Passenger Trains > A further update on the Adirondack in Canada

I received an update this morning from a source at Amtrak on the status of efforts to improve the running time of the ADIRONDACK north of the border and the news is genuinely good, but not yet ideal. This is a summary of the information from Amtrak and historical operating data.

There will remain severe speed restriction across the switch at Cantic, five miles north of the border, where the line joins the route to Vermont/St. Albans that the VERMONTER will eventually take and it's still 10mph through St. Jean sur Richlieu. At present these are the only 10mph sections. Much of the line will be traversed at 30mph. A few stretches are still at the former 50mph standard.

I have not gotten an actual estimated timetable. A CN Employee Timetable as recent as 2005 showed 50mph speeds over the line except in a very few spots.

To put this in context, the CN, in the days of its own passenger service, used to run the daylight Ambassador the 40.3 miles from Montreal to the junction at Cantic in 70 minutes in the summer 1960 schedule. In 2017 Amtrak managed 95 minutes Montreal to Rouses Point--which is 5 miles further than Cantic (the Ambassador took the Vermont route at Cantic). Recall the overall speed limit historically was 50mph on this line. Now it appears to be mostly 30mph, a bit 50mph and a bit 10mph.

So we await anxiously the release of the actual schedule. Anything much over two hours, combined with the inevitable 60-90 minute border delay for Customs/Immigration will have a very negative effect on ridership.

But Amtrak is fully aware of this situation and assures me they are trying for better running times. Let us hope they succeed.

April 3 is only days away and still we can not book seats on the train. I assume the unknown schedule is the cause? This situation must be fixed quickly.

IIRC, Burlington extension of Ethan Allen was bookable 2 weeks out. 

Amtrak needs to SIT HARD on CN.  30 mph is not a passenger speed.  50 mph is barely acceptable.  I am sure that there is a contract for CN to provide rail track at passenger speeds - not a slow-speed nightmare.  

Nobody here seems to know what the actual speed will be. The only reference I've seen mentioned in these threads quotes a nearly 20 year old employee timetable.

ChicagoCoyote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nobody here seems to know what the actual speed
> will be. The only reference I've seen mentioned in
> these threads quotes a nearly 20 year old employee
> timetable.

It was reported in the Times Union last weekend that Amtrak said it will take 3 hours to run the 49 miles in Canada. Amtrak has made countless qualification runs over the last few months to know.

If you bothered to read the original poster, he said he spoke to Amtrak as well.

Posted from Android

MEKoch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Amtrak needs to SIT HARD on CN.  30 mph is not a
> passenger speed.  50 mph is barely acceptable. 
> I am sure that there is a contract for CN to
> provide rail track at passenger speeds - not a
> slow-speed nightmare.  

Problem is many rights or powers Amtrak normally has on a host railroad don't apply in Canada.

Posted from Android

Just making a complete and total hypothetical for a moment...... Is there any storage tracks at the border, or even over the border, where Amtrak could store the train and passengers get bussed to Montreal (temporarily) till there are track improvements? I realize it's probably not worth doing this - and instead adjusting the schedule to move the train to/from Montreal. I am just thinking back to when the Vermonter had a bus connection to/from Montreal at. St. Albans, and then the Montrealer's drama when track improvements were needed in Vermont and the train was suspended and buses subbed....

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just making a complete and total hypothetical for
> a moment...... Is there any storage tracks at the
> border, or even over the border, where Amtrak
> could store the train and passengers get bussed to
> Montreal (temporarily) till there are track
> improvements? I realize it's probably not worth
> doing this - and instead adjusting the schedule to
> move the train to/from Montreal. I am just
> thinking back to when the Vermonter had a bus
> connection to/from Montreal at. St. Albans, and
> then the Montrealer's drama when track
> improvements were needed in Vermont and the train
> was suspended and buses subbed....

In a word - No !. D&H's yards in the Rouses Pt area have long since been torn up. 
Not even Plattburgh. It's Saratoga, Montreal, or forget it.

I think it better to use the D&H / CP to Candaic, Montreal West, and Lucien L'Allier temporarily, but that rules out a Vermont options, as temporary could become permanent,  and Canadian Customs would have to set up shop at Gare Lacolle, a mile west and a half mile north of the junction with Vermont trackage at Cantic. .  

The St Albans - Montreal Thruway bus was really Greyhound. It was a dedicated frequency northbound, and doubled as the 530am scheduled departure of theirs to White River Jct and Boston. After Greyhound thoroughly took over and dissolved Vermont Transit, those frequencies were abolished, and St Albans was eliminated as stop. No one has bothered to set one up with another carrier, such as with Premier Coach/Vermont Translines, believing that would take pressue off a Montreal train extension. But here we are 15 years later and CN has set up many conditions and roadblocks, besides their crappy track. I wish NECR would take over the Rouses Pt sub up to Longuiel, might be easier to deal with tbhem, but that is not in the cards.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/23 07:42 by joemvcnj.

Well, Canadians on Train Orders.  Speak up here.  Why is CN ignoring their contractual obligation to Amtrak?  They certainly do not ignore VIA and provide 30 mph track (at least anywhere I know about).  

CN provides good operations on the GTW portion in Michigan for Amtrak.  CN is far less reliable on the former IC corridor in Illinois from Chicago to Carbondale.  

MEKoch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, Canadians on Train Orders.  Speak up
> here.  Why is CN ignoring their contractual
> obligation to Amtrak?  They certainly do not
> ignore VIA and provide 30 mph track (at least
> anywhere I know about).  
>
> CN provides good operations on the GTW portion in
> Michigan for Amtrak.  CN is far less reliable on
> the former IC corridor in Illinois from Chicago to
> Carbondale.  

The Grand Trunk is a major route, not a branch line with 10 freights a week of mostly bridge traffic to the NECR that they do not much care about. It is not the CV anymore, not their turf.

I rode VIA Rail to Jonquire in 2016. The farther north it got, the crappier the track got. The northern most couple of hours had the train at 30MPH and rocking like a fishing boat. Lost an hour each way on the schedule.
 

MEKoch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, Canadians on Train Orders.  Speak up
> here.  Why is CN ignoring their contractual
> obligation to Amtrak?  They certainly do not
> ignore VIA and provide 30 mph track (at least
> anywhere I know about).  

Have you followed what CN does to the Canadian as far as time keeping goes? Why would they treat Amtrak any better?

Jishnu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MEKoch Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well, Canadians on Train Orders.  Speak up
> > here.  Why is CN ignoring their contractual
> > obligation to Amtrak?  They certainly do not
> > ignore VIA and provide 30 mph track (at least
> > anywhere I know about).  
>
> Have you followed what CN does to the Canadian as
> far as time keeping goes? Why would they treat
> Amtrak any better?

Not any more.  The Canadian is now often early at intermediate points and Vancouver and Toronto.

MEKoch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, Canadians on Train Orders.  Speak up
> here.  Why is CN ignoring their contractual
> obligation to Amtrak?  They certainly do not
> ignore VIA and provide 30 mph track (at least
> anywhere I know about).  

Because for 3 years, there was no Amtrak to be obliged to and no track charges to maintain status quo. Now they'll maintain status quo at the current crappy level that it is. 

Let's be glad US and Canadian Customs did not make a scene out of doing onboard inspections. They want everyone off the train and into a palace like at Niagara Falls.That is another bone of contention they had, and they had to be promised an exit strategy - build something in Gare Central or adjacent to the highway facility on US11, both of which are being planned. 

There was also a contract to sign with EXO, who administers the last mile of track into Gare Central.