Starting next spring, on a date not yet announced, trains will again run on a regularly scheduled basis between New York City’s Grand Central Terminal (GCT) and Amtrak’s Albany-Rensselaer station. While track work on Amtrak’s Empire Connector segment from Penn Station to Spuyten Duyvill (“Spouting Devil” in Dutch, named for dangerous river currents), where the connector line from Penn Station converges with Metro-North’s Hudson Line from GCT, has temporarily diverted Amtrak’s Empire Service trains away from Penn Station and into their former home at GCT in the past, this marks the first time since 1991 that any trains will be regularly scheduled between those two endpoints.
Three round trips between Penn Station and the state’s Capitol District were discontinued last May to accommodate a project to rehabilitate the East River Tunnels that run from Penn Station toward Long Island, on account of damage caused by Hurricane Sandy eleven years ago. Railway Age Senior Editor Carolina Worrell reported this development on Oct. 21, following a joint announcement by Amtrak and Metro-North on Oct. 20, in a story headlined Empire State Corridor Service Restored, Improved. She reported: “Thanks to joint efforts by the State of New York and Amtrak, one additional Amtrak trip in each direction between Penn Station and Albany-Rensselaer will be restored starting Dec. 1, 2025, the company said. Train 235, which departs Penn Station at 3:15 pm, and Train 238, which departs Albany-Rensselaer at 12:10 pm, will both be resumed… The new run will be scheduled with the Grand Central to Albany train departing at mid-morning and the Albany-Rensselaer to Grand Central train departing in the afternoon and arriving at Grand Central in time for evening events in New York City… The MTA is now advancing a plan with partners to run Metro-North service between Albany and Grand Central, starting with one daily round-trip in the Spring of 2026.”
The new Amtrak service is slated to begin on Dec. 1, several months ahead of the new Metro-North trains. The Metro-North trains will stop at Rhinecliff and Hudson, as do Amtrak trains. In a related development, the Massachusetts section of the Lake Shore Limited between Rensselaer and Boston will also return to service on Dec. 1. At the present time, buses are serving those stops.
Big Deal?
Gov. Kathy Hochul hailed the Metro-North train as a major achievement. Roger Rosenbaum reported in the Mid-Hudson News on Oct. 21: “‘Restoring Amtrak service and debuting Metro-North service to Albany is a huge win for riders,’” Hochul said. “‘This new plan will provide more travel options and lower fares for over two million annual riders, saving them time and putting money back in their pockets.’” Worrell reported similar laudatory comments from Metro-North President Justin Vonashek and Amtrak President Roger Harris. Not to be outdone, as Rosenbaum reported: “Local leaders across the Hudson Valley and Capital Region hailed the expansion as transformative. Rhinebeck Mayor Gary Bassett added, “‘Reliable, affordable rail service is essential for the vitality of our river communities. Expanding service and holding down ticket costs will make it easier for residents and visitors alike to travel through the Hudson Valley.’”
The MTA announcement did not mention fares, although Laura Ratliff reported on www.timeout.com that the Metro-North fare will be “about $40 each way.” A check on Amtrak fares for Nov. 7 and 20 showed a range from $44 to $99 for coach fares, while a check on Dec. 15 fares revealed offers of a $38 fare on a few trains.
The additional train between New York City and Rensselaer on Metro-North will be helpful, because it will fill a gap that was created when Amtrak cut service between the two cities. As a practical matter, though, the new train does nothing more than that. It does not mark an expansion of service, nor does it add a lower-fare alternative to taking an Amtrak train for most passengers. For seniors and passengers with disabilities, the fare could be considerably lower, because transit providers (including on “transit railroads” like Metro-North) charge half of the “regular” base fare for those riders. Amtrak’s discount is only 10%. As a practical matter, the new Metro-North train might operate only on a temporary basis. It comes as a means for filling a temporary gap in the service day, caused by an ongoing project. When the project is completed, Amtrak could restore the schedule that Metro-North will operate, which would probably cause Metro-North to discontinue that run. Still, there is also the long run.
Maybe in the Future
As stated, the new train will run for the specific purpose of filling a temporary gap, but will serve as an important proof of concept, too, if Metro-North chooses to expand service based on that concept. The concept, simply stated, is that some “transit railroads” are already running service that cover more distance and longer trip times than traditional “commuter train” services. Almost since its inception, the Long Island Rail Road has run trains between New York City and the North and South Forks of eastern Long Island, runs that take about three hours each way today. New Jersey Transit runs service on the historic Erie Railroad to Port Jervis, with the portion of the line in New York State owned by Metro-North and the trains run under contract between the two railroads. Five of the routes on Metrolink in the Los Angeles area take more than two hours from end to end, with one taking about 2:40 for its trip.
These examples provide a model for regional railroads to continue, take over, or initiate service on trips that are on the long end of “commuter” length or on the short end of corridor length. One route, between Springfield, Massachusetts and New Haven, has a schedule shared between Amtrak and CTrail, operated by Connecticut’s transportation department. Amtrak runs most of the service, which CTrail operates a few trains to and from Springfield and more that turn at Hartford. A proposal in Illinois would have Chicagoland railroad Metra run four round trips daily between the Windy City and new stops at Rockford (the western terminal) and Belvidere, with a suburban stop at Elgin. There are also some places where local railroads could either supplement or replace Amtrak service on routes of similar length. Virginia is purchasing rights-of-way for trains within its borders and to and from Washington, D.C., going to and from such places as Richmond and Charlottesville. Virginia Railway Express (VRE) could run these services, leaving the long-distance routes to Amtrak, as operates today. SEPTA in Philadelphia could run the Keystone Corridor to Harrisburg. Operations such as these, which could include Metro-North running many or all of the trains that terminate at Rensselaer, would remove some costs and responsibilities from Amtrak, while substituting equipment from the regional railroads. That would conserve Amtrak’s scarce equipment, which could be used elsewhere.
Other advocates are making similar proposals. In an Oct. 29 post on its website, the High Speed Rail Alliance suggested that NJ Transit could run to Scranton (which that agency proposed in the past), Metra could extend from Chicago to Champaign (on Amtrak’s route to Carbondale and New Orleans), and the Wisconsin cities of Milwaukee and Madison. Another suggestion was Chicago to Lafayette, Indiana on the Cardinal route, which the Indiana Passenger Rail Alliance (IPRA) has suggested going further: to Indianapolis and beyond there to Cincinnati, Louisville and even Nashville.
On the other side of the argument, taking on new services would also bring new responsibilities financial and otherwise, to the local railroads, in addition to the ones they already have. In the meantime, for example, Metro-North’s day-to-day projects continue. Rosenbaum also reported: “What is not clear is the speed at which urgently-need repairs and accessibility measures will be put into place at the Rhinecliff station. Mid-Hudson News recently reported a traveler got stuck in the elevator as well as the start of payment for parking at the often jammed-packed lots.”
All of this having been said, there is something nostalgic about taking a train between the Albany area and Grand Central Terminal, as an alternative to Penn Station. Grand Central Station, a radio program that aired from 1937 until 1954, presented human interest dramas set in New York City. The show’s opening described a train pulled by a steam locomotive barreling toward “Grand Central Station.” Steam units are dangerous in closed spaces and were banned from the station and the tunnel under Park Avenue before the program’s run began. There is also the nomenclature distinction of “Grand Central Station” being the subway station and “Grand Central Terminal” being the historic station that hosts Metro-North trains, both brushed aside by applying artistic license, but the opening still had its impact on the listening audience. After the sound of a steam locomotive’s whistle, the opening words were: “As a bullet seeks its target, shining rails in every part of our great country are aimed at Grand Central Station, part of the nation’s greatest city. Drawn by the magnetic force of the fantastic metropolis, day and night, great trains rush toward the Hudson River, sweep down its eastern bank for 140 miles, flash briefly by the long, red row of tenement houses south of 125th Street, dive with a roar into the 2½-mile tunnel which burrows beneath the glitter and swank of Park Avenue, and then—Grand Central Station! Crossroads of a million private lives, a gigantic stage on which are played a thousand dramas daily!”
The experience of riding a train from the Albany area to the historic Grand Central Terminal, modified by the use of an electric motor unit and a somewhat shorter train, will be available to the public every day again, starting next spring, but only once each day, unless Metro-North decides to add more trains.
