MassDOT Rail: Springfield Hub (East-West, NNERI, Berkshires, CT-Valley-VT-Quebec)

This upgrade could also make it much more feasible to introduce a Boston - Toronto train, and other long-distance services using this trunk, something I think would greatly benefit the region.

At 80 mph average speed, Chicago would be 13 hours from South Station, and Toronto would be 7.5.

At 100 mph, Chicago would be 10 hours and Toronto would be 6 hours by train.

At 120 mph, Chicago would be 8 hours and Toronto would be 5 hours by train.

At 150 mph, Chicago would be 7 hours and Toronto would be 4 hours by train.

Making incremental progress towards such a network is a good thing to keep in mind.
110-124mph would need to use the I-90 ROW to bypass the slow sections in MA but its doable. NYS just rejected its 125mph proposal for Upstate in favor of 90mph but left the door open for 110mph using dedicated tracks along the existing CSX line. Ohio & Indiana could follow the same 110-124mph model. So from NY or Boston you could run 2x daily service to Chicago , 4x daily to Toronto. Montreal could probably handle 2-3x daily from Boston if it went via Springfield , 2-4x daily from NY on 2 different routings.
 
This upgrade could also make it much more feasible to introduce a Boston - Toronto train, and other long-distance services using this trunk, something I think would greatly benefit the region.

At 80 mph average speed, Chicago would be 13 hours from South Station, and Toronto would be 7.5.

At 100 mph, Chicago would be 10 hours and Toronto would be 6 hours by train.

At 120 mph, Chicago would be 8 hours and Toronto would be 5 hours by train.

At 150 mph, Chicago would be 7 hours and Toronto would be 4 hours by train.

Making incremental progress towards such a network is a good thing to keep in mind.

The border crossing delay is a killer on Canadian services, especially for frequent travelers with NEXUS.
 
The border crossing delay is a killer on Canadian services, especially for frequent travelers with NEXUS.

This is a very solvable problem. In many parts of the world, international rail travel is quite seamless and efficient.

For example, on the Eurostar service between London and mainland Europe, passport and security checks are conducted before boarding, so there's no need for checks on arrival or during the journey, allowing for a seamless journey.

Solving the border-crossing problem is much easier than solving the problem of trains traveling very slowly over that route. In a world where there’s the political will and execution such that a train could average 80 mph between Boston and Toronto, we’d easily be able to solve the border-crossing problem.
 
This is a very solvable problem. In many parts of the world, international rail travel is quite seamless and efficient.

For example, on the Eurostar service between London and mainland Europe, passport and security checks are conducted before boarding, so there's no need for checks on arrival or during the journey, allowing for a seamless journey.

Solving the border-crossing problem is much easier than solving the problem of trains traveling very slowly over that route. In a world where there’s the political will and execution such that a train could average 80 mph between Boston and Toronto, we’d easily be able to solve the border-crossing problem.
How would a Eurostar model handle international passengers who are boarding from a smaller station where they don't have the facilities to do the border checks?

(I mean, one option would just be limited stop service, which I think is what Eurostar does? And that could definitely be viable under certain models.)
 
How would a Eurostar model handle international passengers who are boarding from a smaller station where they don't have the facilities to do the border checks?

(I mean, one option would just be limited stop service, which I think is what Eurostar does? And that could definitely be viable under certain models.)
Sealed trains between large stations with space for customs and border check facilities.

And my understanding is that the customs and border check experience on Eurostar since Brexit reinstated the checks is horrific. Eurostar is actually running trains at reduced capacity to reduce the queues for the checks (about 30% reduction in capacity).
 
Sealed trains between large stations with space for customs and border check facilities.

And my understanding is that the customs and border check experience on Eurostar since Brexit reinstated the checks is horrific. Eurostar is actually running trains at reduced capacity to reduce the queues for the checks (about 30% reduction in capacity).

Yikes. I still maintain that this is a solvable problem, even if there are issues surrounding my example post-Brexit. Many solutions, but I’m not an expert to tell you which is best for this scenario
 
  • Like
Reactions: FK4
Sealed trains between large stations with space for customs and border check facilities.

And my understanding is that the customs and border check experience on Eurostar since Brexit reinstated the checks is horrific. Eurostar is actually running trains at reduced capacity to reduce the queues for the checks (about 30% reduction in capacity).
Yeah so this would be, like, limited stop service from, for example, NY Penn to Toronto with stops only at… like, Albany and Buffalo?

I would love to see the day where we have this, but it seems like a hard sell to lose out both on all the intermediate ridership and on the e.g. Rochester <> Toronto journeys on the corridor.
 
Yeah so this would be, like, limited stop service from, for example, NY Penn to Toronto with stops only at… like, Albany and Buffalo?

I would love to see the day where we have this, but it seems like a hard sell to lose out both on all the intermediate ridership and on the e.g. Rochester <> Toronto journeys on the corridor.

I’m no expert, but how about introducing designated international cars on these trains? An intermediate car could have customs for passengers to pass through before getting onto the international cars. It would require careful coordination. Is that crazy?
 
My understanding regarding the planned regulations for US-Canada trains is that a designated station (Vancouver & Montreal) handles all customs & immigration in both directions, then the trains run sealed to the border. If this system is not the case, then I sincerely hope they head this way! This system doesn't solve circumstances like trains to Toronto, though.

And if they ever instituted a service where the US side was the "sealed" end, I'd expect the same system in place (I think Detroit or Buffalo would make good stations for service into Canada).
 
It would take the form of US pre-clearance, which you may have experienced if you fly to the US from most major Canadian airports like Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal and some other places like Dublin Ireland and Abu Dhabi. You clear US immigration and customs while still in the departure country, where you are sequestered from other passengers having legally if not in fact entered the US. On a flight you would arrive as a domestic passenger, in a domestic terminal, without having to clear customs on arrival - which means you can fly from Toronto to a US airport that doesn't have a CBP station like LaGuardia.

The same would occur on a train - you would "enter" the US at Montreal Central, and the train would then not make stops until after crossing the border - the stop at St. Lambert would be dropped. Your arrival in Plattsburgh NY, and the miriad small towns would then be as a domestic arrival. Going the other way, the train is sealed from the border until you arrive at Montreal Central, and you'd go through the CBSA station there. Practically, you'd need a platform that is physically separated from the others, as well as a sterile waiting area for cleared passengers.

Legally speaking, the enabling law for this was passed by both countries in August 2019, with Montreal Central one of the priority installs, but with cross border trains suspended there was no movement on actual implementation. Canada also has the right to operate pre-clearance facilities in the US, but with the relative disparity in traffic concentration has never actually done it.
 
It would take the form of US pre-clearance, which you may have experienced if you fly to the US from most major Canadian airports like Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal and some other places like Dublin Ireland and Abu Dhabi. You clear US immigration and customs while still in the departure country, where you are sequestered from other passengers having legally if not in fact entered the US. On a flight you would arrive as a domestic passenger, in a domestic terminal, without having to clear customs on arrival - which means you can fly from Toronto to a US airport that doesn't have a CBP station like LaGuardia.

The same would occur on a train - you would "enter" the US at Montreal Central, and the train would then not make stops until after crossing the border - the stop at St. Lambert would be dropped. Your arrival in Plattsburgh NY, and the miriad small towns would then be as a domestic arrival. Going the other way, the train is sealed from the border until you arrive at Montreal Central, and you'd go through the CBSA station there. Practically, you'd need a platform that is physically separated from the others, as well as a sterile waiting area for cleared passengers.

Legally speaking, the enabling law for this was passed by both countries in August 2019, with Montreal Central one of the priority installs, but with cross border trains suspended there was no movement on actual implementation. Canada also has the right to operate pre-clearance facilities in the US, but with the relative disparity in traffic concentration has never actually done it.
Or we could just end the security theater and go back to what we did for 100 years
 
How would a Eurostar model handle international passengers who are boarding from a smaller station where they don't have the facilities to do the border checks?

(I mean, one option would just be limited stop service, which I think is what Eurostar does? And that could definitely be viable under certain models.)
My recollection from when I took it in 2019, was that it ran express from London to Paris, so no rinky dink stations involved. It was not the most streamlined process in London, though. We had to get to St Pancras 2 hours before departure, so it was very much like air travel security hassles.
 
My recollection from when I took it in 2019, was that it ran express from London to Paris, so no rinky dink stations involved. It was not the most streamlined process in London, though. We had to get to St Pancras 2 hours before departure, so it was very much like air travel security hassles.
Nothing in the UK is streamlined. The degree of unnecessary wait times and cumbersome, pointless, archaic rules is unparalleled. No wonder they had to leave the EU. I lived there for a full year and could not have been more ready to come back to the states. Lots of great stuff about the UK, but my god, the inefficiency is astounding and frustrating.
 
My understanding regarding the planned regulations for US-Canada trains is that a designated station (Vancouver & Montreal) handles all customs & immigration in both directions, then the trains run sealed to the border. If this system is not the case, then I sincerely hope they head this way! This system doesn't solve circumstances like trains to Toronto, though.

And if they ever instituted a service where the US side was the "sealed" end, I'd expect the same system in place (I think Detroit or Buffalo would make good stations for service into Canada).
It would take the form of US pre-clearance, which you may have experienced if you fly to the US from most major Canadian airports like Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal and some other places like Dublin Ireland and Abu Dhabi. You clear US immigration and customs while still in the departure country, where you are sequestered from other passengers having legally if not in fact entered the US. On a flight you would arrive as a domestic passenger, in a domestic terminal, without having to clear customs on arrival - which means you can fly from Toronto to a US airport that doesn't have a CBP station like LaGuardia.

The same would occur on a train - you would "enter" the US at Montreal Central, and the train would then not make stops until after crossing the border - the stop at St. Lambert would be dropped. Your arrival in Plattsburgh NY, and the miriad small towns would then be as a domestic arrival. Going the other way, the train is sealed from the border until you arrive at Montreal Central, and you'd go through the CBSA station there. Practically, you'd need a platform that is physically separated from the others, as well as a sterile waiting area for cleared passengers.

Legally speaking, the enabling law for this was passed by both countries in August 2019, with Montreal Central one of the priority installs, but with cross border trains suspended there was no movement on actual implementation. Canada also has the right to operate pre-clearance facilities in the US, but with the relative disparity in traffic concentration has never actually done it.
Right, these options both make sense for trains into Montreal and Vancouver, but Toronto is the hard one because it's a much longer journey between the border and the station. So yeah, it sounds like it would have to be the non-stop model that @HenryAlan describes, which seems workable between London and Paris, but harder between anything except maybe New York and Toronto.
I’m no expert, but how about introducing designated international cars on these trains? An intermediate car could have customs for passengers to pass through before getting onto the international cars. It would require careful coordination. Is that crazy?
Oh huh, that's an interesting idea. No clue if it could be feasible. I will say that it has the general ring of "Something the US Does That No One Else Does But Which Kinda Works."

More generally though, I am intrigued by the possibility of moving the customs process on to the moving train. For example, passengers could board on the normal platform at NYP; the train could then run non-stop (or I guess near non-stop) to Albany, during which time customs inspectors can move through the train; anyone who doesn't pass inspection can detrain along with the inspectors at Albany, while the rest of the train continues non-stop to the Canadian border, after which it can make all intermediate stops between Niagara Falls and Toronto. A similar process could be done coming from Toronto, with inspectors and unapproved travelers detraining at the border to return to Toronto.

(I suppose you could do a similar thing with a non-stop train from Boston that does its inspections during a non-stop run between Boston and Albany, before being combined with the other set of inspected cars from New York.)

I worry about losing out on intermediate ridership, but I suppose there are ways around it: travelers from upstate NY could, for example, take a separate domestic train to Niagara Falls, go through customs there, and then board the international train along with the pre-checked passengers.

The other thing to consider is that it's currently a 12-hour train trip between New York and Toronto. That includes an average of 1 hour for customs (more going to the US, less going to Canada), so perhaps an Onboard-Customs journey could trim that down to 11 hours. I wonder if there could be a market for an overnight train under that model. Depart either end around 7 or 8, customs are completed by 10pm, arrive at the destination the next morning around 7 or 8.
 
My understanding regarding the planned regulations for US-Canada trains is that a designated station (Vancouver & Montreal) handles all customs & immigration in both directions, then the trains run sealed to the border. If this system is not the case, then I sincerely hope they head this way! This system doesn't solve circumstances like trains to Toronto, though.

And if they ever instituted a service where the US side was the "sealed" end, I'd expect the same system in place (I think Detroit or Buffalo would make good stations for service into Canada).
The legislation was passed on both sides of the border in 2017 for Customs preclearance facilities in Montreal and Vancouver that would allow the Adirondack and Cascades trains to run sealed over the border. But the Canadians have not implemented those facilities yet, and have given no firm timetables for putting them into effect so both trains still have hourlong border layovers for Customs. The Trudeau Administration, despite lots of bluster about supporting passenger rail, have been nearly useless at muscling along any improvements so we unfortunately have very unreliable partners up there.

The Maple Leaf doesn't have preclearance because it's a combined Amtrak/VIA Rail operation that has 5 well-patronized intermediate stations in Ontario, meaning at-border Customs must be the rule. Even if upgraded GO Transit Regional Rail to Niagara Falls displaced a lot of the Canadian-side local traffic, the St. Catharines and Aldershot intermediates are large enough in ridership to need to stay on the ML's schedule any which way. Same could be said for any reinstatement of the Chicago-Toronto International train, as that made all Blue Water stops on the U.S. side and all Sarnia-Toronto Corridor stops on the Canadian side. Ditto if the Wolverine got re-extended to Toronto via the Windsor-Toronto Corridor route, as that was a load-bearing Corridor train east of Windsor.
 
But no matter how many times you say it, Springfield to Boston commuter rail itself is not improved access, it’s not justice, it’s not environment, it’s not any of the feel good sloganeering. People ain’t taking a 3 hour trip on a train on a regular basis.
This take shows why moving away from the “commuter rail” terminology and changing to regional or intercity rail is so psychologically important for encouraging more rail travel.

I could be wrong but it sounds like you’re only looking at SPG-BOS as some sort of 9-5 commuter service. It also seems like SPG-WOR is being entirely overlooked here but that’s where the improvements are happening and where the train would take about an hour. There’s also the reality that the Downeaster already exists and people use it to commute to Boston from ME, and the MetroNorth New Haven Line is a 2:10 trip to Grand Central (local train) yet used heavily from New Haven daily. There’s so many other trips that are served between cities outside of a daily commute.

Springfield is the poorest municipality in the state. It already has the best RTA bus system in the state with most routes oriented to funnel to Union Station. Adding 2:10 service to Boston on its own is huge for connectivity to the Knowledge Corridor and higher paying job opportunities for super commuters, but the 1 hour to Worcester is vastly more significant for the Springfield and Worcester regions. It becomes possible to live cheap in Springfield but have a job in Worcester without wasting time and gas on a 30mile traffic slog down Rt9 or I-90. There’s also the transfer in Worcester to local service to places between there and Boston. A regularly scheduled traffic-free transportation option between the cities of Boston, Worcester, and Springfield would be a huge win for the state.
 
BOS-SPG-xxx should be understood as intercity. I also like the description of "super commuter" at least to describe who rides.
It is "worky" but not quite commuter and not quite "business travel"
It is "mid-value" not quite leisure trip but not fully billable
It isn't 8 hours, but often either a half-day meeting or a day-and-a-half overnight.
It is an awkward distance--too short to fly, but longer than one would like to drive

So we struggle to name it.
Clearly the Downeaster works this way. I'm more familiar with the similar demographics in Virginia where most of the state routes are "super commuters" to Washington DC, who have long worked in the hinterlands or remotely--since the dawn of cable modems (2005) if not DSL (2000) or flip phones (1998), but need to travel to "The Regional Capital" somewhere between 2x/wk and 1x/month for stuff like
  • The Weekly "in person" / "golden hour" meeting as a team
  • The occasional client meeting
  • Project kickoff and milestones
  • Hearings in front of a regulator, govt agency, or court
  • Expert witnessing
  • Doing "deals"
And of course:
  • Students at weekends
So its things like: UVa professors Charlottesville, bureaucrats from Richmond and Navy officers from Norfolk, and lawyers/consultants from any of those places traveling to DC

Springfield and the college towns of the berkshires could totally fill that role, particularly since SPG-BOS is a single trunk (as opposed to Virginia's which is split on 2 trunk lines)
 
Last edited:

Back
Top