TWO RAILROAD GIANTS AT WAR – AND RIDERS PAY THE PRICE

 

There’s a feud brewing between Metro-North and Amtrak and it’s getting nasty.  Worse yet, this tiff is already hurting our train service in Connecticut.

Since 2021 construction has been underway to bring some Metro-North trains into New York’s Penn Station, rather than Grand Central.  At New Rochelle, select Metro-North trains headed to NYC will “hang a left” and go over the Hell’s Gate Bridge, just as Amtrak trains now do, with new station stops in the Bronx.

This is significant not only for getting Connecticut and Westchester commuters to Manhattan’s west side, but more importantly, to harvest the labor of Bronx residents for jobs in Connecticut via a speedy, reverse-commuter train ride.

But now Amtrak is dragging its feet, slowing construction.  Why?  Because Amtrak is angry with Metro-North for not allowing high-speed tests of its new Acela NextGen train while running in Connecticut.  And that’s because Metro-North says the new Acelas have been losing their pantographs on Metro-North’s overhead power lines.  Not once, but five times.

Amtrak's NextGen Acela

Amtrak sued MTA (parent of Metro-North) to regain access to our tracks to test their flagship train and they lost.  Now they’re appealing their claim.  Perhaps in revenge, Amtrak is slowing MTA contractors’ access to the new Bronx stations, pushing back their opening from 2027 to 2030.  That means lost employment (and taxes) in Connecticut.

Meanwhile, Amtrak has also throttled the already diminished Shore Line East rail service as CDOT has decided to replace the electric M8 cars running there since 2022.  Why?  Because CDOT says that Amtrak (which owns those tracks and wires east of New Haven) is charging too much money to use its overhead catenary electrical lines to power those electric trains.  So, forget about speed and clean-running electric trains and it’s back to the slower diesels.  Still, CDOT claims this will save them $8.8 million.  I guess that’s the price of clean air?

On top of all this CDOT’s next fare hike (5%) kicks in July 1^st on all Connecticut commuter lines.  Fares are going up because CDOT says its costs are increasing and the only alternative would be service cuts.  That’s not altogether true.

The better alternative would have been for the legislature to adequately fund CDOT operations in the first place by giving them the $11 million needed (and requested by CDOT) this year to run trains at current fares and schedules.  But lawmakers didn’t, so we really have those pols to thank for the fare hike.  Remember that in November.

And forget about the highly-touted revival of trains on the Waterbury branch where ridership is up almost 150% in recent years.  Commuters there are looking not only at that same fare hike but bus substitutes for ten months due to construction. But when the work is done CDOT will open four station upgrades on the branch, so that’s something.

So here's the scorecard: Amtrak and Metro-North are feuding, Shore Line East is going backwards, Waterbury riders will be riding buses, fares are going up, and your legislators didn't lift a finger to stop any of it.  Connecticut commuters aren't just being taken for a ride… they're being taken for granted.

 

 

SHAPIRO’S FOLLY – PART DEUX: THE BRIDGE THAT WON’T DIE

 

Connecticut: the land of steady habits where bad ideas don’t go away, they just get bigger.

Easton housing developer Stephen Shapiro is back again, expanding on his idea of a bridge across Long Island Sound from Bridgeport to Suffolk County NY.  Now he’s even added the idea of a tunnel for parts of the bridge, as shown in a fresh set of AI renderings, gobbled up by the media without asking many questions.

AI Rendering by Shapiro

Go big or go home, seems the theme, though the Shapiro ‘plan’ is just an amateur’s vision as Shapiro is neither a bridge engineer nor transportation planner.  He still thinks the 14 mile bridge / tunnel (or is it 18 miles, as he said this week?) can be built for about $50 billion.  But what do the experts think?

“Fifty billion dollars is a fantasy number,” says Pete Harrison of the widely respected tri-state Regional Plan Association which has been working in this field for over a century.  “The era of big bridge highways has passed.  But just imagine if that much money was spent on our trains and buses (in Connecticut),” he added.

What does CDOT think of Shapiro’s idea?  Not much.  “This proposal has never been vetted by CDOT or any transportation planning organization,” says CDOT’s Josh Morgan echoing Governor Lamont’s comments earlier this year. 

And the MTA (parent of Metro-North) is similarly uninspired.  “The cross-sound tunnel was not part of the agency’s 20 year plan,” Aaron Donovan told me.

One might guess that Shapiro thought he could win those agencies’ favor with his new design which adds a rail line down the middle of the bridge / tunnel.  Shapiro’s beautiful AI renderings show what looks like an Amtrak Acela hurtling across the bridge.  But elsewhere in his descriptions the train line is described as for “light rail”, which Amtrak and Metro-North certainly are not.

None of this bodes well for Shapiro or his political allies who promise to try again to find funding for a study.  The bill introduced this past session (HB-5320, which rightfully died in committee) called for a one year study of indeterminate cost.

That’s not realistic, one transportation insider-turned-consultant tells me: “A market / feasibility study would probably take about three years and cost $5-10 million.  An EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) would cost $25-50 million more.”

Is there even demand for such a crossing?  Shapiro guesstimates as many as 100,000 cars a day, each paying a one-way toll of $39.  For perspective, Fred Hall, the VP-GM of the cross-sound ferry from Bridgeport, carried only 525,000 vehicles in all of last year (at a toll for cars starting at $78 one way).  That means an average daily ferry load of 1400 vehicles. Would a bridge / tunnel toll of half that amount really mean more than 70 times as much traffic?

Most of the speakers at last week’s media event at the capitol spoke about how much Bridgeport would benefit from this new structure.  That city’s former mayor and State Senator Bill Finch (now a lobbyist for the electricians union) compared the project to putting a man on the moon.

Among the other speakers, a college student from Long Island who’d like a quicker ride home from school… a local disc jockey… and a state rep from West Haven hoping the crossing would bring Long Islanders to his town’s beaches. Not one of the speakers was a transportation expert.

Noticeably absent from the Shapiro cheering squad… anyone from Bridgeport city hall, the city most affected by such a scheme.

Why should we spend a single taxpayer dollar on a study that’s D.O.A. when we can’t even fund our existing transportation network properly?

This idea has been proposed and studied before… and never built, for good reasons.  Let’s keep that track record intact.

CONFESSIONS OF A KID WHO PLAYED WITH REAL TRAINS

I have a confession to make.

First, let me caution my readers that you should never, ever try this.  It’s dangerous and probably illegal.  But what did I know, a kid of maybe age ten, so fascinated with trains, that I did something this stupid?

I uncoupled a parked freight train on a siding. 

Yes, I crawled under a fence and went up to a stopped freight train maybe a half mile long, that I knew from experience would be parked there for a while.  I climbed up on the box car, turned wheels and pulled levers. I was having so much fun!

Then the train started up. 

I could hear the engine, far out of sight, blast its horn and slowly start tightening the slack between the railcars.  Jumping well off to the side I was amazed to see so much mass starting to move.  And then it happened.

As the cars tightened at their couplers I saw that one of those levers I had pulled had uncoupled the front of the train from the rear.  The last thing I remembered was a huge hose between the cars tightening and disconnecting with a loud “pop”.  More of a bang than a pop, but by that time I was running toward home.

The train seemed okay but as the front of the consist pulled, away the rear just sat there.  I assume that eventually, somewhere down the track they realized what had happened, maybe when the crew in the caboose (they still had them in those days) noticed they’d been left behind.

Pretty stupid thing to do, I’ll admit.  And dangerous too.  It took me weeks before I could even confess to my Mother what I’d done, and even then she thought it was just my imagination.  But it wasn’t.

But my ‘crime’ had given me a lesson about air brakes.  That hose, connecting each car to the next, was how the train’s brakes worked.

Brakemen at work

In the early days of railroading the brakemen literally were stationed atop the boxcars and, on signal from the locomotive crew blowing its whistle, they’d run across the cars tightening brake handles, hopefully stopping the entire train in time.

Then, in 1872 George Westinghouse (yes, the same guy who later brought us so many innovations in electricity) invented the automatic air brake.

All train cars’ brakes were connected to a hose-fed air pressure system controlled at the locomotive.  When the lines were pressurized, the brakes on all the cars would be released and the train could move along.  When it came time to stop, the pressure was slowly released and the brakes were automatically applied.

The system was also fail safe.  If the train started to derail (or was uncoupled by a naïve young rail fan), the pressure was cut and the brakes applied automatically just as I had witnessed. (I still wonder how the front of ‘my train’ kept moving after I’d popped the hose).

Westinghouse’s system worked so well that by 1900 air brakes were required on all trains.  And they’re still in use today.  That invention became WABTEC, the Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Company, merging in 2019 with GE Transportation which makes locomotives.  Today WABTEC is a $45 billion company.  A spinoff, WABCO, put the same technology into trucks.

Stopping a huge train or a truck with just the power of air.  Quite an invention.

But a final word of caution from a once-stupid kid who should have known better: never, ever play with trains. Not stopped ones. Not parked ones.  Not “just for a minute.” They can move without warning, and one wrong step can be fatal.  So please…stay off the tracks.

CT TRANSPORTATION FIRSTS

I’m tired of people bad-mouthing Connecticut.

Yes, our taxes are high.  Yes, I-95 often feels like a rolling Town Meeting with brake lights.  And yes, Metro-North can still turn a simple trip into a test of faith.

But let’s give Connecticut some credit.  For almost 400 years, our small state has punched above its weight.  

Sure, we love our firsts. New Haven will always claim the hamburger at Louis’ Lunch.  Bridgeport gave Buckminster Fuller room to build his futuristic, three-wheeled Dymaxion Car, which looked like tomorrow until tomorrow changed its mind. 

Buckminster Fuller's Dymaxion

But let’s also consider Connecticut’s transportation history: a story of roads, wheels, rails, engines, submarines and aircraft.  It is also the story of a state that always wants to move faster.  Just look at our roads.

Before I-95, before the Merritt Parkway, before the toll debate that refuses to die, Connecticut had turnpikes.  In the 1790s, private companies built toll roads to connect towns, farms and ports. The idea was simple: better roads helped commerce. The second idea was more important: somebody had to pay for them, proving that some things never change.

Then came better road-building technology.  New Haven’s Eli Whitney Blake patented a stone-crushing machine in 1858, making crushed stone more practical for road construction.  Long before orange traffic barrels became our unofficial state flower, Connecticut was already trying to build better roads.

Then came bicycles.  Hartford became a national bicycle center in the late 1870s, when Albert Pope contracted with the Weed Sewing Machine Company to build Columbia high-wheel bicycles.  The bicycle was more than a toy.  It was personal mobility, freedom and an early argument for better roads.  Long before motorists demanded smooth pavement, cyclists were already lobbying for it.

The "Pope" Bicycle

Connecticut’s bicycle story didn’t end in Hartford.  In 1971, now-famous Cannondale was founded in Wilton.  It began by building camping gear and bike-towed trailers, not bicycles, later applying aluminum to sturdy but light-weight bike frames.

Or consider our trolleys.

Electric streetcars once linked cities, mill towns and neighborhoods across the state.  They let people live farther from work, shop beyond their own neighborhoods and travel without owning a car.  They stitched Connecticut together… before the automobile helped pull it apart.

Connecticut also got into cars early.  Hartford, Bridgeport and New Britain all had their moment in the auto industry.  But we also got into regulation early, because this is Connecticut and we do enjoy a good rule.  In 1901, Connecticut passed the nation’s first statewide motor-vehicle speed-limit law: 12 miles per hour in cities and 15 on country roads.

But transportation here was never just about roads.

David Bushnell of Saybrook developed the Revolutionary War submarine “Turtle”. That future eventually became Groton’s Electric Boat and the nuclear submarine age. Then look skyward: Pratt & Whitney made East Hartford synonymous with aircraft engines, while Igor Sikorsky made Stratford a helicopter capital.

So yes, we complain about traffic, late trains, fares, parking and the CDOT.  But Connecticut has never just watched transportation happen. We shaped it.

So be proud of our state the next time you’re stuck in the traffic our forefathers helped make possible.

 

THE REVOLT OVER SPEED CAMERAS

Few transportation issues have divided Connecticut residents more quickly than automated speed cameras.

Warning signs in Greenwich

Supporters say the cameras slow drivers down and protect children near schools. Critics argue they represent government surveillance, outsourced enforcement, and a “money grab”.

The controversy has played out most visibly in Greenwich, Fairfield and Milford.

In Greenwich, the debate became so heated that town officials suspended the speed camera program in April after determining that mandatory public hearings required before launching the program had somehow been missed.  Oops.

That decision followed months of complaints from residents who questioned everything from privacy protections to vendor involvement and the town's vendor selection process.

By mid-December 2025 Greenwich had issued 12,006 warnings and 2,294 citations, and later reported 7,225 citations in January 2026 alone.

Coverage by my colleagues at Greenwich Free Press documented the outrage.  A citizen petition gathered more than 700 signatures calling for the cameras to be removed.

May 14th Hearing in Greenwich    

At a long-overdue public hearing in mid-May, residents raised concerns about the selection process of vendor Blue Line Solutions, its data collection and privacy policy, and whether the system was designed more to generate revenue than improve safety.  

Town officials and police strongly disagreed.  Greenwich Police Chief Jim Heavey recently argued the cameras were "working exactly as intended" and reported reductions in speeding around schools since they were turned on.   Greenwich First Selectman Fred Camillo repeatedly rejected claims that the program was a "cash grab," emphasizing that the goal was protecting children.  

The Greenwich RTM takes up the issue June 8.  My guess is voters' representatives will reject it, adding another chapter to the town's remarkably clumsy handling of this program.

The same tensions are now emerging in Fairfield.

Fairfield's cameras issued more than 114,000 warning tickets in their first 17 days, with officials projecting roughly 190,000 violations during the initial warning period.   The numbers immediately fueled skepticism.

In Fairfield the violations kick in when you go more than 10 mph over the speed limit.  The first fine is $50, with additional processing fees possible depending on how the citation is paid.

Residents questioned why cameras operate 24 hours a day rather than only during school arrival and dismissal times.  Others worried about revenues projected to reach approximately $3.2 million during the first month of enforcement.

State Sen. Tony Hwang publicly acknowledged the backlash and urged town leaders to create a dedicated roadway-safety account so residents would not see the program as a "revenue grab."

Fairfield First Selectperson Christine Vitale pushed back, saying the program is "fully about children's safety" and adding that zero revenue would actually be the best outcome, meaning drivers obeyed the law.

So far fifteen Connecticut municipalities have received CDOT approval to install the cameras.  At least one town, Kent, has voted (by a four to one margin) not to install the speed cams.

Still, many crucial questions about the program remain unanswered at the local level:  how are vendors properly vetted, what happens when the three-year test period expires, how do citizens know ticket revenue will be properly spent and even a more basic question… are our speed limits too low?

Supporters insist these cameras are not about revenue.  Fair enough.  If every driver obeyed the speed limit, the towns would collect nothing.  But when local governments begin projecting millions of dollars in future ticket revenue (and dreaming of how it might be spent), they shouldn't be surprised when taxpayers become suspicious.

The challenge for Connecticut isn't proving that speeding is dangerous.  Most of us already agree that’s a real issue.  The real challenge is convincing drivers that speed cameras are truly about safety and not simply the latest government innovation in “contactless fundraising”.

 

 

TAKING YOUR BIKE ON THE TRAIN OR BUS

Now that summer is unofficially underway, let’s revisit a recent column of interest to bikers…

Taking mass transit is great.  But when you step off your train or bus, what do you do to get to your final destination?  Increasingly, that means BYO wheels:  a bike, e-bike or scooter.

The problem is, the rules for bringing your “wheels” can be very different depending on your carrier.

METRO-NORTH:

You can bring your non-electric-powered bike on the train anytime… except rush-hour and certain holidays.  Some train cars include wall-mounted racks; check the TrainTime app for bike-friendly trains and car markings.  If you have a folding bike that can get stowed in the overhead rack, you can bring it anytime.

But if your bike or scooter is powered, the rules are quite different.

First, you can’t ride your e-whatever at the station, on the platform or in the train. You can only bring your wheels on the train if it folds up, weighs less than 100 pounds and is your property, i.e. not a CitiBike, VEO etc.

Hanging bike rack on Metro-North

You cannot charge your e-bike on the train.  It must have UL-certified batteries and be stored in an area so it doesn’t block other passengers.  Whatever the rules may be, the train conductor or railroad staffer always has the final say and can stop you and your bike from being on the train.  If the train’s too crowded, you may be denied boarding. 

Remember… if your final destination is Grand Central Terminal there are any number of Citi Bike stations just outside on the street.  At New Haven there are bike-shares available through Ride New Haven.

SHORE LINE EAST & HARTFORD LINE:       The e-bike rules here are quite similar.  Unlike on Metro-North, regular (non-electric) bicycles are welcome anytime.  On the Hartford Line, CT Rail trains welcome bikes anytime for free.  But Amtrak’s Hartford Line trains accept bikes only with a reservation and a charge of $20.  You should call Amtrak at 800-872-7245 to purchase your ticket and secure a bike spot, as space is limited.

Confused yet?  Best if you check your railroad’s rules carefully, as e-bike policies differ between CT Rail and Amtrak-operated trains. 

At Hartford’s Union Station you can rent a scooter (but no bikes) through VEO.  Bikes may be added in the future.

CT TRANSIT BUSES:

Connecticut’s buses were pioneers in allowing bikes… not in the bus, but on racks mounted on the outside front of the bus.  The racks only hold two bikes, and its first-come, first-carried.

Only standard non-motorized bikes are allowed on racks; e-bikes, scooters, and motorized vehicles are not permitted, regardless of weight.

OTHER BUSES IN CONNECTICUT:

All GBTA (Greater Bridgeport) buses are equipped to carry your bicycle… two-bike maximum, first-come first-served.  Norwalk Transit rules aren’t crystal clear.  You might want to consult your carrier’s website or ask the driver before trying to transport your device.

PORT JEFFERSON FERRY:

The Port Jefferson Ferry allows bicycles and e-bikes onboard, but according to company policy, they are considered luggage and must be kept with the rider at all times.  Cyclists are required to carry their bikes as well as any baggage up and down staircases to the passenger decks.  If there’s room you can use the elevator.

Whatever your destination, always BYO (and wear) a helmet when operating on two wheels.  And remember:  E-bikes and scooters should use UL-certified batteries and never be charged aboard any vehicle or station.

 

NO GAS LINES... YET

Got vacation plans this summer?  Better stay flexible as the war with Iran is going to make travel this summer more expensive and unpredictable.

Even when the war is declared “over” there is such a backlog of shipping in the Mideast that supply chains will be disrupted for many months.  We’re not just talking about gasoline but dozens of other chemicals the world’s manufacturers are dependent on.  The impact of this will affect us all.

Roughly 2,000 ships are reportedly delayed, anchored or awaiting clearance across the Persian Gulf region. Their cargoes are going to face months of delays heading for China, India and Japan when they can resume travel.  Not only will prices for their cargoes soar, but so too will the cost of the products those cargoes are used to manufacture… plastics, electronics, fertilizers and pharmaceuticals.

The Oil Crisis of 1973

So far oil supplies are at a deficit (lower than they should be) but are not seeing real shortages:  no “gas lines”…. Yet.

If you’re planning a European vacation this summer, double check.  Because jet fuel prices have nearly doubled since the war began Lufthansa has already cancelled 20,000 flights this summer.

Flights are being consolidated even as fares are hit with fuel surcharges.  Older, less fuel-efficient aircraft like the Boeing 767 are increasingly being replaced by newer jets such as the Airbus A350.  Some analysts have warned that Europe could face critically tight jet fuel supplies within a few weeks if disruptions continue.

Trans-Atlantic flights out of New York City will continue, albeit it at higher costs for travelers.

And remember;  summer tourism affects more than just the passengers.  If they can’t travel, tourism dollars they would spend on both sides of the Atlantic will plummet.  European tourism officials were counting on free-spending American visitors this summer.  Instead they may get cancellations and angry customers staring at airfare apps. 

Even if you’re not flying to Europe, domestic road trips will be affected.

As of last Friday, AAA says the average price for gas in Connecticut was as high as $4.66 and diesel was $5.84.  Experts say that an end to the war may see an immediate price dip at the pump for gas but not for diesel.  High diesel costs mean higher prices for everything we buy.  And it may be 2027 before prices return to pre-war levels. 

Remember the supply chain disruptions after COVID?  They may be the new normal.  Take pharmaceuticals, for example.

America is hugely dependent on India and China for the pills we take.  Certain cancer drugs and vaccines, may be especially vulnerable to shipping disruptions.  Pain killers, antibiotics and anesthetics could be in short supply.  Even generic drugs (which make up 90% of those sold in the US) will be affected.

The world economy now runs on floating warehouses, fragile supply chains and optimistic assumptions.  One conflict half a world away can raise the price of gasoline in Connecticut, disrupt vacations in Europe and threaten the supply of medicines in your local pharmacy.  

We built a global economy based on speed, low cost and “just in time” delivery.  But “just in time” just isn’t anymore.