I didn't say that they were disinterested...but CT's obstruction has at least been rather a pain with respect to travel times on the NEC-North. I also think it's fair to say that getting those extra 10-20 MPH would still count for something.
If NH is not going to be an active participant, there are plenty of other projects in New England to invest the limited amount of passenger rail funds in while waiting for the NH political environment to realize that the expansion age of roads, more roads, and ever more cars is coming to a close.
Only one. In Milford.
Part of the answer there is that Boston, like New York, Philly, and Washington, has a decent carless population if I'm not mistaken. So there's that aspect to be had, plus the fact that MTR has a decent public transit system.
I agree with Anderson. I do not feel that a trip tie of even 8.5 hours would hamper ridership, and I think it's workable.
Agree that Boston has a good transit system with a population that does not either have a car or is not inclined to drive long distances does make a difference. I can see a BOS-MTR train at 8.5 hours doing ok, but the ridership will be less from Boston than it would be if it took the more direct route through NH. On the other hand, by the time a BOS-MTR train service starts, odds are that gas prices will be way more than $3-$4 a gallon.
Good point. With the NYP-BOS long trip time and no circa 5 AM departures from NYP to BOS, connecting to a BOS-MTR train is unlikely. A BOS-MTR train would probably depart mid-morning, late enough to allow connections from all the MBTA commuter train lines, but early enough to provide a early evening or circa 6 PM arrival in MTR. Want to get there early enough to allow connections in MTR to commuter trains, if not also VIA.
Yes, with the Vermonter the only thing missing is the political will and the operating subsidy to run the train everything else is already in place to run such a train. Heck, as a matter of fact the hand thrown switch at Cantic is normally set in the direction of Essex Jct. The Adirondack crew has to get off the train to set it in the Rouses Point direction, pass it, and then set it back in the Essex Jct. direction before heading on.
you missed the point I was making. There is no trackwork that must be done to run the train. The track is there used by freight trains every day. Yes there are a few slow stretches between Essex Jct. and Cantic, specially near the bridge across Richeleau River, but it is not so bad as to be unusable. Freight trains use it regularly.
The point is taken...my understanding was just that those track issues slowed things to the point that the run started to get embarrassingly long over those miles. Of course, I think the bigger issue has been getting the customs facility set up at MTR, which from what I can tell, Vermont wants taken care of first.
As I posted earlier in the thread, VT submitted a TIGER IV grant application for $11 million total with $3 million in state matching funds to rehabilitate the tracks north of St. Albans to the border. The odds of being selected are long with over $10 billion in total applications for $500 million of FY12 TGER IV funding, but VT is willing to put up $3 million of state money. The 2013 VT state budget which appears to have benn passed has $6 million to provide state matching funds to access the long standing Sen. Jeffords earmark for track upgrades to the western corridor.
That is the route for a proposed Portland to Montreal train that is one of the service expansion options being studied by Maine. There was a public meeting view graph presentation on it from 2011 that is available on the net somewhere. As I recall, pretty much of an obvious non-starter requiring hundreds of millions to restore the tracks to decent passenger train speeds for a proposed once a day train. Then there is the problem of customs inspection for a passenger train at an isolated border crossing.
Would it be possible to pre-clear passengers at Montreal and seat them in a sectioned-off car (I've seen barriers in the vestibules sometimes) until after the border? You'd still need to stop at the border, yes--but the only ones who would need to be processed would be those who boarded after MTR. Should make the stop a lot faster.
Seems like a probable mixed bag. Considering that you're probably looking at 2-3 hours of running on the Canadian side of the border, it seems to me that you'd have that barrier in place for a long time. Mind you, if it was just Sherbrooke subject to this, that wouldn't be as much of an issue...but it still seems like a potential mess if Quebec starts wanting more stops.
The customs inspection issue from what I know is not (directly) the number of passengers, but that there would have to be a custom inspection performed at the border both ways. At an isolated border crossing. The distance is too far from Montreal with multiple stops in Canada and the US for pre-clearance and sealing of passengers over the Portland to Montreal route to be practical.
About five years ago I had to cancel a YUL-BOS roundtrip booked at relatively short notice (~ 2 weeks) with Air Canada. I was refunded the full fare as credit for future travel, and it was sufficient to cover the entire cost of a London (England) > Montréal / Chicago > London trip a year later
The letter, signed by the four Senators, was sent to Secretaries Clinton (State Dept) and Napolitano (DHS). A joint letter from four US Senators does carry weight, especially since this is from Democratic Senators (ok, Bernie Sanders is an Independent but he does caucus with the Dems) to a Democratic administration. Should provide a poke in the ribs to the upper level bureaucrats to get the agreements done.
