3 years!? That’s long enough for those who once supported Amtrak to find other more convenient routes to get where they’re going… it will change customer habits away from Amtrak (they’ll fly, take the bus, or drive where they are going to instead)… and many may not return when Amtrak increases their service (if they every actually do).
@@AKMorehouse My intuition is telling me that this is also to sideline aging equipment and reduce maintenance burden. They’ve combined a Florida train with a Chicago train to reduce North River tube train count AND reassign Superliners to other trains. Hopefully 🤞 the Airo sets will be in service by the time they’re done with the tubes.
May be because the third rail inside Grand Central Terminal is bottom contact, while the third rail inside Penn Station is top contact. Amtrak's P32AC-DMs can only collect power from top contact third rail, and thus may not be allowed to run diesel engines into Grand Central.
@@trainmaster1269 Only the Metro-North P32AC-DMs have the contact shoes that are compatible with the bottom contact third rail leading into Grand Central Terminal
I agree, if it is a three year disturbance to the service why not convert a few engines to the other type of third rail, they ran Amtrak trains into and out of Grand Central Station in the past. As usual they worry more about their ease of use rather than passenger connivence. Also why should it take over an hour to separate or combine two trains into one at Albany. They do that same operation on a daily basis with the Lake Shore Limited and I believe it takes less time than that. If not it should. We are only taking one part of the train off and then putting a new engine on the front of the other train. Better operating discipline should be able to do this in much less time.
@@davidempire4874 It may be possible but Metro North was created to be a metro New York City Commuter Railroad. Their charter may not allow them to operate past their existing terminals. Also just like Amtrak their crews would have to qualify to operate north of their existing terminal.
Unfortunately you run into a whole plethora of issues... having to qualify Conductors and Engineers from Metro Norths northern most terminus to Albany (rule books, physical characteristics, signals, equipment, etc), then equipment compatibility, interoperational issues (Amtrak and Metro North would have to come to an agreement of whose going to operate what equipment), and the state legislation. The list goes on and on.
@@alb12345672 I didn't even think about THAT headache. Plus, will MTA agree to it? I'm sure the operational cost would be significant, and Amtrak would be required to foot the bill for that because it would be their service.
All of the people completing these comments are mind numming. You're all screaming about how they should have better service and they're doing infrastructure projects in order to have better service. The cognitive dissonance is astonishing.
I think it’s fair to be upset that it’s being mismanaged to the great expense of passengers. You can’t possibly believe that the *best* solutions here was a 2 hour layover in Albany…
The work that is being done has no effect on the service itself. What it does effect is the ability to turn trains around. All Empire trains go out to Sunnyside yard in The Queens where they are run around a loop to be turned to face the proper direction for their return trip. With this project that ability is gone hence the new schedule and push pull service.
Well ... Do what you have to do to keep us safe. Passengers just need to plan their trips that's all. Right before Thanksgiving too. For three years ...
I wish Metro North can go to Albany that way commuters have the option if Amtrak service insta available and they have another option to travel to the city
@saulrod2087 Would you like to pay the tax that the MTA charges each county it operates through? Plus I don't believe Metro North has any interest in coming further north than POU.
So I suppose this means I'm going to have to cancel my plans to take Amtrak from Penn Station to Poughkeepsie, and then take a return trip on Metro-North?
Why would anyone take trains from Toronto or Montreal (11 hours each way) when they can just fly in 1 hour (and go through Preclearance)? At that point, what difference does an extra 1.5 hours at Albany make?
No matter how long it took to get from the west to Albany or NYC to Albany there was always that long, long wait until the train would move again. It seemed the switching of locomotives or something caused this. God knows what should be a rather short stop in Albany turns into a long wait for something to happen. The same with the Maple Leaf from Toronto. The border crossing is long, everyone has to exit the train and lineup for custom inspection while dogs search the train (at least the used to). You sometimes feel you could walk it faster. I bet management has never rode these trains, probably have a private jet for travel...
@@haroldalexis4200 That’s a good question. Here’s the answer: Empire Service enters NYP on the south side of the station. LIRR uses the north side of the station. Running from the south tracks to the north tracks and Hudson Yard would require a seesaw move/moves over the ladder tracks on the east end of the station gumming up traffic for everyone else.
@ Politics? Yes. Nimbyism? No, the tracks and trains are already there. It’s more to with “why buy the cow when the milk is free?” Well, this is why. An augmented Metro North from GCT to Rensselaer wouldn’t have a problem with East River tubes.
@@maestromecanico597 Its a State problem. Columbia and Rensselaer would have to pay taxes, car registration fees, etc. And it is NIMBY too, if they were to add any new stops. They don't want them. If they just used existing stops, it could work. It is not much more than Montauk in terms of mileage, so certainly reasonable. I'm sure they would get plenty of ridership from Albany.
@alb12345672 Back in the day I was told by one of the participants that New York State was ready to pull the trigger on acquiring the line north of POK from CR. The hiccup was "one bridge" on the line (didn't say or don't remember which one) and that was that. Now Amtrak leases the line from CSX and NY gets the free milk. Sounds great until your service is cut due to infrastructure not on line.
@@maestromecanico597 This is similar to when Amtrak took over in Pennsylvania. Prior to Amtrak the trains between Philadelphia and Harrisburg were really two commuter lines combined into one intercity line. The cars used were slightly improved silverliner MU cars that ran the full route but many riders only ride between various stations to either Lancaster, Harrisburg or Philadelphia. Even with Amtrak today which now run through from Harrisburg to New York City. Most passengers are riding just part of the route and there is always major turnover in passengers at Philadelphia. So it acts as two routes: Harrisburg to Philadelphia and a Philadelphia to New York City. As in New York State the state of Pennsylvania helps by subsidizing the route between Philadelphia and Harrisburg and has contributed to pay for various upgrades to the line.
Gonna be one big sh** show for the next 3 years on Amtrak. I can just imagine the chaos over holidays such as Thanksgiving and Christmas/New Years... . *smfh*
@@HaroldAlexis-bb8sd it would be so much more convenient if these agencies could… you know not close important infrastructure at the same time. I know this is probably also unfeasible but how hard would it be to have LIRR send like 5 more trains to Madison or just have the trains not go to the yard.
@@railroad9000 Do not forget if you fly or take a bus there are sometimes long layovers if you have connections at various terminals. So it is not just an Amtrak issue.
Amtrak is a sad, sad organization. Technology may be better today; but this situation would never happen 60-70 years ago. The New York Central would have handled various construction projects without interfering with and/or cancelling trains. It's simply very unfortunate. As a quick example: one round trip New York to Montreal (which was out of service for many months) is ridiculous. Obviously there's no interest.
@@povertyspec9651 I guess you never travel durning busy times when you get caught in heavy traffic or wait for an accident t,o be cleared that always takes forever.
First of all, this has nothing to do with lack of money, Amtrak has money which is why they can repair those tunnels, and with or without aid to Ukraine those tunnels must be closed in order to repair the damage and the time would have bem 3 yrear regardless of Ukraine. In any cas, since you've made this populist claim than despite what many Americans think you are not alone in the world and thinks that happens in other places influence you, even if youthink it doesn't. It is in the interest of the US. As it's in the interest of many other countries, including in Europe (that also aided Ukraine) tomoreven it's occupation by Russia. If they succeed it will have grave consequences for Europe, the US and many other countries that will hurt the world economy. It is in your best interes to help preven this and sending money is the best option and much better for all as the other two options -sending troops or letting Rusiia win- are far worst.
Amtrak should go out of business, force us to realize passenger trains in the USA are mostly a stupid idea, and make the little boys and girls grow up and cease wanting to play with choo choos that cost trillions to build, are occupied by few and turn a profit NEVER. THEIR SO CALLED “environmental impact” is ZERO.
How is that going to help any ? The UNITED STATES already lost so much in passenger rail service in history. No transit or rail service is perfect & would not want a repeat of that performance.
@@sheilah4525 Amtrak does not cost a trillion dollars to operate its full national system. However the airlines even paying for airport fees do not cover the cost to operate the air traffic control system and many routes and airports operate at a deficit. Same with highways.If you had to pay the true cost to build and maintain them most would run at a loss. People who drive always complain when the government wants to raise gas taxes to help pay for all those highways. So don’t say Amtrak is a loosing proposition when they carry many passengers and on many shorter lines in the northeast and other routes cover their cost to operate and may even make a small operation profit.
This is why people will never get rid of their cars for travel. We're the only country with a bad slow old regional train system that should have been upgrading the system how Europe and Japan did over the years.
Amtrak used to use the original NY Central route stayed on now Metro North main into Grand Central Terminal. PLENTY OF ROOM the government and democracks waste money don't care about YOU
3 years!? That’s long enough for those who once supported Amtrak to find other more convenient routes to get where they’re going… it will change customer habits away from Amtrak (they’ll fly, take the bus, or drive where they are going to instead)… and many may not return when Amtrak increases their service (if they every actually do).
@@AKMorehouse My intuition is telling me that this is also to sideline aging equipment and reduce maintenance burden. They’ve combined a Florida train with a Chicago train to reduce North River tube train count AND reassign Superliners to other trains. Hopefully 🤞 the Airo sets will be in service by the time they’re done with the tubes.
Why not NY service into and out of Grand Central Terminal??
Been done before.
May be because the third rail inside Grand Central Terminal is bottom contact, while the third rail inside Penn Station is top contact. Amtrak's P32AC-DMs can only collect power from top contact third rail, and thus may not be allowed to run diesel engines into Grand Central.
@@williamyoon7660if it’s been done before doesn’t that mean that the P32’s also have bottom contact 3rd rail?
@@trainmaster1269 Only the Metro-North P32AC-DMs have the contact shoes that are compatible with the bottom contact third rail leading into Grand Central Terminal
I agree, if it is a three year disturbance to the service why not convert a few engines to the other type of third rail, they ran Amtrak trains into and out of Grand Central Station in the past. As usual they worry more about their ease of use rather than passenger connivence. Also why should it take over an hour to separate or combine two trains into one at Albany. They do that same operation on a daily basis with the Lake Shore Limited and I believe it takes less time than that. If not it should. We are only taking one part of the train off and then putting a new engine on the front of the other train. Better operating discipline should be able to do this in much less time.
Grand central should get overhead catenaries like CT has. Third rail is dangerous junk
So the Montreal service just got 1.5 hours longer? 🤦🏻♂️
In 3 years travellers will have acquired new habits. They' may change modes of travel. Or they may change destinations. Or they not travel at all.
Metro North should expand to Albany.
@@davidempire4874 That's a great idea .💡💪🏼👍
@@davidempire4874 It may be possible but Metro North was created to be a metro New York City Commuter Railroad. Their charter may not allow them to operate past their existing terminals. Also just like Amtrak their crews would have to qualify to operate north of their existing terminal.
SHOW us the RIDERS!!!!
For the time being why not have Metro-North go to Albany?
Unfortunately you run into a whole plethora of issues... having to qualify Conductors and Engineers from Metro Norths northern most terminus to Albany (rule books, physical characteristics, signals, equipment, etc), then equipment compatibility, interoperational issues (Amtrak and Metro North would have to come to an agreement of whose going to operate what equipment), and the state legislation. The list goes on and on.
@@gerardlang9690 I'm sure it could be done. Three years is a long time.
@@alb12345672 I suppose your right, but we all know how slow the wheels of government turn.
@@gerardlang9690 There is also a tax issue. But for the interim they should provide the service.
@@alb12345672 I didn't even think about THAT headache. Plus, will MTA agree to it? I'm sure the operational cost would be significant, and Amtrak would be required to foot the bill for that because it would be their service.
I sense a great disturbance in the service...
...as if thousands of travelers suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced
All of the people completing these comments are mind numming. You're all screaming about how they should have better service and they're doing infrastructure projects in order to have better service. The cognitive dissonance is astonishing.
I think it’s fair to be upset that it’s being mismanaged to the great expense of passengers. You can’t possibly believe that the *best* solutions here was a 2 hour layover in Albany…
The work that is being done has no effect on the service itself. What it does effect is the ability to turn trains around. All Empire trains go out to Sunnyside yard in The Queens where they are run around a loop to be turned to face the proper direction for their return trip. With this project that ability is gone hence the new schedule and push pull service.
Hey Zach, great hair bruh!
Well ... Do what you have to do to keep us safe. Passengers just need to plan their trips that's all. Right before Thanksgiving too. For three years ...
How about going back to Grand Central Terminal with a few trains? It's been done before
They may not have that equipment anymore. GCT is third rail.
Ok so if the problem is the east river why not put a rear cab on the trains and have them go Albany-NYC-Philly-DC???
I wish Metro North can go to Albany that way commuters have the option if Amtrak service insta available and they have another option to travel to the city
I think that' beyond metro north scope, like they literally lack the trains to send that far out. If they do that, there headways are gonna suffer.
@saulrod2087 Would you like to pay the tax that the MTA charges each county it operates through? Plus I don't believe Metro North has any interest in coming further north than POU.
So I suppose this means I'm going to have to cancel my plans to take Amtrak from Penn Station to Poughkeepsie, and then take a return trip on Metro-North?
@@DTD110865 why trains will still be running
Meanwhile Ontario is building a high speed rail line between Toronto and Quebec City
How can Amtrak passengers avoid taking the plane from Montreal or Toronto to NYC?
Not everyone is taking the full distance train, some passengers may be travelling from Buffalo or Albany, or Montreal to Springfield and etc.
Why would anyone take trains from Toronto or Montreal (11 hours each way) when they can just fly in 1 hour (and go through Preclearance)? At that point, what difference does an extra 1.5 hours at Albany make?
Some just prefer the laid back method of taking the train.
More importantly, the trains serve the many communities between the two end cities.
Not too many people ride the entire route. They travel between. And there is a significant amount of people that don't like to fly.
Some people don't like to fly.
Why not ? That's how I started riding the rails long distance & grew to love it .
They will be cutting more than this soon as the country tanks.
This is why we need to nationalize our railroads to allow Amtrak quick access to alternate routes.
No matter how long it took to get from the west to Albany or NYC to Albany there was always that long, long wait until the train would move again. It seemed the switching of locomotives or something caused this. God knows what should be a rather short stop in Albany turns into a long wait for something to happen. The same with the Maple Leaf from Toronto. The border crossing is long, everyone has to exit the train and lineup for custom inspection while dogs search the train (at least the used to). You sometimes feel you could walk it faster. I bet management has never rode these trains, probably have a private jet for travel...
Why not share & use Long Island Railroad Hudson train yards ?
@@haroldalexis4200 That’s a good question. Here’s the answer: Empire Service enters NYP on the south side of the station. LIRR uses the north side of the station. Running from the south tracks to the north tracks and Hudson Yard would require a seesaw move/moves over the ladder tracks on the east end of the station gumming up traffic for everyone else.
Why doesn't Amtrak reroute their Empire service trains to Grand Central Terminal? It ran them there for decades.
They may not have that equipment anymore. GCT is third rail.
@@alb12345672they have all that equipment, all locomotives running on the Hudson River line are P32ACDM 3rd rail equipment dual mode engines.
NYC to Albany is commuter train distance. Why is this left to Amtrak?
Politics. There have been feasibility studies done before and it all come to "NIMBY".
@ Politics? Yes. Nimbyism? No, the tracks and trains are already there. It’s more to with “why buy the cow when the milk is free?” Well, this is why. An augmented Metro North from GCT to Rensselaer wouldn’t have a problem with East River tubes.
@@maestromecanico597 Its a State problem. Columbia and Rensselaer would have to pay taxes, car registration fees, etc. And it is NIMBY too, if they were to add any new stops. They don't want them. If they just used existing stops, it could work. It is not much more than Montauk in terms of mileage, so certainly reasonable. I'm sure they would get plenty of ridership from Albany.
@alb12345672 Back in the day I was told by one of the participants that New York State was ready to pull the trigger on acquiring the line north of POK from CR. The hiccup was "one bridge" on the line (didn't say or don't remember which one) and that was that. Now Amtrak leases the line from CSX and NY gets the free milk. Sounds great until your service is cut due to infrastructure not on line.
@@maestromecanico597 This is similar to when Amtrak took over in Pennsylvania. Prior to Amtrak the trains between Philadelphia and Harrisburg were really two commuter lines combined into one intercity line. The cars used were slightly improved silverliner MU cars that ran the full route but many riders only ride between various stations to either Lancaster, Harrisburg or Philadelphia. Even with Amtrak today which now run through from Harrisburg to New York City. Most passengers are riding just part of the route and there is always major turnover in passengers at Philadelphia. So it acts as two routes: Harrisburg to Philadelphia and a Philadelphia to New York City. As in New York State the state of Pennsylvania helps by subsidizing the route between Philadelphia and Harrisburg and has contributed to pay for various upgrades to the line.
Gonna be one big sh** show for the next 3 years on Amtrak. I can just imagine the chaos over holidays such as Thanksgiving and Christmas/New Years... . *smfh*
Can we not use grand central or something
No. The MTA is doing construction on the Park Avenue elevated viaduct & train traffic is limited to & from Grand Central Terminal.
@@HaroldAlexis-bb8sd it would be so much more convenient if these agencies could… you know not close important infrastructure at the same time.
I know this is probably also unfeasible but how hard would it be to have LIRR send like 5 more trains to Madison or just have the trains not go to the yard.
Why not just use Grand Central Terminal
Trailways will be cleaning up 🤑🤑🤑
i dont think they should cut service
1-1/2 layover is nothing!
I had a 10 hour layover in Sacramento, CA to meeting a cnnecting train!
@@railroad9000 Do not forget if you fly or take a bus there are sometimes long layovers if you have connections at various terminals. So it is not just an Amtrak issue.
@@johnchambers8528 True enough!
Train travel is so much more enjoyable than in the metal cyclinder!
This is wild 😮😮😮
Amtrak should send some trains to Grand Central Terminal.
amtrack try and improve service challenge, impossible
Amtrak is a sad, sad organization. Technology may be better today; but this situation would never happen 60-70 years ago. The New York Central would have handled various construction projects without interfering with and/or cancelling trains. It's simply very unfortunate. As a quick example: one round trip New York to Montreal (which was out of service for many months) is ridiculous. Obviously there's no interest.
😹
Build back better
Highways are superior
And overcrowded & oversized parking lots.
@@povertyspec9651 I guess you never travel durning busy times when you get caught in heavy traffic or wait for an accident t,o be cleared that always takes forever.
Isn’t that great, every train out of Albany is full so they screw the riders.
Of course... yippee...do better Amtrak
What do you want them to do, not make service better?
Do you have any other soloution?
Maybe leave those tunnels in a horrible and unsafe state?
It’s better to drive to Albany instead of taking an Amtrak train.
All those billions that went to Ukraine are just a waste. We should be benefitting from our own tax dollars, not Europe
First of all, this has nothing to do with lack of money, Amtrak has money which is why they can repair those tunnels, and with or without aid to Ukraine those tunnels must be closed in order to repair the damage and the time would have bem 3 yrear regardless of Ukraine.
In any cas, since you've made this populist claim than despite what many Americans think you are not alone in the world and thinks that happens in other places influence you, even if youthink it doesn't. It is in the interest of the US. As it's in the interest of many other countries, including in Europe (that also aided Ukraine) tomoreven it's occupation by Russia. If they succeed it will have grave consequences for Europe, the US and many other countries that will hurt the world economy. It is in your best interes to help preven this and sending money is the best option and much better for all as the other two options -sending troops or letting Rusiia win- are far worst.
Amtrak should go out of business, force us to realize passenger trains in the USA are mostly a stupid idea, and make the little boys and girls grow up and cease wanting to play with choo choos that cost trillions to build, are occupied by few and turn a profit NEVER. THEIR SO CALLED “environmental impact” is ZERO.
How is that going to help any ? The UNITED STATES already lost so much in passenger rail service in history. No transit or rail service is perfect & would not want a repeat of that performance.
@@sheilah4525 Amtrak does not cost a trillion dollars to operate its full national system. However the airlines even paying for airport fees do not cover the cost to operate the air traffic control system and many routes and airports operate at a deficit. Same with highways.If you had to pay the true cost to build and maintain them most would run at a loss. People who drive always complain when the government wants to raise gas taxes to help pay for all those highways. So don’t say Amtrak is a loosing proposition when they carry many passengers and on many shorter lines in the northeast and other routes cover their cost to operate and may even make a small operation profit.
Well. It’s probably faster to walk.
This is why people will never get rid of their cars for travel. We're the only country with a bad slow old regional train system that should have been upgrading the system how Europe and Japan did over the years.
Bro forgot about Canada
Ignoring GO, we're even worse 💀💀💀
@BoredCapturer I want to come to Canada to ride it and see the difference between amtrak and GO.
Who's going to pay for that?
Amtrak used to use the original NY Central route stayed on now Metro North main into Grand Central Terminal. PLENTY OF ROOM the government and democracks waste money don't care about YOU