Downeaster to NY City and further

[blue streak 1]

Am having some computer problems and tried to send the proposal to Downeaster.  To preserve it am duplicating the e mail and hope it gets to the proper people.  Comments welcome

 

Capital costs and operating costs at present are very high to implement the proposals to bypass both Boston stations.

Here is an alternative that might work coming from Maine to the south.
1.  Run locomotive on front of train from Maine.
2.  When approaching Boston-by pass the MBTA service facility, join the Grand crossing route, take a wye track onto the Worchester line,and pull forward into South station.  That will require a new wye track from Grand to the Worchester line. Have no idea of the costs but it will benefit MBTA and Amtrak as well.
3.  At Boston South station have a NEC regional train back onto the consist of the train from Maine, disconnect the  locomotive that is on front from Maine, connect air, electric cabling, complete a brake test and train is ready to proceed south.
4. This might require some south bound Maine
trains to run earlier ?

ADVANTAGES
11.  Faster time to NYC and beyond from Maine as compared to the inland route.
12.  Minimum extra equipment needed.
13.  Those passengers that terminate at Boston will leave seats available for NY bound passengers that might actually reduce number of
cars needed for the Regional train that is tied on.
14.  The process north bound could be reversed with the Maine cars on rear of regional train.
15.  Trains 688 & 698 may need to be re-scheduled into Boston South at earlier time
then they could become the end of train 67. 
16.  The reverse could happen with train #66 ( has very good on time performance ) bringing on the rear the Maine cars for trains 681 - 691.
17.  When Amtrak gets it new sleepers delivered in 2016 then some Maine passengers could board sleeper to NYP, WASH, Newport
18.  Additional operating expenses would be minimal ( very important ) with only the additional mileage into Boston and maybe some passenger costs on to Wash .
19. No backing into / out of South station
20.

DISADVANTAGES
21. Does not use inland corridor to Springfield & Hartford.
22.  Capital cost may be high for higher speeds  by  the MBTA facility, faster speeds on Grand, building a wye, and making a full interlocking  that may be necessary at the wye.
23.  This plan if used for early departures from Maine might not work as well if there may be are a lot of thru commuter passengers on those trains
that are already filled.
24.  If this implemented the use of the inland corridor might be delayed further.

[e-mail]

 

[daveklepper]

1.  Makes sense for overnighters with sleeper service, but not for daytime service because of slow running required on Grand Junction with its many grade crossings.  One can make the N. Sta. - S. Sta. transfer in 30 miniutes or less.

2.  For overnight sercice the wye won't be necessary.  Better a short backup movement, with power on both ends or cab-car (currently in use!) and keep people facing the same way.

3.  A N. Sta. - S. Sta. rail tunnel is way way overdue. 

[ROBERT WILLISON]

Both proposal seem possible but is it effective or competitive? Seem like all the cuts,couples and equipment required makes it unfeasible.

[blue streak 1]

Link to 2012 Grand Junction stud,  Except for a wye over the Charles river costs estimated at $30M.  Charles river wye probably very costly ?  Backing up to South station might be a short term fix ?

http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Portals/17/docs/grandjunction/WGJFinalReport.pdf

Agree that the  night connection might present some complications  but an early day connection would get passengers all the way to WASH by susnset.