Fall River and New Bedford is scheduled to open in a couple of years.

Amtrak

Routes added after Amtrak was created were:

Boston section of the Lake Shore Limited
Ethan Allen to Rutland, VT
Montrealer (now the Vermonter)

and last, but certainly not least...

The Downeaster from Boston to Portland and then on to Brunswick

Additionally, while not a new route, there was major investment in the New York City - Boston segment of the Northeast Corridor.

There were studies conducted before many (all?) of these improvements made.   I know that there was significant community opposition to the Greenbush commuter rail and extension of the Downeaster service to Brunswick and I am guessing similar opposition to other rail passenger improvements projects.

I am curious, where in the country do you believe that rail passenger improvement projects occur without facing NIMBY opposition or without extensive studies?








 

RuleG Wrote:
-------------------------------------
>
> I am curious, where in the country do you believe
> that rail passenger improvement projects occur
> without facing NIMBY opposition or without
> extensive studies?
>

Nowhere....and the "wheels of change" spin in quicksand. In order for real change to occur, various people/entities/government(s) have to WORK TOGETHER. When does this happen??!! Sorry folks, I call it like I see it.

I will believe a change/improvement to our national rail passenger network when I SEE IT. Some of what I have read in various threads recently is nothing more than a "pipe dream"....

Again, the current administration is NOT going to "save" Amtrak.

Posted from Android

I don't think Amtrak itself wants to save Amtrak. The fantasy map of state-only supported corridors, from which the Biden Administration is taking its cues, was drawn by political hack Stephen Gardner and his 64-pack of Crayolas, and of course ignores the entire national network outside the NEC. It is no accident, but deliberate, that Pueblo does not touch the SW Chief route. His goal is to nail states for 85% of Fully Allocated Cost, based on their corrupt accounting methodology, and send the excesses to the NEC. PRIIA-209 is a Ponzi scheme, which he wrote in the first place back in 2008. 

There is no doubt in my mind that states like SC, GA, FL, TN, and OH will laugh this off into the recycling pail by their morning coffee break. That is all before the Class I's are engaged. Then it comes down to the NEC, including the silliness of Ronkonkoma to entertain the railfans, while FRA has already postponed NYS's Empire Corridor EIS until 2022, in which case it won't get close to passing the Senate, and that will be the end of that.  



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/21 09:18 by joemvcnj.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think Amtrak itself wants to save Amtrak.
> The fantasy map of state-only supported corridors,
> from which the Biden Administration is taking its
> cues, was drawn by political hack Stephen Gardner
> and his 64-pack of Crayolas, and of course ignores
> the entire national network outside the NEC....

Definitely not an "optimized" network. 

BRAtkinson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As a Massachusetts resident, I can say that
> without fail, the extra trains will be studied and
> re-studied and re-studied until ALL the funds are
> gone!  Then the NIMBYs will start screaming,
> too!
>
> Restoring the 'Inland Route' has been studied
> multiple times since it ended about 20 years
> ago.  Still no Inland Route trains.  Blame Mass
> DOT, blame MBTA, blame CSX, blame local
> governments, and on and on.  New Englanders seem
> to move fast when initiating studies, but spending
> the money and getting it done is slower than a
> snails pace.

Former Mass resident here also. One possible difference this time is that there may actually be some funding available to make it happen. 

if you actually read the studies you refer to here, most of them say that service restoration is a good thing, but it's expensive and they question how to obtain funding. A study like that is not a failure., it's sort of a success.  You look at how service could be restored, look for a feasible means to fund it, and (often) conclude that funding isn't quite available just yet. That's reality. 

Politics is the art of the possible, and up until recently, this wasn't really possible. That might be changing. 

Republican Ohio has Governor Mike DeWine - not too bad a guy as Republicans go.  But do not expect dollars from Ohio state government.  And DeWine will likely give the idea meek endorsement, at best.

Then the legislature will sabotage it again and again.  The Cities on the 3C corridor will heartily endorse it (Dayton, Cincinnati have already done so).   Columbus?   Cleveland eventually will, but Mayor Frank Jackson likely could not find the Amtrak station if he wanted to.  

Thankfully the Cleveland Plain-Dealer had a nice front page story on Amtrak expansion.

But you can count on NS and CSX to resist the 3C corridor by all means necessary, even though it will bring significant dollars their way for track and signal improvements.  

Wurli1938 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Probably the 1st will be Downeaster to Rockland.
>
My money is on Rutland - Burlington as first out of the gate.  Supposedly the recently completed Middlebury tunnel was the last major obstacle to commencing service.

The most surprising route on the map is Boston - Concord, NH.  At just around seventy miles, this seems to be well outside of Amtrak's purview.  It's not an extension of the a NEC, as it would operate out of North Station in Boston.

Dave

Boston to Concord NH is consistent in length with Hoboken NJ to Port Jervis NY, or GCT to Poughkeepsie NY.

Is NH supporting this idea?

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Boston to Concord NH is consistent in length with
> Hoboken NJ to Port Jervis NY, or GCT to
> Poughkeepsie NY.
>
> Is NH supporting this idea?
>

No.  Our legislators occasionally throw a few dollars at a study, but nothing more.  To my knowledge, even those who do support passenger rail in the upper Merrimack Valley envision a model that integrates it into the MBTA (as Rhode Island does), rather than involving Amtrak.

Dave

DavidP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> even those who do support passenger
> rail in the upper Merrimack Valley envision a
> model that integrates it into the MBTA

This was tried in the early 1980s and only lasted a year or two.  But, given how much congestion there is on I-93 from Granite Staters working in Massachusetts, it might be viable if traffic comes back in a post-pandemic world.

pennsy3750 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> DavidP Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > even those who do support passenger
> > rail in the upper Merrimack Valley envision a
> > model that integrates it into the MBTA
>
> This was tried in the early 1980s and only lasted
> a year or two.  But, given how much congestion
> there is on I-93 from Granite Staters working in
> Massachusetts, it might be viable if traffic comes
> back in a post-pandemic world.

Wasn't that service some kind of a bus on rails?

sums007 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pennsy3750 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > DavidP Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > even those who do support passenger
> > > rail in the upper Merrimack Valley envision a
> > > model that integrates it into the MBTA
> >
> > This was tried in the early 1980s and only
> lasted
> > a year or two.  But, given how much congestion
> > there is on I-93 from Granite Staters working
> in
> > Massachusetts, it might be viable if traffic
> comes
> > back in a post-pandemic world.
>
> Wasn't that service some kind of a bus on rails?

Yes, in part.  For most of the experimental service, one Boston - Concord round trip was covered by an MBTA standard commuter set, and a second used a British Leyland RailBus connecting to a regular MBTA train in Lowell.  The bus was on loan to the USDOT for demonstration purposes.

Dave

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think Amtrak itself wants to save Amtrak.
> The fantasy map of state-only supported corridors,
> from which the Biden Administration is taking its
> cues, was drawn by political hack Stephen Gardner
> and his 64-pack of Crayolas, and of course ignores
> the entire national network outside the NEC. It is
> no accident, but deliberate, that Pueblo does not
> touch the SW Chief route. His goal is to nail
> states for 85% of Fully Allocated Cost, based on
> their corrupt accounting methodology, and send the
> excesses to the NEC. PRIIA-209 is a Ponzi scheme,
> which he wrote in the first place back in 2008. 

Best, short succinct explanation of Amtrak's problems that I have seen. No matter who is appointed as Amtrak's leader, the political power and decision making is performed by the ingrained political insiders who pander to the east and west coastal elites and ignore the needs of those in the great in-between. Yes the coastal regions and the Chicago area have the greatest potential for passengers, but without the crumbs thrown to heartland states to have their senators vote for Amtrak funds, there would not be even the semblance of a national network. Those senators have to push harder to increase their small piece of the pie for both their constituents and those who want an alternative way to travel long distance without all the hassels of modern day air travel.

If South Dakota wants expanded Amtrak, service, and there's no evidence they do, the state will need to get their own Senator Ron Johnson (R-SD) on board.  Taking a break from his recent crazy talk, he criticized the infrastructure proposals coming from the President.

Mr Johnson has not been a supporter of Amtrak in the past, and rarely missesa chance to critize it.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If South Dakota wants expanded Amtrak, service,
> and there's no evidence they do, the state will
> need to get their own Senator Ron Johnson (R-SD)
> on board.  Taking a break from his recent crazy
> talk, he criticized the infrastructure proposals
> coming from the President.
>
> Mr Johnson has not been a supporter of Amtrak in
> the past, and rarely missesa chance to critize it.

Pretty sure that Ron Johnson is not a US senator from South Dakota!  Thune and Rounds are the current ones! Wisconsin has the fortune to have Ron Johnson as one of theirs!

Bruce



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/21 08:52 by BCutter.