Is Boston really part of the Northeast Corridor? (Worcester, Springfield: live, trains)

[btownboss4]

The general definition of the Northeast Corridor is Boston to Washington. However I don't really think Boston is really attached to the corridor.

Yes it is technically on the corridor according to Amtrak but 1/2 the distance is between Washington and New York, with Philly and Baltimore on the way, while Boston only has Providence and Hartford "Linking" it to NYC.

In Addition, while Acela and Northeast Regional Service do originate out of Boston's South Station, the Washington to NY Corridor also has the Vermonter, Carolinian, Palmetto, Crescent, Cardinal, Silver Meteor and Silver Star and the NY to Philadelphia corridor additionally has the Pennsylvanian and Keystone Service, and MARC Trains run between Washington and Baltimore. So the rest of NY to DC stretch is much more intertwined than the NY to Boston stretch. The MBTA is also the only transit system that doesn't interconnect with at least one other major city transit agency along the corridor (Barring Amtrak Connections)

Third there is a gap. While Baltimore, Washington and Philadelphia all have regular day trippers to intermingle on the Delmarva, and NY to Baltimore has day trippers intermingle on the Jersey Shore, Boston, by function of Geography is left out, the Lakes and Mountains of NH, Coast of Maine, and Cape Cod are much to far from the rest of the Northeast for any one else to go there, leaving Boston more culturally isolated.

Continuing with the leisure thread, Boston is much more oriented North and East than South and West. While the Berkshires are as close or closer than Downeast Maine or the White Mountains, people from the Boston area are more likely to the latter two than the former. Montreal is just as popular if not more so than NYC.

[ckhthankgod]

Yes.....

[jjv007]

I've been thinking about this for a while. Well-constructed points all around.

[qworldorder]

New York to D.C. is about the same distance as New York to Boston. The only major difference is you have heavily populated New Jersey, Philadelphia and Baltimore in between, as opposed to the lesser populated Connecticut and Rhode Island. Boston has its own outsized sphere because of this, so naturally the rail connections will be weaker--you simply have less people in an equivalent distance. If Boston had more people and competing cities in that distance, its rail connections would be definitely be stronger. Culturally and physically though, yes, its still part of the Northeast Corridor. Boston is what Baltimore would be if they switched places.

[JerseyGirl415]

I mean, what else would it be part of?

[Duderino]

I think you make a good argument. I still think that Boston is still very intertwined with the NEC/megalopolis economically and culturally, but it's definitely the least connected of the "Big 5."

Especially now having lived in both ends of the NEC, I get a strong sense that Bostonians, and New Englanders generally, really pride themselves as being a very distinct and separate region from points south and west, like a subnation.

It's a region where there's a lot to be proud of for sure, and I've truthfully sensed a lot more provincialism than any place I've lived/been to in the New York, Philly, Baltimore and DC areas, which was surprising (I'd always assumed Philly was the most provincial area of the bunch). Not that that's a terrible thing--just an observation.

Mine is just one perspective, but interested in others also.

[jjv007]

I think Boston may be more provincial and Philly may be more territorial if that makes any sense.

[MassVt]

Boston is slightly more isolated, but not enough to be excluded from any urban northeastern combine. The accent is different, the housing style ( old brick, or triple-decker in Boston, more brownstone/rowhouse in the other 4 NE cities) definitely changes, but it's still very northeastern....

[missionhill]

Nothing the size of Philadelphia or Baltimore between Boston and New York but otherwise it's pretty similar as to population. Connecticut and Rhode Island are two very urbanized states, especially CT which has a continuously urbanized corridor from the NY state line at Greenwich as far as Hartford/Windsor/Manchester. For rail service to Boston Amtrak uses the shore line, which passes through somewhat more rural areas in eastern Connecticut and southern Rhode Island with some small town stops like Old Saybrook, Westerly and Kingston where you could be forgiven for thinking you had left the Northeast Corridor. If Amtrak had a straightened out, higher speed line between New York and Boston it would no doubt serve that whole 70+ mile corridor in Connecticut, possibly continuing to Springfield MA as well and then head east through Worcester and Framingham. That wouldn't seem so different from the route through New Brunswick, Trenton, Philadelphia, Wilmington, then a longish rural stretch down to Baltimore and on to DC.

[personone]

Boston has more claim to being part of the "northeast" corridor than either DC or Baltimore. As others have mentioned, when talking about the region in terms of travel or a continuous stretch, DC to New York is more populous in terms of continuous, major metro areas. You've got Baltimore and Philly between DC and NY, whereas you don't have any metro areas that large between NY and Boston.