Acela & Amtrak NEC (HSR BOS-NYP-WAS and branches only)

[F-Line to Dudley]

LIRR to Ronkonkoma then through the tunnel would be a bunch of straightaways where high speed trains could run long stretches at ~200mph. The curves on the current route through CT might limit trains to half that. I can't find my source, but I read somewhere that the tunnel option to get from NYC to New Haven could be 30-40 minutes faster than any other planned improvements going through southwest CT.

Not with LIRR traffic to contend with, it won't. The Main Line exceeds the traffic-clogged New Haven Line in service density, and almost all of it is local/non-express traffic that's making frequent stops. You can't bob and weave a 200 MPH train around that kind of traffic.

 

[ritchiew]

Not with LIRR traffic to contend with, it won't. The Main Line exceeds the traffic-clogged New Haven Line in service density, and almost all of it is local/non-express traffic that's making frequent stops. You can't bob and weave a 200 MPH train around that kind of traffic.

Anytime these plans come up, they're light on details. But I think what they're proposing is using the LIRR ROWs, but building new dedicated high speed track on top. So adding new high speed track at ground level where possible, and maybe a viaduct above LIRR tracks in other places. Or something like that. Again, they're light on details, so I'm guessing.

That would solve your bobbing and weaving problem for sure. But this might be even more fantastically expensive than it looked at first glance.

 

[RandomWalk]

And the LI NIMBYs will love an elevated rail viaduct.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Anytime these plans come up, they're light on details. But I think what they're proposing is using the LIRR ROWs, but building new dedicated high speed track on top. So adding new high speed track at ground level where possible, and maybe a viaduct above LIRR tracks in other places. Or something like that. Again, they're light on details, so I'm guessing.

That would solve your bobbing and weaving problem for sure. But this might be even more fantastically expensive than it looked at first glance.

These cross-Sound proposals mostly assume that the abandoned midsection of the Central Branch would be rebuilt as a high-speed bypass of the Main Line east of Floral Park. But that too would have local traffic to bob-and-weave around on two tracks, because the Central Branch is an LIRR-world Crazy Transit Pitch for the real-world capacity crunch on the Main Line for all the mouths it has to feed and all the growth that's going to those mouths. So you *might* get a few miles of relief between Bethpage Jct. and Floral Park, only to slam headfirst into the same dog-slow procession of local traffic on the last 16 miles to Penn. And, no, nobody's ever considered what kind of heinous costs this would entail. Even on the existing track you've got a shitton of grade crossings to full-on eliminate if you ever hope to legally run >110 MPH. To say nothing about the tunnel, the virgin north-south ROW to 'Koma, reactivating the densely-abutted Central Branch ROW, and making the incompatible electrification schemes mesh.

 

[sneijder]

We need to stop throwing money at studying these pipe dreams. Just get the existing ROW tracks and bridges up to full possible speed based on the current geometry, unclutter the South Station/Penn Station approaches, get the MBTA to run EMU's on the Providence Line, maybe straighten a curve here or there, and we've got 3 hours from NYC to Boston.

 

[ritchiew]

We need to stop throwing money at studying these pipe dreams. Just get the existing ROW tracks and bridges up to full possible speed based on the current geometry, unclutter the South Station/Penn Station approaches, get the MBTA to run EMU's on the Providence Line, maybe straighten a curve here or there, and we've got 3 hours from NYC to Boston.

To be clear, this isn't some government study done with taxpayer money. This tunnel project is being proposed by a private advocacy group, North Atlantic Rail. And they're not throwing money at a study. This is crayoning with an extremely rough, back-of-the-envelope cost estimate.

I'm glad advocacy groups keep pushing these ideas, even if they seem far fetched. It's a reminder that this is what it could look like if we focused on high speed rail like other (much poorer) countries have done. Boston and NYC would be an hour and a half apart if we could muster the same engineering zeal as, like, Italy. And we should be embarrassed that this kind of thing looks like a pipe dream when it is what other countries are already doing. I don't know what the rest of NAR's advocacy is like, but I'm glad they're doing it.

 

[JeffDowntown]

To be clear, this isn't some government study done with taxpayer money. This tunnel project is being proposed by a private advocacy group, North Atlantic Rail. And they're not throwing money at a study. This is crayoning with an extremely rough, back-of-the-envelope cost estimate.

I'm glad advocacy groups keep pushing these ideas, even if they seem far fetched. It's a reminder that this is what it could look like if we focused on high speed rail like other (much poorer) countries have done. Boston and NYC would be an hour and a half apart if we could muster the same engineering zeal as, like, Italy. And we should be embarrassed that this kind of thing looks like a pipe dream when it is what other countries are already doing. I don't know what the rest of NAR's advocacy is like, but I'm glad they're doing it.

Naples to Milan (same distance as Boston to DC) is 4hr 15min by high speed rail ($94 one way)

 

[bakgwailo]

Naples to Milan (same distance as Boston to DC) is 4hr 15min by high speed rail ($94 one way)

Ugh, the Italian rail system is a dream between Italo/Trenitalia. Pretty much show up day of for $30 first class between any given city pair for 1-2 hours trip time.

 

[fatnoah]

This whole thing is insane. Looking at a May 2024 timetable, Acela 2151 is scheduled to run the 156 miles between BOS and NHV in 119 minutes, for an average speed of 78mph. The remaining 75 miles takes 104 minutes, for an average speed of 44 mph, which is insanely slow for a trip with one stop, even when Metro North traffic is taken into account. Just getting the average speed on MNRR to 78mph as well would shave three quarters of an hour off the schedule. As a previous poster noted, solving some curves and a bridge or two would knock that down even further.

The money would be far better spent knocking an hour of the BOS/NYP trip and fixing the infrastructure south of NYP so that we have an electrical system that wasn't contemporaneous with Kaiser Wilhem would also be nice.

 

[bigeman312]

This whole thing is insane. Looking at a May 2024 timetable, Acela 2151 is scheduled to run the 156 miles between BOS and NHV in 119 minutes, for an average speed of 78mph. The remaining 75 miles takes 104 minutes, for an average speed of 44 mph, which is insanely slow for a trip with one stop, even when Metro North traffic is taken into account. Just getting the average speed on MNRR to 78mph as well would shave three quarters of an hour off the schedule. As a previous poster noted, solving some curves and a bridge or two would knock that down even further.

The money would be far better spent knocking an hour of the BOS/NYP trip and fixing the infrastructure south of NYP so that we have an electrical system that wasn't contemporaneous with Kaiser Wilhem would also be nice.

All else equal, how much time will the following projects shave, collectively:

• East River Tunnel Rehabilitation
• WALK Bridge Replacement
• Connecticut River Bridge Replacement

 

[sneijder]

This whole thing is insane. Looking at a May 2024 timetable, Acela 2151 is scheduled to run the 156 miles between BOS and NHV in 119 minutes, for an average speed of 78mph. The remaining 75 miles takes 104 minutes, for an average speed of 44 mph, which is insanely slow for a trip with one stop, even when Metro North traffic is taken into account. Just getting the average speed on MNRR to 78mph as well would shave three quarters of an hour off the schedule. As a previous poster noted, solving some curves and a bridge or two would knock that down even further.

The money would be far better spent knocking an hour of the BOS/NYP trip and fixing the infrastructure south of NYP so that we have an electrical system that wasn't contemporaneous with Kaiser Wilhem would also be nice.

I'm sure the NEC is super-congested beyond what I can see on the Metro North schedule, but after riding the 4pm Acela from Penn northbound a few times for work, it seems like
- 1 or sometimes 2 tracks are closed for extended lengths, forcing the Acela to run on the local track interlaced with local Stamford trains sometimes
- even east of stamford, sometimes we ran on the local/platform track and slowed to 20-30mph frequently in order to maintain spacing

I wonder if the full quad-track of the NEC was fully functional at track speed, how much padding could be removed from the schedule even without any curve-straightening. Since in theory the acela would only be limited by express-running Metro North trains which run no slower than the acela in this curvy section of track from NYP > New haven.

 

[Justbuildit]

Whether it's quad tracking, bridge rehab, straightening a few curves, or separate bypasses, even an 80mph average speed between NYC and BOS would put the trip under 3 hours each way and absolutely change things. With 150mph+ in RI and MA, it really isn't asking much for the Western CT and NYC regions. There are a ton of people who still fly, especially off-peak, but < 3hr city-to-city would make the train so much more palatable and help reduce airport congestion. Fatnoah is right, shaving off a chunk of time and then continued marginal improvements with higher top speeds in select areas into the future makes the existing ROW livable even if it isn't a 90 minute ride.

 

[thepixelnation]

There are a ton of people who still fly, especially off-peak, but < 3hr city-to-city would make the train so much more palatable and help reduce airport congestion

Just starting from a "Visit New York City, not JFK/LGA/EWR Airport" viewpoint would do so much

 

[Stlin]

Whether it's quad tracking, bridge rehab, straightening a few curves, or separate bypasses, even an 80mph average speed between NYC and BOS would put the trip under 3 hours each way and absolutely change things. With 150mph+ in RI and MA, it really isn't asking much for the Western CT and NYC regions. There are a ton of people who still fly, especially off-peak, but < 3hr city-to-city would make the train so much more palatable and help reduce airport congestion. Fatnoah is right, shaving off a chunk of time and then continued marginal improvements with higher top speeds in select areas into the future makes the existing ROW livable even if it isn't a 90 minute ride.

I would generally agree - the travel times make a difference, especially in BOS or DCA where our airports on one end of the trip is (usually) super easily accessible. Per Wikipedia, the Acela BOS-NYP and NYP-WAS routes are roughly the same distance, but NYP-WAS being~45 minutes and ~16mph faster equated to 83% of the train & air market share vs 54% for BOS-NYP.

Just starting from a "Visit New York City, not JFK/LGA/EWR Airport" viewpoint would do so much

Unfortunately, as much as I wanted to take Amtrak, I just booked a flight from BOS to JFK - although mostly because I actually need to be in Queens.

 

[thepixelnation]

I actually need to be in Queens

congrats, you've found one one of the very few cases where JFK's location is actually convenient

 

[DBM]

if we could muster the same engineering zeal as, like, Italy.

I saw this get publicized briefly on some news aggregator recently and I don't think it's been posted here before:

https://transitcosts.com/

Key takeaway (boldface/italics mine):

"Why do domestic subway and light rail projects cost more and take longer to construct than similar projects in Italy, Sweden, Turkey, Korea, Chile, and Spain?"

"We [at the Marron Institute] investigate this question across hundreds of transit projects from around the world. We have created a database that spans 59 countries and totals more than 20,000 km of urban rail built since the late 1960s. We have also examined this question in greater detail by carrying out five in-depth case studies that take a closer look at unique considerations and variables that aren’t easily quantified, like project management, governance, site conditions and design."

In other words, thanks to these guys' meticulous data-mining, we can now study, in exquisite, excruciating, embarrassing detail, just how incompetent the US is at HSR projects compared to literally every single other country on earth.

(Also, I noticed this guy Alon Levy is part of their research team, and his name gets bandied about on this forum from time-to-time...)

 

[ritchiew]

I saw this get publicized briefly on some news aggregator recently and I don't think it's been posted here before:

https://transitcosts.com/

Key takeaway (boldface/italics mine):

"Why do domestic subway and light rail projects cost more and take longer to construct than similar projects in Italy, Sweden, Turkey, Korea, Chile, and Spain?"

"We [at the Marron Institute] investigate this question across hundreds of transit projects from around the world. We have created a database that spans 59 countries and totals more than 20,000 km of urban rail built since the late 1960s. We have also examined this question in greater detail by carrying out five in-depth case studies that take a closer look at unique considerations and variables that aren’t easily quantified, like project management, governance, site conditions and design."

In other words, thanks to these guys' meticulous data-mining, we can now study, in exquisite, excruciating, embarrassing detail, just how incompetent the US is at HSR projects compared to literally every single other country on earth.

(Also, I noticed this guy Alon Levy is part of their research team, and his name gets bandied about on this forum from time-to-time...)

Jeez, I hope someone's posted that before. I totally agree, that's an incredible resource!

One of the really in-depth case transit studies they did was the Green Line Extension, which is absolutely worth reading to see how it took so long and cost so much.

I didn't notice they have a whole new study specifically for High Speed Rail projects. Thanks for pointing that out

 

[Jahvon09]

Does anyone know exactly when the new Acelas will go into revenue service? Why is it that the MBTA & Amtrak order new equipment & then it sits & sits & sits because of mutiple delays that seem to last for eons?!!! It is ridiculous & doesn't seem to make any sense at all!!!!

 

[Justbuildit]

I happen to have a Google alert set up for that exact question. Newest info I could find indicates "late" 2024, so expect something like an 11:50PM departure on 12/31/24. Not an obviously top tier site, but they reference an email they received directly from Amtrak after an inquiry.

A spokesman for Amtrak, Jason Abrams, said in an email this week that the new units are on presently track for a public launch in "late" 2024, based on the latest information from the train’s manufacturer, Alstom.

https://www.ctinsider.com/connecticut/article/ct-new-trains-amtrak-acela-airo-hartford-line-19560494.php

 

[AndrewOnTheMBTA]

I did more digging on the proposal of extending 3 daily trips of NER to Ronkonkoma - which seems to be stuck as a proposal for the entirety of this year. While this was maybe an idea before it became a proposal, does anyone have anymore info on if this will go anywhere? From Reddit discussions a few months ago, it seemed to have some support. I'm sure LI will push back - and won't this require work on overhead caternary? I love the idea of connecting to JFK from Amtrak and an easier ride for those in Queens - but I wonder if that is enough support to get it built. It still wouldn't be cheap.

Amtrak and Partners Receive Federal Grants to Improve and Expand Passenger Rail Across America - Amtrak Media

Amtrak and its partners have been awarded more than $2.1 billion to improve existing routes and advance plans to expand Amtrak service across the country.

media.amtrak.com