Amtrak - "Downeaster" - hoped for service

[Anonymous]

The second week of February and the buzz from the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority was that the Amtrak service to Portland, Maine would soon start. The work was that with the track work done service would start May 1st of this year.

But, as with every step, Guilford throws yet another monkey-wrench into the plan.

They get millions to improve the trackwork, which they are about to finish, to their benefit.

Recently it was the weight of the rail for the speed that Amtrak planned. Then they wanted Amtrak to get additional Insurance for the potent potential "Evironmental" damage the construction of asphalt platforms might cause. Now they are claiming the roadbed, that they constructed to approved specifications, will not take the stress of Amtrak's planned 79 mph service.

It will take six to nine months for the STB to decide this latest issue. There goes yet another start-up date!

Boy, does Guilford have a pair, or what? In the meantime tax money has paid for the roadbed improvement and the public can't benefit from th expected passenger service.

Congress should investigate them, if they have time to investigate every allegded "it does't look good" issue with the Clinton pardon.

I want to ride to Portland!

Walter

[Anonymous]

Hey! Aren't there any passenger fans out there with something to say?

[jsanchez]

I really think Guilford is an embarrasment to the railroad industry as a whole. With their lame and uncooperative delay tactics, I think the public should make them aware of this. The only thing Guilford seems good at is abdanoning track, they don't even bother to offer lines to shortlines. There are many ex- Guilford lines that have been abandonned and then a state agency winds up re-openning the track with tax payer money(Vermont, Maine,N.H. Conn.) Guilford even had the audacity to bid on the Conn. river line that Vermont is reopenning, after they trashed it and scared/drove off business. I wish someone would buy Guilford and put them out of our missery. New England has too many trucks on the road.

James

[Anonymous]

Hi James,

Yes your right about Guilford. I've written to the public officials with my views about the "Downeaster" service delays.

Good to hear from you.

Walter

[Anonymous]

MAINE NEEDS THE TRAIN
But we wait in vain.
Guilford's lack of enthusiasm for passenger service is disappointing. Their conduct in all this is almost if not in fact criminal, in my opinion. By the way, Maine needs passenger train service to at least as far North as Bangor.

[Anonymous]

I have a sane, rational, and workable solution to all this.The New England states should create a regional aliance, hire an engineer to design a lightweight bi-directional 50-80 passenger lightweight, low slung, hybrid powered (turbo diesel generator set with battery operation in cities) shuttle car with remote control capable of up to 100 mph and handling less than ideal trackage.These could replace buses in interurban and inter-airport service.They could be operated multi-car where needed could link in under utilized airports like Portsmouth, Berlin ,and Lebanon,NH (I am sure there are more of this type). The aliance would own and maintain the cars and AMTRAK could use them where their own trains are not allowed to run by the railroads.The whole system could be computer controlled and credit card operated so no train crews or station agents and the automated system would have satelite backup and monitoring.Use aircraft type seating and seatbelts for safety and the batteries could give airfraft-like acceleration-deceleration (motors recharging the batteries for added braking).Having a lot of them with no crews means you can place spares over the sytem to be used when traffic becomes heavy and all controlled by computers monitoing passengers.We have the technology to do it, too bad we can't replace the politicians with computers.

[Anonymous]

You're right. It should go to Bangor.

[Anonymous]

What an idea! To bad NIMBY would get in the way all over the place by the auto set.

[Anonymous]

Ex-New Englander here to say I've watched the rail passenger service discussions and trials end in failure every time. Partly because of no patronage by the public. Remember when President Reagan almost killed Amtrak? Don't get hopes up on the down east line. As much as I favor it I don't think it will happen. Roger D.

[Anonymous]

I hope you're wrong. Maybe with the rumor from over this weekend that the limit of 59 mph will be accepted - just so this all can get started - we can see the train headlight acomin down the track.

[jsanchez]

There have been a quite few success stories with passenger trains latey. The Portland to Seattle service is growing rapidly using the Talgo trains, San Diego to Los Angeles keeps growing, the new Acela seems to be beating its projections after a rough start, North carolina has had much success with their new passenger trains, ridership has been growing nicely on the state sponsered Pennsylvania Keystone service, the Chicago- Milwaukee service has been succesfull along with some of the new Vermont trains. There have been a few failures like the Chicago to Janesville, Wisconsin service, but they are far outnumbered by the successes.
I think the Maine service will be a hit due to the congestion of the Boston Metro area, rising gas prices(look for 2.50-3.00 a gallon this summer, also many in New england are used to traveling by train already betweeen N.Y. and Boston and on the growing number of commuter lines that are all experiencing healthy ridership growth. Who in their right mind enjoys driving to Boston in the first place. Can you imagine all the rail service that could have been provided with the money wasted on the big dig project!!!

[jamesedwbradley]

I'm not well acquainted with "big dig" but is there any possibility at all that it could be amended to include even a single rail line - maybe connecting South and North Stations with a little work at each end? Planners appear to have missed the boat on that one. Meanwhile I hope Boston-Portland starts at an early date at 59 mph - I do agree with David Fink that 20 mph and 12 minutes is not worth arguing over!

[Anonymous]

I think the 20 mph and 12 minutes is still worth arguing over. The railroads in the 60's didn't provide for the speed and the trains couldn't compete with the ever increasing speeds of the car. We know what happened.

Now you need to provide in multiple layers the proof that the structure will do what the operators say it will. Yet Guilford keeps arguing they don't want the speed because it's not planned into the track structure even if told by others it is. They just don't want high spped Amtrak on their slow speed frieght system.

By the way there was thought given to a rail line connecting South and North Stations. One of the arguments is that it would add several million to the cost. Now the "Big Dig" is no longer talking about millions but a couple billion if all the costs are added. There is still thought and plans being bandied about.

It will come at 59mph to start from what we here sometime this summer. Hopefully it will go higher. And I think it will be successfully as are the ones you mentioned.

[Anonymous]

There is a glimmer of hope.

The latest news on the WEB SITE for the Northern New England Rail Passenger Authority is from May 7th.

The is some forward movement eported in activities, construction and agreements. But the trains aren't rolling yet.

Check out the site for hopefully more updates. But in the meantime we need to tell anyone who will hear us that we want the service to start.

[john7470]

Trains are nice, but if you truly have the public interest in mind, shouldn't you consider the alternatives to rail? Here's a quick comparison with buses:

I'll use the pro-rail study's ridership figure, claiming to eventually reach 500,000/yr on 4 daily roundtrips.

Environment - A locomotive burns ~1.5 gals/mile. 100 miles * 4 r/ts = 1,200 gallons/day.

A bus gets about 5 mpg. To carry the equivalent ridership in buses would require 20 r/ts per day (assuming 35-40 passengers/bus)
100 miles * 20 r/ts = 4000 miles / 5mpg = 800 gallons/day

Very simply, the bus is proven to be significantly (30%+) more fuel efficient mode in this corridor.

Convenience - What would be better for the dispassionate commuter/traveller: The choice of 20 departures daily or four? And would that traveller prefer a 1:55 or 2:30 transit time? If you answer 20 and 1:55, then bus is the preferable option.

Congestion - Not an issue. The 40 additional buses on the highway will actually have a positive impact, as those buses are replacing individual autos. Oh, by the way, the bus service is already operating and doing well. Why torpedo a good thing?

Cost efficiency - buses pay road taxes, corporate income taxes, fuel taxes, and tolls. The rail options wouldn't pay anything and would additionally continue with subsidies as long as it is run.

Ridership - Seriously, how often are any of you going to ride the train? Once a year? Les Otten of Sunday River tried his wonderful ski train between Portland and Bethel a few years back, claiming it could make money and people would flock to it. People tried it as a novelty, then went back to their cars.

By the way, I agree about the questionable ethics of Guilford (I'm a former employee and know all too well). But you have to have grudging respect for them. By manipulating the system, complete with stupendously inept Maine state transport officials, they were not only able to have their main line rebuilt, they also made money by being a contractor on the project!