Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
At bottom of above photo there was a Amtrak Valley Flyer there.
Shore Line East and Hartford Line also shares same logo "CT rail" in above photo.
Metro North New Haven Line, Amtrak to Boston are all there in above photo. Pretty cool
The concentration of commuter rail from New Haven down to New York is a legacy from the early 20th century. Connecticut hasn't made any big bets, it's just cooperating with NY State to keep the Metro North system functional. New Haven is at the upper end of reasonable day-trip range of New York whether for weekday commuting or going in for a show or a meeting or whatever it is. Been that way for over a century.
Incorrect statement. Just on Metro North New Haven line is still a big bet from CT. First of all, New York MTA operate this line, but CT is solely responsible for bills from NY/CT border to New Haven including appropriate number of rail cars. This is not just a "passive" bill payer, ConnDOT owns the track from NY/CT border to New Haven. This "ownership" is big deal. For examples, things happen such as delay etc on New Haven line, Amtrak had to wait for Metro North trains. In most other places, it is other way around. It is fairly simple to understand, on this track, Metro North is the resident train and owner train, Amtrak is just a guest train. Further more, I think on Annual ridership number, Metro North new haven line total ridership is bigger than Amtrak in USA combined. Amtrak is not that of big boy compared to Metro North.
From New Haven to New London, I think Amtrak owns the track, Shore Line East is 2nd class rail that constantly have to wait for Amtrak trains to clear first before it can move on delay or incidents. Ownership is big bet and a commitment itself.
It doesn’t have anything to do with the Valley Flyer though were one of the true high-speed rail plans where NYC-Boston service were routed through either Hartford or Springfield on a new set of tracks that don’t hug the CT coastline, then people on the Valley Flyer could connect to a high-speed rail service in Springfield or Hartford to either Boston or NYC and the commuter rail service connections in New Haven could be substantially more frequent if the express tracks weren’t being used for as Acela service.
You dream too big, not possible in your version of Boston/NYC in our life time.
Correct me if I am wrong, I think fed did the study a few years back on coastal, inland, and high speed Waterbury/Hartford bypassing New Haven all together. The final conclusion of recommendation on the fed study is, no coastal from New Haven/New London/Providence/Boston route in the future because of too much opposition from RI and CT shore line. High Speed Waterbury/Hartford was dead too because of cost.
The final NY/Boston future recommendation for high speed train is 5 stops in between like NYC/Stamford/New Haven/Hartford/Springfield/Worcester/Boston, new Acela trains. Still long way to go, but more of realistic goal for future Amtrak high speed trains.
Shifting Amtrak from New London/Providence coastal line to Hartford/Springfield actually is a doable idea and realistic. Extending the CTrail Shore Line East to Westerly RI, extending Boston/Providence line too to meet at Westerly RI, the vacant Amtrak schedule can be used for both commuter rails, everybody would be happy.
You dream too big, not possible in your version of Boston/NYC in our life time.
Correct me if I am wrong, I think fed did the study a few years back on coastal, inland, and high speed Waterbury/Hartford bypassing New Haven all together. The final conclusion of recommendation on the fed study is, no coastal from New Haven/New London/Providence/Boston route in the future because of too much opposition from RI and CT shore line. High Speed Waterbury/Hartford was dead too because of cost.
The final NY/Boston future recommendation for high speed train is 5 stops in between like NYC/Stamford/New Haven/Hartford/Springfield/Worcester/Boston, new Acela trains. Still long way to go, but more of realistic goal for future Amtrak high speed trains.
Shifting Amtrak from New London/Providence coastal line to Hartford/Springfield actually is a doable idea and realistic. Extending the CTrail Shore Line East to Westerly RI, extending Boston/Providence line too to meet at Westerly RI, the vacant Amtrak schedule can be used for both commuter rails, everybody would be happy.
I have decades to go probably and many places have gone from no high-speed rail to having high-speed rail in much shorter time periods.
Anyhow, I was mentioning the instances in which it would have mattered for the Valley Flyer service line.
Yes, shifting to go up Hartford would be fine and dandy. There were Amtrak Northeast Corridor lines that took the inland route in the past.
In land high speed future rail between NYC/Boston has lots of uncertainties. FRA essentially said yes, we agree RI and Eastern CT is out. But CT/MA you guys study it and tell us where it will be.
My gut feeling is, it is not "Hartford", but actually is "Springfield". Talk of directly connecting Hartford to Boston was there bypassing Springfield, but no real support, nor CT has any real money to support any of that. CT budget is tapped out on CTrail Hartford Line. It won't happen on Hartford.
Springfield/Worcester/Boston, is exactly the current east west rail 6 option study. Fed might be willing to support this new line with lots of money on rails between Springfield/Boston, but not Pittsfield extension. Eventually this east west rail could be more than "minimal rail" as many predicted. It could be more because of Fed interest.
If Valley Flyer can hold on and pass the pilot, it will be great for western mass in the future to have transfer to Boston at Springfield, and a transfer at New Haven to NYC.
I still don't see a big bet. Somebody has to own the railbed since the railroad that built it (New Haven RR) ceased to exist. It's not like Conn got into a bidding war to acquire the railbed. Amtrak wasn't set up to own rail, just to operate passenger service (even though it now does own some lengths of track). Metro North is a terrific operation-- raised platforms, new cars, all electric. The states of NY and CT have had to put up a lot of money to make Metro North as good as it is. Even so it's a legacy operation from 100+ years ago. No one has the kind of capital it would take to build anything like that now-- the huge terminal in Midtown Manhattan, two levels of platforms at the terminal, decking over the line for the three miles up to ninety-sixth st, four track all electric systems fanning out-- up the Hudson to Croton, inland to White Plains, and east to New Haven. It's good the two states are maintaining it as well as they are but what makes it a big bet I don't know. It's basically maintaining a system built by private capital in a different era that the two states are fortunate to have inherited. There's really no choice for a city as big as NY-- it has to maintain the transit infrastructure or lose its economic advantage. Conn plays a role since it contains a sizable chunk of the metropolitan area.
I still don't see a big bet. Somebody has to own the railbed since the railroad that built it (New Haven RR) ceased to exist. It's not like Conn got into a bidding war to acquire the railbed. Amtrak wasn't set up to own rail, just to operate passenger service (even though it now does own some lengths of track). Metro North is a terrific operation-- raised platforms, new cars, all electric. The states of NY and CT have had to put up a lot of money to make Metro North as good as it is. Even so it's a legacy operation from 100+ years ago. No one has the kind of capital it would take to build anything like that now-- the huge terminal in Midtown Manhattan, two levels of platforms at the terminal, decking over the line for the three miles up to ninety-sixth st, four track all electric systems fanning out-- up the Hudson to Croton, inland to White Plains, and east to New Haven. It's good the two states are maintaining it as well as they are but what makes it a big bet I don't know. It's basically maintaining a system built by private capital in a different era that the two states are fortunate to have inherited. There's really no choice for a city as big as NY-- it has to maintain the transit infrastructure or lose its economic advantage. Conn plays a role since it contains a sizable chunk of the metropolitan area.
If you argue that NY and CT both inherited great asset and operate and maintain to date, yes I agree with that, MNR still get subsidy. Railways are not profitable business. My point is, the whole CT state is pro rail to some degree, probably at top of any other states.
The big bet from CT is more reflected in Shore Line East or Hartford Line. Share Line East started with 4 round trips daily between Old Saybrook and New Haven in 1990. The ridership estimate in 1989 indicated higher potential ridership of 700 to 1350 daily riders from wikipedia. Now that was big bet with such small ridership almost 30 years ago. Look at SLE schedule today, compare that with MBTA providence line, 1/10 of ridership, almost same frequency on weekday schedule. Lots of state subsidies on SLE, surely a "big bet" from CT on rails. CT could have just spent the same millions of dollar 30 years ago on expanding I-95 highways with more lanes, but did not on highways, instead CT loves trains and put a lot of capital into SLE.
Same goes for HL, a big bet, $800 million investment so far with only $240 million from fed, majority paid by CT. Final HL capital investment is likely to exceed 1 billion.
Here is SLE info from wikipedia: both RIDOT and SLE have long-term plans to extend their services to meet at Westerly. Extending SLE service would require negotiations with the US Coast Guard, the Marine Trades Association, and other stakeholders for increased use of the Thames River Bridge and the Mystic River Bridge.[4] As part of Governor Malloy's thirty year transit plan, Shore Line East would be extended to Westerly at a cost of $200 million.[66] On February 1, 2016, the Connecticut Public Transportation Commission issued a report recommending extension of Shore Line East rail service to Mystic and Westerly as soon as possible.[69][70]
My read on CT politics, CT has large population of commuters and in general love trains. Therefore, in relative term, yes CT has been doing big bet on rails such as SLE/HL. These kind of ridership would probably get no rail or minimal rail in MA, but CT is fully into it. SLE extension into Westerly is just matter of time, probably will happen at some point years later, most likely timing would be as soon as Amtrak shift shoreline CT/RI acela high speed rail to Springfield/Worcester, CT will push SLE into RI.
Mystic currently has Amtrak station and service. There is no way in CT politics to cut rail off Mystic, the most important tourist asset in CT. Amtrak high speed train NYC/Boston go through RI or not, Mystic will have train running, either Amtrak or SLE, and most likely connected with Providence and Boston too.
CT political fight on rail was fierce in history. Here is fun read on SLE history between Republican CT Governor John Rowland who tried to shut down SLE and replace with bus:
source: wikipedia
In 1995 and 1997, then Gov. John Rowland proposed to replace Shore Line East and the Waterbury Branch with bus service, citing a high subsidy of $18.70 per rider per trip, in order to decrease the unpopular gas tax.[21] Lawmakers from the region called the proposals political and defended the line's ability to reduce congestion and pollution, while opponents of the line called it an example of government waste.[22] The Shore Line East Rider's Association and other groups lobbied to save both services each time, and after public hearings a small fare increase was enacted in late 1997 instead.[23]
Early expansions and criticisms
Shore Line East was extended to New London Union Station in 1996.
In July 1995, Governor Rowland signed a bill ordering various studies, including one that analyzed extending service to New London as had been originally planned.[24] Before the study was completed, ConnDOT unilaterally decided to implement New London service, which the report commended.[19] On February 1, 1996, two round trips per weekday were extended to New London.[25] At that point, ridership was up 18% over 1991 numbers.
Correct me if I am wrong, I think fed did the study a few years back on coastal, inland, and high speed Waterbury/Hartford bypassing New Haven all together. The final conclusion of recommendation on the fed study is, no coastal from New Haven/New London/Providence/Boston route in the future because of too much opposition from RI and CT shore line. High Speed Waterbury/Hartford was dead too because of cost.
Have you ever actually ridden Amtrak in Rhode Island? I have. Many times. Acela rips along at 150 mph in South County until it hits Stonington CT where it slows to a crawl. They just fixed the station in Kingstown adding a 3rd track so Acela doesn't need to slow down as it passes through the station. They're about to do the same thing at TF Green as they add a Northeast Regional stop there.
The rail problem is Connecticut, not Rhode Island. New Haven to New Rochelle has a max speed of 75 mph and there are many spots where it slows to a crawl.
Have you ever actually ridden Amtrak in Rhode Island? I have. Many times. Acela rips along at 150 mph in South County until it hits Stonington CT where it slows to a crawl. They just fixed the station in Kingstown adding a 3rd track so Acela doesn't need to slow down as it passes through the station. They're about to do the same thing at TF Green as they add a Northeast Regional stop there.
The rail problem is Connecticut, not Rhode Island. New Haven to New Rochelle has a max speed of 75 mph and there are many spots where it slows to a crawl.
Right, there are a host of reasons for why running high-speed rail between Boston and NYC away from the CT coastline. Whether or not there’ll be the political will and funding for such anytime in the near future is anyone’s guess.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
