Northeast Regional Inland Route - Boston Via Springfield, MA Through New Haven, CT

>Once the rail improvements happen,

I wish more attention was paid to timelines, deadlines and start dates. Public (journalistic) focus on timelines would push bureaucratic focus. If I were a reporter, it would be one of my first questions, and if it wasn't answered, that would go in one of the top two or three paragraphs.

daybeers wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 10:32 pm Or the dual modes in Albany.

Dual Modes in Albany will probably stick around for longer because of the fact that NYS DOT is responsible for that segment. They've already got ALC42e's (e for electric, with 3rd rail capability) with battery cars on order. These are distinct from the cars that will be catenary powered.

Arborwayfan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 8:42 am The case for more trains on the Springfield-Albany part might be a little stronger if they were coordinated to make it easy to go from Hartford etc to Albany, too: Maybe a couple of daily trips Boston-Albany and return, timed for easy transfers to and from Springfield-points south trains, and a couple of daily trips Springfield-Albany and return, timed for easy transfers to and from Inland Route trains. Easy enough to make the schedule; harder (more expensive) to get the dispatching to be allowed to stay on time to make the connections.

But a coordinated bus would be faster, and would be a way to bring the bus company-ies on board by replacing lost Boston-Springfield business, if in fact the new trains took away their business.

Once Springfield-Boston journey times come down, due to this funding (great news) - that will increase demand on the route overall. It'll of course benefit the Lake shore / Albany-Boston journey time, even if not on the west of Springfield segment. That should attract more riders, all the same. And hopefully have them looking west of Springfield, at least as far as Pittsfield before it becomes NY.

Separately, it's time to look at a Chatham (NY) station. It's much the same catchment as Hudson - anyone heading towards Springfield/Boston would railhead from there in theory. If more Albany-Boston service is coming (I think another 2 per day - so 5 Springfield-Boston in time) - then it'd be worth it.

One day a spur from north of Hudson would be great for NYC-Berkshire traffic, but of course the viability without Albany is a question mark.

I ran some "inland route" trains out of New Haven years ago when they were running.

The difference in mileage wasn't much, but the running times were longer.

There was an afternoon job that left New Haven (I forget the train number, may have been 474), ran to Boston via Springfield. The return portion of the trip was either run or deadhead on #67.

A little later they added a very early morning mail/passenger train Boston to New Haven, #641. Fairly long train, four or five mail handling cars on the head end with 6 Amfleets behind. That ran out of New Haven as #178/641. Long night job, you went to work around 8.30pm, got a few hours' sleep after midnight in the employee trailer at South Station, then departed about 2.30 in the morning. Ran nonstop to Springfield, handled mail, then made all the Hartford line stops to New Haven. You were tired when you got done with that one!
(J.Albert)

cle wrote: ↑Sat Sep 23, 2023 9:06 am One day a spur from north of Hudson would be great for NYC-Berkshire traffic, but of course the viability without Albany is a question mark.

Wow, build from scratch a, what, 40 mile right of way through "hilly" topography to handle "one a day"?

Almost be cheaper to upgrade the New Haven Berkshire Div; Danbury-Canaan, 65 miles, to FRA Class 3 (Psgr 60mph) from its present FRA Excepted (Frt 10mph). The Commonwealth of Tax has taken care of that already in MA, Pittsfield-Canaan) to serve an industry (Becton-Dickinson; medical equipment) located in Connecticut!!!

I think even the Housy would be okay with that!

Report I got when I was at SKS last June was there is "one a day".

Sure like to know things such as car counts, LD's, MTY',s, loadings, but alas Carole-Ann (Dir Alumni Affairs) is "not into that stuff".

Now so far as Mr. Smith's comment, sure Housy would go along. They have gotten the State to as good as donate them the ROW through CT.

I'll be "on The Hill" again next June - checkbook in hand (actually my Donor Advised Fund) - to mark the closing of the Centenary.

cle wrote: ↑Sat Sep 23, 2023 9:06 am Separately, it's time to look at a Chatham (NY) station. It's much the same catchment as Hudson - anyone heading towards Springfield/Boston would railhead from there in theory. If more Albany-Boston service is coming (I think another 2 per day - so 5 Springfield-Boston in time) - then it'd be worth it.

Chatham NY has been indicated as a stop on the Albany - Boston corridor - also Chester MA. Recently per media reports the mayor of Westfield MA has also approached the commonwealth interested in a stop so that could get added as well. I would anticipate further grant requests related to these corridors now that they’ve landed the first phase.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2023 6:40 am

cle wrote: ↑Sat Sep 23, 2023 9:06 am One day a spur from north of Hudson would be great for NYC-Berkshire traffic, but of course the viability without Albany is a question mark.

Wow, build from scratch a, what, 40 mile right of way through "hilly" topography to handle "one a day"?

Almost be cheaper to upgrade the New Haven Berkshire Div; Danbury-Canaan, 65 miles, to FRA Class 3 (Psgr 60mph) from its present FRA Excepted (Frt 10mph). The Commonwealth of Tax has taken care of that already in MA, Pittsfield-Canaan) to serve an industry (Becton-Dickinson; medical equipment) located in Connecticut!!!

It took me a moment but I believe cle is referring to the study of having a connection from the CSX northbound tracks north of Hudson to the CSX EW track, so that trains don't have to go all the way to Albany and then back along the Boston Post Road.

The benefit of course is much faster access to Chatham and the Berkshires than the current attempt via the Berkshire Flyer, but you lose the benefit of having Albany along the route.

How "key" is Albany to the route ridership wise?

Greg Moore wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 10:57 pm It took me a moment but I believe cle (immediate post) is referring to the study of having a connection from the CSX northbound tracks north of Hudson to the CSX EW track, so that trains don't have to go all the way to Albany and then back along the Boston Post Road.

The benefit of course is much faster access to Chatham and the Berkshires than the current attempt via the Berkshire Flyer, but you lose the benefit of having Albany along the route.

Mr. Moore, I totally respect that you are "local" to the area, as distinct from me who makes the journey back to The Hill (South Kent School) when they "summon the 'Lums and their checkbooks", but I do not see you disputing that 40 mile "number" I threw out to build a Hudson-Chatham line, nor that it would be built from scratch and over "not exactly" flat topography.

Now naturally, to ride The Berkshire to Woodrow and trek up The Hill for an alumni gathering, I guess would be a nostalgic dream. Of course, it was one thing for a 16yo to make the trek carrying a bag, something else for an 82yo (never mind that last Alumni Weekend, they had a fleet of golf carts about "to help out").

Finally, what is the great "pull" of Chatham? True, it was end of track for the Harlem Div and, last I knew, the station has been preserved. But it has never been a stop for 448-9, Lake Shore, nor this Berkshire Flyer incarnation.

The connection would be about 3,000' of new track.

https://archives.lib.state.ma.us/bitstr ... sAllowed=y outline (page 21, option 2.1.2)

The appeal of Chatham isn't huge, but it's a good midpoint between Albany and Pittsfield. It's an "easy" add for any existing or proposed train (that said, I wouldn't add it for the LSL, but would for the Berkshire Flyer if it returns and future trains).

As for Jeff's question about the appeal of Albany, I should expand upon my point, especially in regards to the Berkshire Flyer (or similar operation).

I'd estimate about 80-90% (someone else may have the numbers) of the folks boarding a northbound train from NYP are going to get off at Albany (with a majority of the remaining percentage getting off at Hudson or Rhinecliff). Right now perhaps 1-2% continue on to Pittsfield. If you eliminate Albany as a stop, now you have a train in a key evening slot that loses a large portion of its ridership and makes the train less viable. I think you'd definitely pickup riders going to Pittsfield (who currently don't want to take the time to go through Albany) but not enough to compensate for the lost Albany passenger load.

Now in an ideal world, you might have some sort of train that could easily split at Hudson.
Or you'd reactivate the long torn up rails heading east out of Hudson (looks like it was the Hudson and Chatham branch of the B&A) and have a more direct route. But that's never going to happen. If anything I'd take bets on the Harlem line to Wassiac returning long before that! And I'm not taking bets on that either!)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudson_an ... n_Railroad

It appears that there once WAS a road between Hudson and Chatham. Parts of it survived until 1959.

So who knows how much of that right of way survives; somehow I don't think much.

Yeah, that's the one I referenced, I didn't realize it was abandoned that late.

BTW, Open Railway Map is a great resource for finding old routes (though I notice it's missing the Central New England Railway through North Canaan and into Millerton, and that route survived beyond Hudson and Boston (1965 vs 1959))

Greg Moore wrote: ↑Tue Sep 26, 2023 11:25 am The connection would be about 3,000' of new track.

https://archives.lib.state.ma.us/bitstr ... sAllowed=y outline (page 21, option 2.1.2)

The appeal of Chatham isn't huge, but it's a good midpoint between Albany and Pittsfield. It's an "easy" add for any existing or proposed train (that said, I wouldn't add it for the LSL, but would for the Berkshire Flyer if it returns and future trains).

As for Jeff's question about the appeal of Albany, I should expand upon my point, especially in regards to the Berkshire Flyer (or similar operation).

I'd estimate about 80-90% (someone else may have the numbers) of the folks boarding a northbound train from NYP are going to get off at Albany (with a majority of the remaining percentage getting off at Hudson or Rhinecliff). Right now perhaps 1-2% continue on to Pittsfield. If you eliminate Albany as a stop, now you have a train in a key evening slot that loses a large portion of its ridership and makes the train less viable. I think you'd definitely pickup riders going to Pittsfield (who currently don't want to take the time to go through Albany) but not enough to compensate for the lost Albany passenger load.

Now in an ideal world, you might have some sort of train that could easily split at Hudson.
Or you'd reactivate the long torn up rails heading east out of Hudson (looks like it was the Hudson and Chatham branch of the B&A) and have a more direct route. But that's never going to happen. If anything I'd take bets on the Harlem line to Wassiac returning long before that! And I'm not taking bets on that either!)

I was saying a few different things.

Chatham as an isolated topic (a station on the existing line) and then a more speculative view about a spur. It wouldn't need to be 40 miles if higher up, where it narrows, but then of course it's closer to Albany. I would assume that a better Berkshires service could be more than 1tpd - and freight might utilize it too.

I take the Empire service regularly, and can say that Hudson/Rhinecliff is comfortably 40-50% of traffic on an Albany terminator.

Chatham as appeal. I think it's broader than the town itself. There are many attractions nearby and it serves a broader catchment (new and improved Catamount/Hillsdale, Ghent/Art OMI... southern Berkshires (GB) - it's a downtown station and I think would have a lot of interest.

As for the taxes of states, and the companies where beneficiaries are based. I'm not parochial enough to care. Like NH. It's one region with a very fluid economy across state lines.