AMTRAK NEC: Springfield Shuttle/Regional/Valley Flyer/Inland Routing

if amtraks long view plan is to have a viable inland plan b to a flooded nec in rhode island, they will need full electrification from nh to springfield to boston.

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2023 5:16 amI agree. Since the launch of CtDOT’s Hartford Line service traffic is at the tipping point for electrification. Given that infill stations may lead to more service, the time is probably right. Amtrak would most certainly love it for eliminating Regional engine changes.

The other end is more problematic. It would be a primarily MBTA project; two or three extended inland regionals are not enough for Amtrak to chip in financial support. They would need DM’s to bridge the gap. The Lake Shore would likely remain diesel.

There is definitely room for growth with infill stations and connecting transit services. I do think that given the sprawled out nature of the area, they have a lot more potential as a sort of regional rail service than purely daily commuter traffic.

That's an interesting thought about Amtrak and Regional trains, I hadn't even thought about that. Amtrak needs dual-modes anyway, as there are all sorts of interesting routings that go a bit off of the NEC into diesel territory.

There also needs to be a nationwide push for major freight rail lines to be electrified, but the B&A doesn't justify electrification even though Selkirk to Chicago and Selkirk south do.

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2023 6:00 amI think I do remember that. At this point, I would think CT would be all-in on electrification, and would simply order more 8's, or Sprinter-type power. So it seems Amtrak will have both types of DM power; DC and AC. Hopefully the AC DM's would be able to bridge the gap between SPG and BOS.

The M-8's aren't really right for the service, but they are shoehorning them into SLE service, so who knows. They really should have either electric push-pull or overhead EMUs with 25hz and low-level capability for service into Penn and SLE service.

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2023 6:00 am So it seems Amtrak will have both types of DM power; DC and AC. Hopefully the AC DM's would be able to bridge the gap between SPG and BOS.

The AC DMs are speced to run on diesel from New Haven to St Albans, Harrisburg to Pittsburgh, and Washington to Charlotte NC among other routes. I think they'll have no issues running diesel from Springfield to Boston.

To be clear, I don't think the B&A justifies electrification as is.

New Haven to Springfield to me, absolutely does. Electric Regionals and EMUs for the Hartford line.

Separately, so does Boston to Worcester. Worcester will have three platforms soon too.

And in parallel, there is talk of extending said Regionals from Springfield to Worcester and Boston. In addition to Albany-Boston increases. So my thought was more about the infill of a future Springfield-Worcester gap which has renewed frequency interest and investment to reduce journey times planned - but assumes either end are wired. It's fairly speculative, but logical - and I think if that were the case, the justification for the infill would be there. Albany to Springfield, nope.

Regionals on the inland route New Haven - Springfield - BOS using ALC-42Es would be a natural to establish advantage of full electrifications.

That would allow the screw ups over Hartford station to be bypassed.

cle wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2023 9:46 amAnd in parallel, there is talk of extending said Regionals from Springfield to Worcester and Boston. In addition to Albany-Boston increases. So my thought was more about the infill of a future Springfield-Worcester gap which has renewed frequency interest and investment to reduce journey times planned - but assumes either end are wired. It's fairly speculative, but logical - and I think if that were the case, the justification for the infill would be there. Albany to Springfield, nope.

I can definitely see the logic of connecting the other routes that justify electrification in their own right. On the one hand, it's only 42 miles, on the other hand, relatively few trains would use it, and I think it would be better handled by the AC dual modes. The Springfield Line itself is on the edge for what justifies electrification, the MBTA Worcester Line certainly justifies it in its own right, but the amount of traffic running between Springfield and Worcester just wouldn't be that much, with much of the traffic to Worcester being commuter traffic, and much of the traffic up to Springfield being generated from NYC and south.

west point wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2023 10:15 pmThat would allow the screw ups over Hartford station to be bypassed.

???

I think that is where the business case changes.

If NH-Springfield was wired, and Boston-Worcester was done so also - then the ROI on the infill might be more compelling; for example the release of bi-modes to other needed routes, journey time savings (electric acc/decel throughout, and no mode changes) plus decarbonization benefits, noise, local pollution etc.

And suppressed demand is rife, I would wager. Just because it is only planned to be used by X trains in a few years, that doesn't represent the cap of its potential. Build and they come - especially with better service. I don't see why a >New Haven - Hartford - Springfield - Worcester - Framingham - Boston< only pattern could not be hourly - in addition to the local Springfield and Worcester line services, and even if it couldn't get to NYC every hour. A limited stop regional express.

It's not so different to the Keystone which does run to NYC almost all hours, but hasn't historically and in theory, doesn't have to. And provides a faster regional service on an existing route.

Beginning June 5 Amtrak will be adding a second daily regional through train round trip to Springfield. On the weekend this will mark the return of trains 143 and 146 (with 146 returning as a both Saturday and Sunday train.) On weekdays 141 will depart an hour earlier and train 125 will be extended to Springfield. It will depart Springfield at 7:50 AM Monday - Friday. The northbound will be a reinstated train 136 which will run M-F.

Interesting, thanks for the info! What are the times of 136, 143, and 146?

Depart NYP 8:50 PM arrive SPG 12:26 AM 136
Depart SPG 6 AM 143
Depart NYP 8 PM arrive SPG 11:22 pm 146

cle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 4:38 pmIf NH-Springfield was wired, and Boston-Worcester was done so also - then the ROI on the infill might be more compelling; for example the release of bi-modes to other needed routes, journey time savings (electric acc/decel throughout, and no mode changes) plus decarbonization benefits, noise, local pollution etc.

Inherently, yes, the only reason to wire Springfield-Worcester is to connect the inland route, it has little value on its own. I still see this as a fairly limited service a few times a day. With good AC DMs, there should be relatively little time penalty to running diesel between Springfield and Worcester.

The flip side of that equation is where could be the resources be put to better use in electrification or other improvements? I think that segment is a hard sell.

Also, was the B&A double tracked at one point between Springfield and Worcester? That would be a necessity for much of any additional traffic.

I'm not so sure that if you build it they will come on that particular segment. I think that is generally true of rail services connecting worthwhile destinations, but it seems to me that the general draws for traffic are south on the corridor, I just don't see a whole ton of traffic generation by linking Framingham and Worcester to the corridor going south.

The Shore Line route is slow, curvy, and prone to flooding especially going into the future. I don't see why rerouting most service to the inland route shouldn't be explored.

IMO a bypass HFD-PVD would be nice, but costly.

ElectricTraction wrote: ↑Sat Apr 29, 2023 9:10 pm

cle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 27, 2023 4:38 pmIf NH-Springfield was wired, and Boston-Worcester was done so also - then the ROI on the infill might be more compelling; for example the release of bi-modes to other needed routes, journey time savings (electric acc/decel throughout, and no mode changes) plus decarbonization benefits, noise, local pollution etc.

Inherently, yes, the only reason to wire Springfield-Worcester is to connect the inland route, it has little value on its own. I still see this as a fairly limited service a few times a day. With good AC DMs, there should be relatively little time penalty to running diesel between Springfield and Worcester.

The flip side of that equation is where could be the resources be put to better use in electrification or other improvements? I think that segment is a hard sell.

Also, was the B&A double tracked at one point between Springfield and Worcester? That would be a necessity for much of any additional traffic.

I'm not so sure that if you build it they will come on that particular segment. I think that is generally true of rail services connecting worthwhile destinations, but it seems to me that the general draws for traffic are south on the corridor, I just don't see a whole ton of traffic generation by linking Framingham and Worcester to the corridor going south.

See, I do see the potential. Tons of universities, jobs in Hartford, Stamford access too - plus for those Hartford Line places, regular access to Boston itself... there are tons and tons of ways this gets used. And a region as dense and affluent as this, with two core cities at either end and a lot of decent sized regional centers should easily justify this.

And the Hartford line should have it alone. Other than NJT and Poughkeepsie, where else has that frequency under diesel? If Denver's piddly shuttles can be wired, this can. Framingham no brainer too.

West of Springfield towards Pittsfield, this drops off a cliff of course, I'm not completely naive.

Electrify BOS - Springfield Yes But !!! -----Only the sections that will not be needing changes. Those call them permanent should get the 2 Main tracks and electrify. Use ALC-42Es where they can use the quicker acceleration. The first improvement will allow two permanent sections to be connected which give a 20 - 30 mile all electrified section. Rinse, dry, and repeat.

cle wrote: ↑Mon May 01, 2023 9:08 amSee, I do see the potential. Tons of universities, jobs in Hartford, Stamford access too - plus for those Hartford Line places, regular access to Boston itself... there are tons and tons of ways this gets used. And a region as dense and affluent as this, with two core cities at either end and a lot of decent sized regional centers should easily justify this.

Possible. Like CTRail and SLE, it would be more of a regional service, and not commuter.

And the Hartford line should have it alone. Other than NJT and Poughkeepsie, where else has that frequency under diesel? If Denver's piddly shuttles can be wired, this can. Framingham no brainer too.

Springfield is right on the edge for electrification, but it probably makes sense since the NEC is electrified. Worcester to Boston is a no-brainer.

I'm still skeptical on Springfield-Worcester. I think that viable AC dual modes are needed anyway. There are all sorts of places Amtrak could do service to. Mohegan Sun, Cape Cod, Atlantic City, Richmond, Newport News, etc.