Boston and High Speed Rail

[BostonUrbEx]

Just wondering, does anyone have any documents regarding HSR to Montreal? I'm wondering what the fastest and the most likely routes would be. I think it is safe to assume it would hit Manchester along the way whatever way it goes?

Also, assuming N-S Rail Link gets built, does the Downeaster fall prey to Acela extension? Or does it stay it's own? I don't think it would cover it's own costs, so perhaps all Acela north of Boston is better directed towards Montreal. I was thinking that turning the Downeaster into a Portland - Boston - Cape Cod route would make for pretty assume seasonal service in any direction. Don't really see a need to go all the way to Acela for either.

 

[stellarfun]

The fastest Acela route to Montreal would be the Lake Champlain route from Albany. There is not and will not be enough Boston-Montreal traffic to ever even approach justifying the cost of HSR and electrification.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

If the North-South Rail Link were ever built the Western Route/Downeaster and the Lowell Line to Concord would get electrified and speed-upgraded to handle through-routed NEC Regionals. Those are highly sought-after routes to unite with the NEC, and what are driving the need for the N-S Link more than anything T-related. The Concord route would be pretty brisk because the Lowell Line has only the 2 close West Medford grade crossings (which would be eliminated) and just a few widely-spaced ones in NH. Western Route/Downeaster a little slower because of freight congestion and lots more grade crossings (ultimate HSR future for connecting Maine is probably upgrading the better-equipped Eastern Route and restoring it completely). Acelas could definitely be thru-routed, although probably at slower speed than further down the line. At any rate, a lot of people would patronize either route if a right-sized subset of service continued north of Boston.

The Montreal leg would be restoration of the NH Main from Concord to White River Jct., VT and then continuing up on the Vermonter route. That connecting track was abandoned around 1992 and is landbanked by state of NH. Frankly, getting full-blast HSR there is so far in the future I don't know if it's worth talking about yet. Concord and Portland are where the DC-NYC-BOS thru-routing revenue is going to be highest given population density, and trains passing through NYC would do better continuing straight up the Hudson or going the Vermonter route to get to MTL. The Springfield Line's likely going to be HSR rated by then, so even if north of SPR is still lower-speed it's a fast enough trip from the NEC to Montreal to be competitive with air travel. And easier to keep doing speed increases on the upgraded active line than build a whole new one. So I don't think we'll be seeing the NH Main go active again to White River Jct. for quite a long time.


After the Vermonter upgrades are complete, and they get that train eventually re-extended back to Montreal, there should be a Boston-Montreal regular-speed Amtrak train initiated. Probably only looking at a few years before talks get serious with Quebec about upgrading their track and reinstating the Montrealer. That'll uncap demand enough to easily merit an Amtrak out of South Station that goes through Worcester, then turns through Palmer and Amherst on the current Vermonter route they'll soon be trading in for the CT River route. New England Central Railroad, which owns the line north of Palmer and in VT, is a very passenger-friendly operation and has been extremely accommodating of the Vermonter and the mutually beneficial track upgrades it gets out of the deal. They're arguably better neighbors than Pan Am has been, falling behind schedule on the track work it's supposed to be doing on the CT River. So if this BOS-MTL regular speed regional picked up that routing and brought some of the same speed upgrades in tow as NECR is getting on the rest of its route, that would be a very well-patronized train. Especially by students going for a wild weekend in MTL. And 79 MPH speed would be just fine at a competitive price.

For HSR to ever happen from here to there the ridership demand's got to percolate and demonstrate the sort of growth potential the Downeaster has. We're certainly not going to get that without a low-speed route in place with 20 years to let its ridership crest. I really think this initial service via Worcester/Palmer needs a higher priority than the nonexistent talk it's gotten so far.

 

[whighlander]

High Speed Rail as currently implemented is a 19th century dinosaur with 21st Century knee and hip joints -- it makes no sense

what is needed is electric traction (could be overhead or could be aircraft-aux power units) driving each wheel on self propelled vehicles which travel non-stop point to point at about 100 MPH

All the long train stopping is just left over from steam boilers and pulling from the front

The future -- you arrive at South Station swipe your Charley and board there are no tickets as vehicles to major destinations leave every 15 to 20 minutes at peak and 30 minutes later and earlier -- in about;
2 hours you can get off at Penn Station in NYC
90 minutes to New Haven and Westchester
1 hour to Springfield or Hartford, Portland ME
45 minutes Portsmouth or Concord NH
30 minutes to Providence, Manchester NH,
20 minutes to Worcester

At an intermediate station the train either terminates and you board a local or the thru train bypasses the station on a short bypass track

Lots of other benefits

 

[billpa]

1 hour to Springfield or Hartford, Portland ME
45 minutes Portsmouth or Concord NH

One hour to Portland but 45 minutes to Portsmouth? So 15 minutes from Portsmouth to Portland?

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

One hour to Portland but 45 minutes to Portsmouth? So 15 minutes from Portsmouth to Portland?

It's pretty straight and flat so that seems plausible. Considering speeds they have in China/Japan, yes.

 

[billpa]

I was just wondering why it would take 45 minutes from Boston to Portsmouth but only 15 minutes from Portsmouth to Portland. Different speed limits? Traffic limitations, perhaps?

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

I was just wondering why it would take 45 minutes from Boston to Portsmouth but only 15 minutes from Portsmouth to Portland. Different speed limits? Traffic limitations, perhaps?

Traffic for sure, and fact that it has to serve a tenative 3 (post-Peabody/Danvers build) heavy-use commuter rail branches out to Beverly. Although if they killed off all the grade crossings in Beverly and Everett/Chelsea (the latter pretty much a requirement for building the Urban Ring) and subsumed all the local stops up to Salem with Blue Line the Eastern Route could be a lot zippier. Probably the fastest stretch of HSR on a retrofitted ROW in New England for that 15-20 miles north of heavy commuter rail territory. On the straightaways north of downtown Newburyport through the woods of Salisbury and Hampton that line would really fly...easily 160+ MPH sustained. I seriously doubt you could achieve under 45 minutes from Portsmouth to Portland, though. Urban density in Portsmouth/Kittery metro area and the waterfront means a slow and curvy trip with sharp turns for 2-4 miles depending on which direction they go, so much was abandoned by B&M north and west of there that the routing options are very limited, and there's no way into Portland without merging back onto the Western Route and all its concurrent freight at Orchard Beach (where it's literally on the beach) or Wells.

It'd be a GREAT deal faster on the Eastern Route than anything they could do on the Western Route--triple-tracking, grade crossing elimination, etc. That's another NEC-ish situation where they'd be straining to keep it 125 MPH through all the congestion and old infrastructure. The ROW geometry on the Eastern Route is worlds better because it was originally designed for speed, and there would be zero freight from Revere to Wells allowing better true HSR frills.

Like it or not, the density in thickly settled parts of New England, maxed out interstate footprints (if highway-with-rail were an option), hilly geography and twisty rivers (HSR to Montreal has to contend with the meandering Merrimack riverbank Lowell-Concord and all the same lakes that I-89 has to dip and dive around Concord-VT), and outright abandonment of too many alternate ROW's in the pre-landbanking era means a lot of regional compromises with retrofitted infrastructure. At least a reactivated Eastern Route has more baked-in design advantages for significant stretches of bona fide high speeds than just about anything else on the immediate eastern seaboard.

 

[palindrome]

I dream of a day where I can go grab an authentic cheese-steak for lunch.

 

[whighlander]

F-Lin.... You can solve many of the otherwise intractable problems with my single car self propelled MSNSR (Medium Speed, Non_Stop, Rail):
1) by making the trains into self propelled single cars -- you get rid of the need for long platforms, long slow curves, tickets, ultimately drivers
2) by not trying to run faster than 100 MPH -- you get rid of need for excessively heavy duty roadbed, need for continuously welded rail or lots of adjusting, concerns with wind noise, etc.
3) by making the trains 21st Centuy Budliners - you get rid of the old 2 wheels rigidly connected to a spinning axle -- each wheel is a brushless permanent magnet motor and individually suspended (think heavy duty McPherson Strut with electromagnetic active assist) -- this radically reduces the need to straighen curves or build in the banking
4) by making the runs non-stop point to point you can adjust the density of service to meet the demand in a given station -- ie more cars are needed going from Boston to NYC than Boston to New Haven or New London -- well you just send more cars to NYC they just wizz by New Haven - the New Haven bound cars stop at New Haven and can then either return to Boston or continue on the NYC depending on time of day, etc. -- all you need at a station is a brief acceleration/ decelleration lane that merges into the main-line which bypasses all of the stations

 

[Riverworks]

High Speed Rail as currently implemented is a 19th century dinosaur with 21st Century knee and hip joints -- it makes no sense

what is needed is electric traction (could be overhead or could be aircraft-aux power units) driving each wheel on self propelled vehicles which travel non-stop point to point at about 100 MPH

All the long train stopping is just left over from steam boilers and pulling from the front

The future -- you arrive at South Station swipe your Charley and board there are no tickets as vehicles to major destinations leave every 15 to 20 minutes at peak and 30 minutes later and earlier -- in about;
2 hours you can get off at Penn Station in NYC
90 minutes to New Haven and Westchester
1 hour to Springfield or Hartford, Portland ME
45 minutes Portsmouth or Concord NH
30 minutes to Providence, Manchester NH,
20 minutes to Worcester

At an intermediate station the train either terminates and you board a local or the thru train bypasses the station on a short bypass track

Lots of other benefits

There has been a lot of recent analysis on this. You could achieve even shorter travel times than what you descried above:

Boston to Providence in 10 minutes
Boston to Hartford in 30 minutes
Boston to Waterbury/Danbury in 45/50
Boston to NYC in 1 hour and 30 minutes
Boston to Philadelphia in 2 hours

Boston to Portsmouth would be about 10-15 minutes and Portland in about 30-40 minutes.

With HSR on a dedicated 2 track alignment capable of 220mph (or greater with today's technology), operated via electric traction/catenary, distributed power rolling stock, such travel times could be achieved.

Just need to find a way to pay for it

 

[BostonUrbEx]

Just need to find a way to pay for it

All these billions of dollars in bombs and drones in Afghanistan, Libya, Sudan, etc don't seem to be doing too much for us.


BTW, how does a conductor check tickets if your ETA to Providence is 10 minutes?

 

[Riverworks]

All these billions of dollars in bombs and drones in Afghanistan, Libya, Sudan, etc don't seem to be doing too much for us.


BTW, how does a conductor check tickets if your ETA to Providence is 10 minutes?

Ticketless boarding. I believe Amtrak is developing a plan for this in the next couple of years.

You would have to redesign rail stations similar to airports - hand over your ticket before you board, so you eliminate the need for conductors. There would probably still be attendants on the train, but no one dedicated to checking tickets.

 

[whighlander]

River....

" Boston to Providence in 10 minutes
Boston to Hartford in 30 minutes
Boston to Waterbury/Danbury in 45/50
Boston to NYC in 1 hour and 30 minutes
Boston to Philadelphia in 2 hours

Boston to Portsmouth would be about 10-15 minutes and Portland in about 30-40 minutes.

With HSR on a dedicated 2 track alignment capable of 220mph (or greater with today's technology), operated via electric traction/catenary, distributed power rolling stock, such travel times could be achieved.

Just need to find a way to pay for it "

Why bother -- 200 MpH to Providence is overkill unless you offer departure every 10 miutes -- the time you spend waiting on average exceeds the travel time and the extra energy, infratructure costs and maintenance costs are impossible to justify

100 MPH sustained average speed with frequent departures makes Springfield, Manchester, Portland, Providence and Hartford into bedroom communities for Boston

at 120 MPH sustained average speed with departures every 15 minutes you can travel to/from NYC Midtown /downtown Boston in time for morning meeting 6 AM departure meet at 9:00 leave after lunch at 1PM and back for your normal afternoon of work at 3PM

That's plenty rapid for most anyone to do business throughout BOS-DC (the longer ranges by plane, 200 and less miles by MSNSR)

 

[Riverworks]

River....

" Boston to Providence in 10 minutes
Boston to Hartford in 30 minutes
Boston to Waterbury/Danbury in 45/50
Boston to NYC in 1 hour and 30 minutes
Boston to Philadelphia in 2 hours

Boston to Portsmouth would be about 10-15 minutes and Portland in about 30-40 minutes.

With HSR on a dedicated 2 track alignment capable of 220mph (or greater with today's technology), operated via electric traction/catenary, distributed power rolling stock, such travel times could be achieved.

Just need to find a way to pay for it "

Why bother -- 200 MpH to Providence is overkill unless you offer departure every 10 miutes -- the time you spend waiting on average exceeds the travel time and the extra energy, infratructure costs and maintenance costs are impossible to justify

100 MPH sustained average speed with frequent departures makes Springfield, Manchester, Portland, Providence and Hartford into bedroom communities for Boston

at 120 MPH sustained average speed with departures every 15 minutes you can travel to/from NYC Midtown /downtown Boston in time for morning meeting 6 AM departure meet at 9:00 leave after lunch at 1PM and back for your normal afternoon of work at 3PM

That's plenty rapid for most anyone to do business throughout BOS-DC (the longer ranges by plane, 200 and less miles by MSNSR)

I agree that Boston and Providence are not the best city pairs, but the alignment between the two is extremely straight, low impact and could be one of the first segments to be constructed as part of the overall system. Amtrak could also work with MBTA to advance the South Shore rail extension and congestion projects. The end goal is to connect Boston with NYC, PHL and WAS. I imagine there will be comprehensive service plans that will not just serve Providence but also other stations along the route. I'm referring to the analyzed alignment and service plan proposed in the last Amtrak HSR report.

Some trains will blow right through Providence, while others will offer skip-stop service. The point is that there is potential to travel between the two cities in a very short time-frame. And once the service is offered and riders catch-on to its convenience, it will redefine the way people commute around New England, and the entire NEC.

As someone mentioned earlier, imagine being able to grab a cheese steak in PHL from NYC in about 30 minutes. You could even have Boston commuters from New York (1 hr 30 min) - that's what people spend driving down 93 from Concord and Manchester.

If the service is quicker and costs reasonable (a touchy point with most), it will blow away the air and auto industries. You can certainly justify HSR in the Northeast.

 

[whighlander]

Riva... " If the service is quicker and costs reasonable (a touchy point with most), it will blow away the air and auto industries. You can certainly justify HSR in the Northeast."

You've got to relate to 3 types of users and make the system work for all of them
1) the planned event -- they know when they are traveling and have a budget -- convenience of access is paramount
2) the impromptu business -- this is usually a car event because of the issues of tickets and timing -- but it could be addressed by the high frequency of MSNSR which doesn't need a ticket
3) the person not originating or ending the trip in the center city -- that means either suburban stations or connecting to commuter rail at one or both ends

These are the primary reasons that short of some imposition of restrictions -- that traditional rail (even Acella- like or even TGV-like) will never displace cars, buses and air in the Northeast Corridor

However -- MSNSR can meet these challenges -- the major problem is that it is difficult to integrate into the existing Northeast Corridor
"