Binghamton NY - New York City NYC Passenger Rail Discussion

I agree about going through Scranton; it's the largest town between Binghamton and NYC, and the Erie-route alternative would be to build a beetroot station somewhere with a bus connection to Scranton. Which would be *much* more awkward for people going to and from Scranton.

A NYC - Scranton - Binghamton line could be extended further north, to Cortland and Syracuse, and Cortland could be connected to Ithaca by bus.

One could also extend from Scranton southward to Allentown-Bethlehem and Philadelphia. But Pennsylvania state politicians will have to get on board with that.

Tracks to Syracuse from Binghamton leave from the same end of town where the tracks from Scranton come in. Anyone down for riding backwards for an hour? I don't mind it, but you gotta change ends then. Hello train taking even longer than the bus. Now, a route from Philadelphia to Binghamton...MAYBE I could see that. Or again, maybe NY-Scranton-Bing-south western NY...maybe up to the Finger Lakes? I just don't see Amtrak doing well at all with just Binghamton. The highway is just too fast

A couple of historical notes; Phila(RDG)-Binghamton-Syracuse was the route of an overnight train with a Pullman line even during my 'train riding' days of the '60's.

Also of possible interest I recall attempting to do an air/rail "joyride' but which turned out to be an "Airbus joyride" during 1962. Plan was fly KLGA to KBHM (Broome County) on Mohawk (somewhere there still must be a USAir Flight Attendant - no way an Officer - with a "Mohawk date"), then return on Miss Phoebe (EL had restored the obs-lounge and otherwise upgraded and renamed the Hoboken-Chi Erie Limited) with my first X-ing of Tunkhannock by light of day. Well the Martin 404 (for the benefit of young airfans here), had mechanical problems and, while eventually the flight was operated, on final approach to KBHM where lo and behold out the window, there goes #2 Miss Phoebe .

But Short Line was convenient and efficient A to B transportation along NY 17 and Thruway; somehow i think we arrived at Port Authority before an H&M "tube' from Hoboken connecting with "the young Lady" would have arrived in Midtown.

Finally, even though SUNY Binghamton is enjoying a Kiplinger "top value" rating, this in itself will hardly warrant rail service. Like myself as noted 46 years ago, New York area students will have to make their way to Eighth Ave & 41st St. (PABT), as in this economy, Dad will be "thinking twice" before springing Junior a used (whoops, Certified Pre-Owned) Bimmer 3.

The DL&W abandoned all passenger service between Binghamton and Syracuse on September 14, 1958.

As I have many times on here, you people are just wasting your time. On the railroad years ago we would say you were
"racing your motor". There is no justification for rail service between New York and Binghamton. There is just not enough
population to support it and no money from the state for it either. As I have also stated many times, in the event that the
state or others come up with funds for service, it would much better be spent to the north between Albany and Buffalo where
there is justification for more, faster and better trains.
No matter what happens here, the bus on NY-17 can and will make it faster and you will be better off with multiple bus trips
a day each way than with one or maybe two trains each way.
Any federal money would be a classic example of what is called "PORK".
Dream on!!!!!!
Noel Weaver

Wow, why are you so angry? It's like you want to do anything you can to stop having a train going to Binghamton NY. What do you mean by "justification"? Does a city have to have at least a million people (like Buffalo) before you can have a train? Binghamton NY has almost as many people as Harrisburg, PA (both in the 48K range), and yet Harrisburg have the Keystone Service (electric, even). So what's pork and what isn't?

Mr. Amtrakowitz, Mr. Weaver "started doing this stuff for a living' duing 1956. At his posting, he reiterated that it has clearly been stated here there is no existing rail route remotely competitive with 'drive time' over NY 17 (auto or bus). Further, even if there were a rail route over which competitive timings could be attained, what is there in Binghamton to warrant new rail service over a route that has not had any since 1966?

Yes, everybody has their "pet" train, but when there is no viable route, and no source of funding from a single jurisdiction other than Federal, the pet is simply pork; best lay this matter to rest

At his posting, he reiterated that it has clearly been stated here there is no existing rail route remotely competitive with 'drive time' over NY 17 (auto or bus). Further, even if there were a rail route over which competitive timings could be attained, what is there in Binghamton to warrant new rail service over a route that has not had any since 1966?

Yes, those are good questions, but they can be applied to any rail route. Albany to Buffalo has a lot of high-population cities, but still they aren't getting even the kind of service that runs to Harrisburg. Just using population density as a basis, there shouldn't be any new service to Harrisburg and there should be a great deal more on the old NY Central.

Yes, everybody has their "pet" train, but when there is no viable route, and no source of funding from a single jurisdiction other than Federal, the pet is simply pork; best lay this matter to rest

That's a tricky argument. You could call it all pork, then.

As Col. Perkowski notes, and in his capacity as Forum Moderator, the Golden Rule is a good rule.

There is merit to the point you raise, Mr. Amtrakowitz, that there is more service between Phila and Hbg than, Albany-Syracuse-Rochester-Buffalo (any combination of which having the potential to be considered a "corridor"). However the difference is that a Local jursidiction, or more specifically the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 'stepped up to the plate" to provide operating funds for the Phila-Hbg service. New York has not provided funding for any trains other than the Adirondack, but has provided funding for infrastructure benefitting all passenger railroads operating within the State.

Since any routing NY-Bingo involves at least two states (and the only route, namely the DL&W Route of The Phoebe Snow, that has any source of intermediate traffic has been truncated - and involves three states), the only reasonable and pracitcal source of funding is at Federal level. While during the 70's and 80's, any politician of any standing could 'get his train', those days are fortunately behind us with those "political trains' having been laid to rest. Barring any facts not brought forth in the the discussion here (as well as related discussion over at the NJTransit Forum), it is difficult to come to any conclusion other than this service would be anything other than PORK, and further advocacy of this route would suggest the advocate is simply advocating a train for no purpose other than to 'advocate a train'.

That, my friend, is simply the mindless tactics of organizations such as NARP.

The real justification for having train service is the possibility that the users are willing to pay more of their own money than it costs to run the train. There are virtually no examples (maybe none) of that in N. America depending on how you want to handle the accounting. More important, to a rational mind there's no such thing as "train entitlement".

So that probably leaves us, at least in theoretical terms, with passenger rail being an exercise in socialism and everyone has their own view on that one. Suffice it to say that us railfans can tolerate a little bit of socialism in this area since it's our favorite pet. Now given that, the objective becomes one in figuring out how to move the most people who need to be moved with the limited resources that taxpayers are willing to give up. I think it's fair to say that no matter how one constructs that list, under no plausible circumstance can service to Binghamton make the list if measured by subsidy per potential passenger.

MudLake wrote: So that probably leaves us, at least in theoretical terms, with passenger rail being an exercise in socialism and everyone has their own view on that one. Suffice it to say that us railfans can tolerate a little bit of socialism in this area since it's our favorite pet. Now given that, the objective becomes one in figuring out how to move the most people who need to be moved with the limited resources that taxpayers are willing to give up. I think it's fair to say that no matter how one constructs that list, under no plausible circumstance can service to Binghamton make the list if measured by subsidy per potential passenger.

I think, in the passing it is also worth mentioning that irrespective of what happens to Binghamton service, the service between NY area and Scranton is probably likely to happen and is also likely to get substantial federal funding. At issue then would only be the Scranton - Binghamton segment. I have no clue what the pros and cons are and who might want to fund it. All that I know is that it is something that has been talked about at ESPA, and it is possible that if NYDOT ever gets out of its slumber it might take a look at it again. That of course does not mean that there will be any funding forthcoming for it, since in all seriousness NYDOT really has a few much bigger fish to fry when it comes to improving rail transport in upstate New York.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: There is merit to the point you raise, Mr. Amtrakowitz, that there is more service between Phila and Hbg than, Albany-Syracuse-Rochester-Buffalo (any combination of which having the potential to be considered a "corridor"). However the difference is that a Local jursidiction, or more specifically the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 'stepped up to the plate" to provide operating funds for the Phila-Hbg service. New York has not provided funding for any trains other than the Adirondack, but has provided funding for infrastructure benefitting all passenger railroads operating within the State.

Actually, the PennDOT also paid roughly $100 million of the $145 million in capital put into the Harrisburg route which is owned by Amtrak. Certainly NYS shoudl step up to the plate with more substantial speed increases just as PA should continue it's program to Pitt. neither seems to be happening though.

Duly noted Mr 1617 JFK Blvd; the issue regarding NY-Bingo service is that either route, DL&W or ERIE traverses three states (OK, it could be done in one state; NY-NYC-ALB-D&H-Bingo but let's be reasonable), and that Federal funding for such service is simply not forthcoming. When there is Local funding of rail service, such is to take passenmger TO attractions within the State - not through the State to attractions elsewhere. In short, why should Penna and NJ be interested in funding transportation for a New York area college student attendiong SUNY-Binghamton?

As noted in several lengthy threads over at NJT Forum, New Jersey is simply not interested in funding transportation for Monroe County PA residents desiring to get to jobs in NY; quite simply that is why the DL&W Blairstown Cutoff has not been restored and NY-Strousdburg service has not been established. It is one thing to fund transportation for a Montclair NJ resident to get to NY for a job (even if they don't pay much in the way of Income Taxes to NJ, they DO pay Real Estate taxes to an NJ jurisdiction) but it is sonmething else to fund a Monroe County resident to get to their job in NY (paying neither Income nor Real Estate taxes to NJ).

In short, "where's the beef", i.e. tax $$$?

Gilbert B Norman wrote: It is one thing to fund transportation for a Montclair NJ resident to get to NY for a job (even if they don't pay much in the way of Income Taxes to NJ, they DO pay Real Estate taxes to an NJ jurisdiction) but it is sonmething else to fund a Monroe County resident to get to their job in NY (paying neither Income nor Real Estate taxes to NJ).

That is partly a problem with NJT's mindset, which is that their sole reason for existence is to carry passengers/commuters to New York City. The fact of the matter is that there is a very significant latent demand for commuter service from PA to places like Morris and Somerset counties which can be served by coordinated train and feeder bus service. But NJT is simply not interested in serving anyone who wants to come to NJ to work in those areas. They would rather send NJ people off to New York so New York can earn the income tax dollars instead of NJ. Pretty weird, but who said they thought straight? It is quite hard to fathom why NJT would not be interested in doing things that would cause NJ State to collect some more income tax.

We're way off topic, but PA and NJ have reciprocity with state income tax. I live in PA, my office is in NJ, I pay PA income tax only. Only thing NJ nicks me for is unemployment and work development at about $100 a year...