Watch Hill?...no. That didn't pan out on projected utilization when they envisioned I-495/LIE direct-connecting to the RI 78 expressway stump in Westerly via a Chesapeake Bay bridge-n'-tunnel thon. East-end L.I. is a bunch of cottagefolk with "Go Away" signs on their front lawns; they don't want to go anywhere or be visited by anyone. Never was proposed as a rail routing, and never will be because Greenport Scoot isn't nearly enough co-utilization to blunt any of the trauma of the up-front cost.The best sollution is to bypass CT entirely with a Long Island route + tunnel and don't bother arguing because I'm right.
Swingy NH politics has been putting this on the board, off the board, on the board again, off the board on roughly 2-year intervals. The latest scheme is (Googles, throws dart for good measure)..."on-again" study for Nashua-stub extension of full-local Lowell schedule + couple commuter-extra pokes to Manchester in unsignalized territory. Nashua isn't hard. Track from Lowell to North Chelmsford Jct. on the heavily-used freight main is same speed, good condition from 24/7 freight use, and fully grade separated. North Chelmsford-Nashua is Class 3/60 MPH passenger with all its handful of grade crossings fully-gated, and Pan Am is in-process of renewing all the signals. It's mainly in dire need of a thorough roadbed resurfacing with replacement of some jointed-rail sections, as right now it would be a barf-bag ride at pax speeds. Manchester is a maint-deferred sub-40 MPH and was recently de-signalized because the freight schedule has atrophied too much. I can't see the past-Nashua schedule extras making the cut for first service starts because the physical plant just doesn't ride well enough. In absolute terms it's still mainline-grade, but practically speaking you have to lump that to a Phase II and put more up-front elbow grease into track quality before it's worthy of consequential business.Seeing that Nashua is close to Lowell and the tracks go right from the Lowell station to downtown Nashua, is there any plans to add this connection?
It does a great job of saying:NEWS: Amtrak double-secret restores Acela service...to Harrisburg!
RR.net servers literally melt in foam overload.
No, PennDOT is never ever ever ever ever ever going to be ordering Aveilas. Damnit...if you don't chop off the foamer zombie's head it just comes right back to life with a new Crazy Pitch!It does a great job of saying:
1) Please aim higher: instead of scheming how the Acela 1s can be repurposed to Keystone Service, aim higher to demand an expanded Avelia fleet
2) And, yeah, Pennsylvania-based advocates should lobby to accelerate the rebuild of Keystone stations for all high-level boarding
3) Such that when the platforms are ready and the fleet is expanded, the goal is a Avelias to everywhere with catenary.
Obscure note from the earlier testing pics: see that despite the train approaching the cameraman, the Aveila set is running only with its rear pantograph up. This provoked some curiosity as to what the default running mode was going to be, and whether that test run was just trying out alternate power-up scenarios. As it turns out, rear-pans-up is the default running practice for the new sets...the opposite of the Acela 1's which always run both-pans-up under constant-tension wire or front-pan-only on the remaining stretches of older/saggy variable-tension wire. Used to be that for ID'ing the running direction in Acela pictures where the headlights or rear marker lights weren't visible that you'd go by leading pantograph to break the tie. Now we've got to reverse those calls (Regionals and LD's are easier calls because there's always only 1 Sprinter electric, and if it's on-NEC and not on the Keystone it'll always be leading in pull mode).
F-line, I'm curious as to why they prefer the Crown St. site rather than right at Main St., which is much closer and walkable to actual downtown. Does this just have to do with the layover yard access that you mentioned, or because the curvature of the track at this location? Would this be under future consideration?Right now City of Nashua has its downtown station site at Crown St. fully pre-prepped as a commuter lot for the #11 Crosstown Connector bus. Site plan calls for razing the factory on the front lawn to build a multimodal depot, and the CR platform would go up to the grade crossing on a full-high track turnout abutting the handicapped spaces. Design allowances for building initially as a Rowley-sized 12 ft. wide single-track with direct-ramped side access that can then be later repurposed into a double-track island with up-and-over access. T and PAR already have quid pro quo agreement to host the layover yard on the unused grading in the backside of the freight yard. City up-fronted the payout for the site prep on hedge that the State House was so perennially unreliable that they were going to try for go-it-alone as a last resort. Though the would-be South Nashua Pn'R stop is way more conseqential for ridership, the Downtown site is ready-serve for a stop and positioned where the trains would be backing into the layover yard so it's thoroughly baked into the base requirement. City is fully prepared to debut a minimalist extension @ Downtown and figure out South Nashua on-the-go if it comes to that (even if that's the less-satisfying service start config at go-it-alone capital funding levels). Right now study funding has been restored such that there's enough assistance to plot bigger S. Nashua in-tandem, but you never know if that'll hold by the '22 election.
Wrong line. Main St. is on the Hillsboro Branch, not the NH Main. Can't put anything out there and still have Manchester & Concord servable on a linear schedule. Old Nashua Union Station used to be 1 block up from Crown at the E. Hollis St. grade crossing bordering Temple, where the Boston & Lowell + Worcester, Nashua & Portland + Keene & Concord (current Hillsboro Br.) all converged on different sides of the the same block. So the primary passenger depot was always off-center from central downtown and hugging the Merrimack banks instead.F-line, I'm curious as to why they prefer the Crown St. site rather than right at Main St., which is much closer and walkable to actual downtown. Does this just have to do with the layover yard access that you mentioned, or because the curvature of the track at this location? Would this be under future consideration?