SLE to New London plans delayed

I saw the following news article yesterday, and the question that I had was, "what plans?" The story cites more time needed to replace ties as the reason that a planned daily and weekend service increase to New London was delayed from this spring to next spring. I've never heard of such plans. All the discussion on here I recall has to do with the agreement governing the bridge movements shortly before New London station. Is the news story right? If so, what about the bridge agreement? What are/were the plans?

http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/news_ap_Ne ... 0901101550

Tourism? What are they smoking? Obviously the same crack and heroin that is ALL over the place in New London. The place is a dump! As of now you are lucky to carry more than 5 people beyond OSB on train 3646! Nobody rides that train! Yeah lets spend more money to move empty trains across the Connecticut river. The concrete ties that need to be replaced are BETWEEN New Haven and Old Saybrook! Dopes.

Interesting to know that the ties are between OSB and NHV. Would that have an effect anyway? I don't see how it would.

Perhaps the tourism referred to is to the two casinos just up the road from New London. There is bus service to and from the casino from the train/bus station downtown.

The question remains - is the bridge agreement an obstacle? If so, was there/what was the plan to deal with it? Or was this never seriously going to happen?

FYI...4 people on 3646 to New London last nite.

I don't want to discuss the merits of extending service to New London (which seem limited at best). I was wondering if anyone knows anything about the supposed plan that was delayed, and how it dealt with the obstacles mentioned in previous discussions but not in the news story.

I believe there is an agreement in place between the State of Connecticut and Amtrak regarding the number of trains that
can be operated on a daily basis over the various bridges on this route and Amtrak is close to this maximum right now.
Maybe the people along this route need to decide what is more important commuter trains or pleasure boaters because it
does not seem that they can have both.
Noel Weaver

3 people to London last nite ! The state should call a taxi to take em'.

And then what do you expect the state does on the days where you have lots of people for that train?

Call Busses?

Well that's the thing. The report didn't say that the agreement is the problem (I wouldn't be surprised if they got that wrong), and it said that there was planned extended service for this spring. Well if service was planned, what was the plan? How were they going to deal with the agreement? Or was the 'plan' merely and aspiration, and they threw out a lame excuse rather than addressing the real issues? I guess nobody on here has any knowledge of the facts I'm wondering about. Oh well.

Whether such an extension makes sense is a discussion that's been had ad nauseum.

The ONLY time I have ever seen LOTS of people on the train to New London was back in 2000. It was OPSAIL. Im on the train to New London 5 days a week for the past 10 years. Come sit with me and enjoy the ride! LOTS OF ROOM! you can even have your own private car if you like.

haha. Sounds like it needs to get dumped. From what I heard, it was about the USCG trying to hog the bridge for some boats. Of course, if no one rides the train to New London, then its not an issue. At some point wayy in the future, if they run bi-directionally (with platforms on both sides) New London would start to make sense, as a lot of people work in New London and live on the Shore Line.

If it wasn't for the restrictions on the bridges, i'd say a good idea would be to extend it to Mystic, or even Pawcatuck(for the Westerly,RI people). Mystic would make sense during the summer....could remove some of that traffic off I-95 that's going to downtown Mystic or the Seaport. I also bring up the Pawcatuck/Westerly thing because when i go to Old Saybrook, i see RI plates, and even more RI plates in New Haven.

If the state had the $$$, we could have trains that ran straight from GCT to somewhere past Mystic and back, stopping both ways. It might make sense, but there's not enough money for that now. Commuters could also use the train to go to Groton/ New London from points east if it was extended that way.

they can now, its called Amtrak.

I think the State of Connecticut should put its money into better Metro-North service to Danbury and Waterbury. The area
east of New Haven has ample service to Old Saybrook, the boaters howl when the bridges are not open and I don't think they
should put any money whatsoever into service to New London beyond what's offered by Amtrak.
More service should be operated to Waterbury, Torrington which is bigger than New London and probably the rest of the
towns between New London and Old Saybrook doesn't even have a decent bus connection to Metro-North Service. If the
state wants to do something right, they should operate a connecting bus to Metro-North services between Waterbury and
probably Winsted but at least Torrington. More and better train service to Waterbury would build up one of the few
potentials that the Naugatuck Valley has namely a residential area for people working out of the area and mostly in Fairfield
County and New York.
I know there is employement in Eastern Connecticut but it is better accessed by bus service than by rail service. The defense industries and the casinos are not on rail lines but they are on main highways and accessible for bus service from
anywhere in the area.
I think they are probably running more service than necessary to Old Saybrook and I do not think there is any need for
service beyond Old Saybrook.
Noel Weaver