Amtrak Vermonter / Montrealer

In the begining,Amtrak had the"location A/location B" under canopy signage before MN's creation
at New Haven's then low platforms that were for Amtrak's use only back then. Stamford Transportation Center
did not have the center island platform back then as well.
AS both stations were upgraded 95% of the signage was changed to MTA/MN/ConnDOT standard,
with New Haven's Solari board was the last holdover till last year.
When New Rochelle was picked up as an Amtrak Station stop over Rye,
only some minor signage was changed

NH2060 wrote:Now a thought just occurred to me: Did the state or Amtrak pay for the temporary platforms?

I understand that the temp platforms along with permanent platforms at Holyoke, N'Hampton and Greenfield will be paid on MassDOT contracts from the original project Federal grant and State funding. Amherst had all (non-heritage) Amtrak signage because the community and station owner arrangement.

I am more than a little surprised at the seemingly instantaneous groundswell of support that appears to be materializing for further discussion of service via NECR. I don't expect it to turn in to anything for 10 years at a bare minimum but the sense of loss is palpable and I do not think it is limited to the enthusiast community.

This is very much the opposite from some of the stories I have read about service terminations in the 60s when some of the only people who cared about this at all were the enthusiasts and proposals for future public investment would have been seen as completely unbelievable.

Nobody was making investment proposals in North Conway the day the last RDC pulled out of town. In Amherst there was already a functional website and an ongoing proposal. I think that's remarkable. The cab car end of the train made me think of the RDC.

Since I finally have stable internet service, and I don't feel like walking around in the sub-zero temps just yet I figured I would post up some times/observations on my trip south on #55. I started my trip in Bellows Falls, and ended in Washington, DC. Power was 105 top, 203 tail, with the usual 4 coaches and 1 lounge/business class car. The diesels were swapped to the 936 in NHV. I forgot to grab a NECR and PAS DOB when I left work, so I wasn't able to compare my observations with the speed sheets.

Times first:
Station Arri/Dept Deviation
BFL 1203/1204 -1
BRA 1232/1234 0
GFD 1316/1317 -9
NHT 1344/1345 -14
SPG 1445/1450 0
NHV 1621/1639 0
NYP 1836/1848 -3
PHL 2003/2010 0
WAS 2155 +4

Observations
The NECR section of the route, curvy as it is, seemed to be fairly quick, there were a few spots where we slowed down but nothing too long in duration. From what I could observe it seemed like some switches and crossings had slow orders, but again nothing too major. We ran at slow or restricting speed from the advance signal to CP E. Northfield, and then sat for 6 mins (1250/1256) before getting the light onto the PAS. On the PAS there were some sections of slow running, most notably from GFD to south of the high bridge (Cheapside I believe its called?). Running was also fairly slow from Holyoke south, but even in the cold and snow there was work going on, mainly signal installation. There were multiple crews out installing new signal infrastructure, pretty much from GFD south.

We sat for 15 mins at the CSXT diamond waiting for 449 to head west (1415/1430). After crossing over, there was a 2 minute delay (1434/1436)as one of the engineers swapped ends to use the trailing engine to pull the train back into the station. After the departure from SPG, the trip was pretty mundane. There certainly is evidence of the work going on to double track the line, from Hartford south there is quite a bit of noticeable work going on to widen the ROW for the second track with crossing signals being moved out and ditching and other dirt work starting. It is a great thing to see!

I wonder if once the schedule is firmed up, if there will be any consideration given to trying to allow for a connection between the SB Vermonter and the WB Lakeshore? I understand the difficulty in changing Metro North slots, but perhaps at least another look is warranted. Coming from VT, you either have to spend the night in SPG coming south on the Vermonter (a shame with the trains arriving so close to each other), or wait for 7+ hours in ALB if you go on the Ethan Allen. I have done the later, and even though the ALB station is a million times better than the old mess that was there, it isn't something I would put too high on the list of must-do-again.

Here's some data from the first two weeks of the Vermonter running on the Conn River Line.

TRAIN 55/57 - VERMONTER SB - Period: 12/29/2014 - 1/11/2015
dp. BRA 12:34 PM
BRA - GFD running time | Scheduled 0:31 / Actual 0:36
GFD dwell time | Planned 0:02 / Actual 0:04
dp. GFD 1:07 PM
GFD - NHT running time | Scheduled 0:22 / Actual 0:28
NHT dwell time | Planned 0:02 / Actual 0:02
dp. NHT 1:31 PM
NHT - SPG running time | Scheduled 1:04 / Actual 0:47
ar. SPG 2:35 PM
TOTAL: BRA - SPG | Scheduled 2:01 / Actual 1:56


TRAIN 54/56 - VERMONTER NB - Period: 12/29/2014 - 1/11/2015
dp. SPG 3:15 PM
SPG - NHT running time | Scheduled 0:46 / Actual 0:41
NHT dwell time | Planned 0:02 / Actual 0:05 (NOTE 1)
dp. NHT 4:03 PM
NHT - GFD running time | Scheduled 0:22 / Actual 0:29
GFD dwell time | Planned 0:02 / Actual 0:01
dp. GFD 4:27 PM
GFD - BRA running time | Scheduled 0:41 / Actual 0:34
TOTAL: SPG - ar. BRA | Scheduled 1:53 / Actual 1:50
BRA dwell time | Planned 0:02 / Actual 0:04
dp. BRA 5:10 PM

Times noted are per the public Amtrak timetable, eff. 12/29/2014.

NOTE 1: If the NB train is on-time out of SPG then it has been arriving early into NHT which results in a NHT dwell time of 7 - 10 minutes.

During the first two weeks the SB train has never been on-time out of either GFD or NHT. The NB train was on-time 10 out of 14 days out of NHT but was never on-time out of GFD.

I am really glad to see the Vermonter on the new line. While I have been driving with cost way down to keep full time work up in Vermont. what is the latest on trying to get 3 trains a day in each direction. I ask because I really miss taking it and having an evening departure in Vermont would allow me to take the train again or at least have an early morning departure on 141/148 being extended to Vermont?

Today train 56 departed New Haven with just one locomotive - first time I've seen that since the route change to the Conn. River line.

CVRA7 wrote:Today train 56 departed New Haven with just one locomotive - first time I've seen that since the route change to the Conn. River line.

That is almost certain to result in some kind of savings to VTrans.

gokeefe wrote:

CVRA7 wrote:Today train 56 departed New Haven with just one locomotive - first time I've seen that since the route change to the Conn. River line.

That is almost certain to result in some kind of savings to VTrans.

Indeed, that's supposed to be one of the advantages of returning to the Conn River Line north of Springfield.

On another note, I gather from times that have been posted for the train, it's a really good thing that Amtrak did not immediately whack 30 minutes out of the schedule.

I thought the engine thing was related to grade crossings and breaking ice and snow up.

gprimr1 wrote:I thought the engine thing was related to grade crossings and breaking ice and snow up.

It was. But now I guess that since there is no reverse move needed (only a "back up" move @ SPG) the engine can lead the train down to New Haven or up to St. Albans the whole way with no need for the cab car to even be part of the consist. When the Palmer back up move was part of the trip the cab car lead the way on the NHV-SPG section where I guess buildup is not as much of a problem given that it's overall less rural, etc. in CT than in the Conn River Valley in MA and VT.

If the cab car is indeed coming off for good on the Vermonter wouldn't it still make sense to keep it on hand just or the extra seats even if a 4th coach has been added?

theozno wrote:I am really glad to see the Vermonter on the new line. While I have been driving with cost way down to keep full time work up in Vermont. what is the latest on trying to get 3 trains a day in each direction. I ask because I really miss taking it and having an evening departure in Vermont would allow me to take the train again or at least have an early morning departure on 141/148 being extended to Vermont?

Adding additional frequencies on the Vermonter line is currently being studied as part of the Northern New England Intercity Rail Initiative study project, which is being managed by MassDOT and VTrans.

Details can be found on this link: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/northern ... /Home.aspx

Certainly makes sense to add trains from Springfield
to Brattleboro once the new CT CR service is started.
That might free up some of the Amtrak New Haven
shuttles for use further north.

trainhq wrote:Certainly makes sense to add trains from Springfield
to Brattleboro once the new CT CR service is started.
That might free up some of the Amtrak New Haven
shuttles for use further north.

Unless Amtrak can get an additional pair or two of slots between SHELL and New Haven the only way additional frequencies come to VT is by extending Train 141 and Train 148 from/to VT instead of SPG and/or extending 1+ Shuttles to WRJ, etc. They won't get extended to only Greenfield or probably to even just Brattleboro due to MA having to pick up the tab for the operating costs.

NH2060 wrote:

trainhq wrote:Certainly makes sense to add trains from Springfield
to Brattleboro once the new CT CR service is started.
That might free up some of the Amtrak New Haven
shuttles for use further north.

Unless Amtrak can get an additional pair or two of slots between SHELL and New Haven the only way additional frequencies come to VT is by extending Train 141 and Train 148 from/to VT instead of SPG and/or extending 1+ Shuttles to WRJ, etc. They won't get extended to only Greenfield or probably to even just Brattleboro due to MA having to pick up the tab for the operating costs.

You seem to be assuming that new service should originate at least as far west as NYC. It shouldn't take too much tweaking to have the 400 series run further north, should it? Granted, that's going to require changing trains at New Haven, but it does allow for the intended goal of increased service north of Springfield. If through service is a "must", then drop/add cars is back as an operation at New Haven.

BTW, there isn't a wye to turn trains at Brattleboro, is there?