Flood Problems on Shore Line

jamesinclair wrote:

Cadet57 wrote: Why? Its weather related. Airlines will leave you out in the rain (no pun intended) if there is a weather issue.

Rarely do weather issues delay airplane service for more than a few hours. And as another poster mentioned, and from personal experience, detours due to fog usually end with a charter bus or other service.

BuddSilverliner269 wrote: Why should Amtrak be any different from Greyhound in your scenario?

Because Amtrak charges much higher fares than greyhound and is aiming for a very different clientele. If grandma can't make it to the casino with greyhound, it's not a big deal, but the folks taking Acela are paying to get to their destination as quickly as possible for a reason. Telling them "it sucks, too bad" is not a good way to build customer loyalty.

You also mention funding. Well, when local transit systems have to detour due too weather, they find a fleet of buses to replace the service, even if their budget is in a dire situation. When the green line in Boston last month had a section closed due to flooding, 20+ buses were mobilized to provide service, service to people paying $1.70.

Obviously, amtrak doesnt have an extensive bus fleet on hand, which is why they can charter. Is it expensive? Yes. Is it worth it? I think so. The worst thing a business can do is make an unhappy customer. Suddenly, "I take the Acela every other week" can turn into "dont ever take amtrak, they're useless"

Im glad Amtrak offered the inland route, but I think they could have done better.

Again I-95 was closed for much of the duration of these cancellations ( If the buses and trains can't get through, you have to be honest and say tough luck sometimes ). Flooding is a risk to all modes of transportation.

Furthermore you seem to absolutely love the airlines, which seems to be the whole basis of your bashing of Amtrak. Ironic considering Amtrak has a fairly good track record when it comes to weather conditions that close and backlog airports for days on end ( blizzards anyone ), and no these delays aren't a rarity. Nor do airlines go above and beyond to get the customers to their destination, Amtrak at least attempts to accommodate passengers and get them to their destination. In fact there seems to be an increasing trend in which airlines tend to leave passengers inside cramped aircraft for hours on end on the tarmac ( even when there is no hope of getting to the particular destination ).


Even with the flooding and jitters from "RECORD" breaking snowfall Amtrak by far and wide out performs the airlines( when it comes to satisfying customers ), especially on the NEC.

I hate to say it, but bus would be quicker. From Boston to New Haven or NYC directly 95 in the flooded area wouldn't be used (during normal conditions) because it's faster to go west on the Mass Pike (90) to 84 to Hartford and south on I-91 to join I-95 in New Haven. Sad but true, with no major delays you can drive NYC-BOS quicker than the Acela.

I rode from NYP to BOS on 2150 this morning (0803 departure). We slowed to about 20mph over the affected area. There was a lot of work equipment off to the side, but no sign of crews. The water was still quite high, but all service was otherwise normal. I give two thumbs-up to Amtrak for getting the railroad back after such an extraordinary event.

[By the way, I rode 1161 south BOS-NYP via Springfield on Sunday. The ride took six hours, two minutes; we lost time north of Hartford when the set went brakes-in-emergency, then again south of Hartford waiting for an opposing move over single track, then a longer-than-usual engine swap at New Haven. The strangest part was seeing railfans take photos of the train *I* was on when we crossed the diamond at Palmer!]

Diverging Route wrote:I rode from NYP to BOS on 2150 this morning (0803 departure). We slowed to about 20mph over the affected area. There was a lot of work equipment off to the side, but no sign of crews. The water was still quite high, but all service was otherwise normal. I give two thumbs-up to Amtrak for getting the railroad back after such an extraordinary event.

Thanks for the info. With the affected area being in the Kingston, RI area, sounds like now is not the time to go for a 150 mph joyride. Wonder if we're looking at possibly weeks or even months before the track/roadbed are good for 150 again...

Matt Johnson wrote:

Diverging Route wrote:I rode from NYP to BOS on 2150 this morning (0803 departure). We slowed to about 20mph over the affected area. There was a lot of work equipment off to the side, but no sign of crews. The water was still quite high, but all service was otherwise normal. I give two thumbs-up to Amtrak for getting the railroad back after such an extraordinary event.

Thanks for the info. With the affected area being in the Kingston, RI area, sounds like now is not the time to go for a 150 mph joyride. Wonder if we're looking at possibly weeks or even months before the track/roadbed are good for 150 again...

I think most of the 150 MPH territory is not in the area where there were water problems.
Noel Weaver

CSX Conductor wrote:I hate to say it, but bus would be quicker. From Boston to New Haven or NYC directly 95 in the flooded area wouldn't be used (during normal conditions) because it's faster to go west on the Mass Pike (90) to 84 to Hartford and south on I-91 to join I-95 in New Haven. Sad but true, with no major delays you can drive NYC-BOS quicker than the Acela.

As for driving in less time than the Acela Express makes it, I don't want to be in that vehicle with you. It is not possible IF
you adhere to the speed limits. Traffic on I-95 between New Haven and New York makes Metro-North look like a dream, I
drove I-95 through this area last fall and it was not fun nor fast either.
You are trying to tell us that you can drive from Boston to New York in less than 3 and 1/2 hours, I don't for one minute
believe you IF you are following the speed limits. I don't want to be riding a bus if it makes it in less than 3 and 1'2 hours
either. 55 MPH from New Haven to the New York City Line and 50 MPH inside the city limits of New York alone does you in on this trip.
Your posts usually make much sense to me but this one does not.
Noel Weaver

Noel Weaver wrote:You are trying to tell us that you can drive from Boston to New York in less than 3 and 1/2 hours, I don't for one minute
believe you IF you are following the speed limits. I don't want to be riding a bus if it makes it in less than 3 and 1'2 hours
either. 55 MPH from New Haven to the New York City Line and 50 MPH inside the city limits of New York alone does you in on this trip.
Your posts usually make much sense to me but this one does not.
Noel Weaver

Somewhat off-topic, but I can recall shortly after Acela was introduced, a Stamford Advocate reporter played 'beat the Acela' from Stamford to South Station.

Well he won, but after reporting that he was traveling not less than 90mph on I-84 East of Hartford (65 posted; I think). Somehow, neither I nor a fellow I know "down below" who carefully observes School Zone speed limits (I remember well the one near your Church) nor myself who, while much to the chagrin of the Escalade driving cell-phone yakking Soccer Moms around here, does same, would consider the Advocate's journalism to be "responsible".

But returning to topic, it will be interesting to learn what kind of "marks' the media gives Amtrak for their handling of the flood emergency. Some will surely hold, as we have here at this Forum, that Amtrak should have had an emergency plan to detour over the B&A ready to go as soon as the line had to be closed. Others will hold that "acts of God' happen and best accept such.

Finally on that note, maybe some will hold that God idd not want the holiest period of the Chirstian calendar to be just another excuse to hit the malls, but rather to focus on.....(well, we're here to talk about railroad industry affairs, not theology).

Matt Johnson wrote:

Diverging Route wrote:I rode from NYP to BOS on 2150 this morning (0803 departure). We slowed to about 20mph over the affected area. There was a lot of work equipment off to the side, but no sign of crews. The water was still quite high, but all service was otherwise normal. I give two thumbs-up to Amtrak for getting the railroad back after such an extraordinary event.

Thanks for the info. With the affected area being in the Kingston, RI area, sounds like now is not the time to go for a 150 mph joyride. Wonder if we're looking at possibly weeks or even months before the track/roadbed are good for 150 again...

Once clear of the flood area, we were back up to track speed in no time. I think all of the 150mph territory is north of the affected area.

None of the 150 mph territory was affected by the flood. During the time they had service canceled, they did have an Acela Set run between Boston and Kingston, cause most commuters in south county here take 66 into work, and then Regional 177 coming home.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:

Noel Weaver wrote:You are trying to tell us that you can drive from Boston to New York in less than 3 and 1/2 hours, I don't for one minute
believe you IF you are following the speed limits. I don't want to be riding a bus if it makes it in less than 3 and 1'2 hours
either. 55 MPH from New Haven to the New York City Line and 50 MPH inside the city limits of New York alone does you in on this trip.
Your posts usually make much sense to me but this one does not.
Noel Weaver

Somewhat off-topic, but I can recall shortly after Acela was introduced, a Stamford Advocate reporter played 'beat the Acela' from Stamford to South Station.

Well he won, but after reporting that he was traveling not less than 90mph on I-84 East of Hartford (65 posted; I think). Somehow, neither I nor a fellow I know "down below" who carefully observes School Zone speed limits (I remember well the one near your Church) nor myself who, while much to the chagrin of the Escalade driving cell-phone yakking Soccer Moms around here, does same, would consider the Advocate's journalism to be "responsible".

But returning to topic, it will be interesting to learn what kind of "marks' the media gives Amtrak for their handling of the flood emergency. Some will surely hold, as we have here at this Forum, that Amtrak should have had an emergency plan to detour over the B&A ready to go as soon as the line had to be closed. Others will hold that "acts of God' happen and best accept such.

Finally on that note, maybe some will hold that God idd not want the holiest period of the Chirstian calendar to be just another excuse to hit the malls, but rather to focus on.....(well, we're here to talk about railroad industry affairs, not theology).

Google maps reports NYC (from the Battery) to central Boston via I-384 and I-84 as 3 hours 51 minutes driving time, and "with traffic, up to 4 hours, 50 minutes." Google base calculations are based on traveling at posted speed limits with no traffic delays, not sure how it calculates the with traffic time projection.

That said, for my Boston business trip from Newark, NJ in a few weeks, I've booked the Acela.

Everthing seemed to be getting back to normal just fine. Monday morning i was on 2190 and we had a good run. We had a 15 m.p.h speed restriction that morning just east of high st. Everything else went smooth. Got up to 150 m.p.h just like we always do. I always love seeing the passengers waiting for train 171 back away from the platform on the opposite side when we come thru kingston blaring on the horn. But needless to say it's back to business on the shore line.

Noel Weaver wrote:I think most of the 150 MPH territory is not in the area where there were water problems.
Noel Weaver

This is correct. The stretch that experienced the big submergement was not near the 150mph stretch. The effected area is 90mph for Acelas (with tilt working) and 80MPH for Regionals or Acela with no tilt.

Acela Express wrote: I always love seeing the passengers waiting for train 171 back away from the platform on the opposite side when we come thru kingston blaring on the horn.

Why would you be blaring the horn? It is not necessary, that's what the T.A.M.S. are for.

Btw, there was a 30mph restriction through the area that was under 2 feet of water. Train 174 had the Corridor Clipper on the rear today....maybe they'll bump it up to 60 on tomorrow's TSRB. Usually when the Corridor Clipper comes to Boston it comes in on 174 & returns the next day on train #171.

CSX Conductor..... Of course that's what the TAMS are for. Its easy to say there is no need to blow the horn. But when you have people on the platform early in the morning just standing by the edge of the platform with a camera on track two side sometimes you gotta lay on the horn. And by doing that it catches the attention of the folks standing over on track one who are facing east looking for 171 and have no idea a train is coming towards them at 150 M.P.H.from the opposite direction. On another note yes we did get that 30 m.p.h. restriction later that monday afternoon. CSX I know your glad that the shoreline is back up and running instead of running over that B&A. Lol. But hey that's old turf for you anyway.

Noel Weaver wrote:

CSX Conductor wrote:I hate to say it, but bus would be quicker. From Boston to New Haven or NYC directly 95 in the flooded area wouldn't be used (during normal conditions) because it's faster to go west on the Mass Pike (90) to 84 to Hartford and south on I-91 to join I-95 in New Haven. Sad but true, with no major delays you can drive NYC-BOS quicker than the Acela.

As for driving in less time than the Acela Express makes it, I don't want to be in that vehicle with you. It is not possible IF
you adhere to the speed limits. Traffic on I-95 between New Haven and New York makes Metro-North look like a dream, I
drove I-95 through this area last fall and it was not fun nor fast either.
You are trying to tell us that you can drive from Boston to New York in less than 3 and 1/2 hours, I don't for one minute
believe you IF you are following the speed limits. I don't want to be riding a bus if it makes it in less than 3 and 1'2 hours
either. 55 MPH from New Haven to the New York City Line and 50 MPH inside the city limits of New York alone does you in on this trip.
Your posts usually make much sense to me but this one does not.
Noel Weaver

In all fairness I think it is very much possible. I go to school on Long Island and live in the suburbs of New Haven and many times I've made it from school to home in 80 minutes give or take a few minutes, without hitting 90mph and including time spent in tolls for the Throgs Neck Bridge. Granted I skip over the construction areas of 95 from Bridgeport to New Haven by going to the Merrit. I've made it to UCONN for to visit friends from Long Island in around two hours as well. It is possible, albeit going over the speed limit, but not much above 75. But, the quicker route by far is up 91, over to 84 and across on 90. Probably save 30-45 minutes witht hat route rather than 95.


Edit: Disregard I misread the "if you are obeying the speed limit" part, yeah no way possible.