Home · Maps · About
Home > SubChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2 3]

 

Page 1 of 3

Next Page >  

(1535898)

view threaded

NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 18 22:17:27 2020

Planet Princeton

NJ Transit is conducting a ‘Princeton Transitway Study’ of the Dinky train right of way

By Krystal Knapp
NJ Transit is conducting a study of the Princeton Branch right of way and travel connections to the branch, a 2.7-mile rail line that connects Princeton with Princeton Junction. The two-car train known as the Dinky currently runs along a single track in the right of way and is the shortest scheduled commuter rail line in the United States.

According to documents, the purpose of the study called the “Princeton Transitway Study,” is to evaluate potential transitway improvements in the Dinky right of way.

“The study will investigate opportunities to provide and expand service on this corridor using state of the art transit modes,” reads a Sept. 24 request for proposals from NJ Transit obtained by Planet Princeton. “It will consider alternative transit modes to accommodate ridership demand, including new and emerging technologies that have the potential to improve service and potentially function more cost-effectively than the present arrangement.”

Buses, multi-modal transport, autonomous high headway service, and more will be considered as part of the study.

“The study will also explore the possibility of using the corridor as a backbone for additional transit, including other local or regional transit where use of the transitway would offer an operational benefit,” reads the request for proposals. “This may include existing bus services, new services, or potentially the extension of the existing services into downtown Princeton.”

A primary consideration of the assessment will be travel demand relating to Princeton University’s proposed expansion. The school is adding two new residential colleges, building new engineering and environmental science facilities, and creating a new campus in West Windsor called the Lake Campus.

Asked on Wednesday where the study stands, NJ Transit provided very little information.

“This study is in its very early stages,” said Lisa Torbic of NJ Transit. “No public meetings have taken place as of now.”

Torbic would not say if a firm has been hired to conduct the study, and if so which firm was hired. She also did not respond to questions about the general timeline for the study’s completion, and whether any meetings called for in the study have been held already with local or regional officials.

More than a decade ago, NJ Transit conducted another study of the Princeton Branch right of way and developed a concept plan for a bus rapid transit system for the Princeton area. The bus would have replaced the Dinky train and would have run along the Dinky train right of way. Citizens packed public meetings to protest the replacement of the Dinky with buses, and the plans were scrapped. Residents proposed other alternatives at the time, such as replacing the Dinky with a light-rail system or trolley that would run all the way to Nassau Street. The Dinky remained, but the line was shortened by 460 feet at Princeton University’s request to make way for the Lewis Center for the Arts building and a new access road to the university’s parking garage. The battle over the future of the Dinky and the shortening of the train line was a major setback for town and gown relations, with residents filing unsuccessful lawsuits to try to stop the truncation of the line. The two historic train station buildings were converted into restaurants, and the new station on Alexander Road opened in November of 2014.

A goal of the current study effort, according to the request for proposals, is to determine if a “multimodal Transitway in the study corridor” can function in a similar way to the former bus rapid transit concept, “serving existing travel needs while also supporting the new overlay services that would benefit from operating on this corridor to efficiently access Princeton municipality, Route 1, West Windsor, the university, and regionally.”

Another goal is to consider replacements for the Dinky train cars. According to NJ Transit, the current Dinky train cars were built in 1977 and are nearing the end of their useful life. NJ Transit wants to retire its entire fleet of the Arrow III EMUs electrical multiple-unit cars and replace them with new higher capacity, multi-level cars that officials say would be ill-suited for operation on the Princeton Branch.

As part of the study, the consultant will hold four outreach meetings with the university, the municipality, and county and state transportation representatives, according to the September document. The consultant is tasked with evaluating current conditions along the train line and coming up with recommendations for future use of the right of way, after looking at four alternatives.
Alternative one – A road cart-way with embedded rail, to facilitate both rail and rubber-tired tram services on a shared-use right of way. The road vehicle could do a loop around town and connect to the Princeton Branch right of way.

Alternative two – A standalone rail with a parallel roadway for rubber-tired tram or bus service. Continued use of the current arrow train cars or replacement with another federally approved rail vehicle. The adjacent cart-way would require new bridge work over the D&R Canal, Lake Carnegie, and a tributary of the Assunpink Creek near Princeton Junction.

Alternative three – A road cart-way with a guideway for rubber-tired tram or bus service (similar to one but also allowing for buses).

Alternative four – Continued use of Arrow III cars, restoring them or replacing them with another suitable vehicle. No new stations or structures.
The consultant is also supposed to consider two optional additional stations on Princeton University properties — one somewhere between Canal Pointe Boulevard and and Route 1 south, and one behind a parcel on Alexander Road in West Windsor, east of route 1.

All of the alternatives must, at a minimum, match the current service level, and estimated costs for each alternative should be provided by the consultant, according to the request for proposals. Autonomous vehicles or semi-autonomous vehicles could be considered. New services sharing the right of way or operating parallel to it may be operated by Princeton University and could connect with the local road system, according to the document.

The consultant can also forecast ridership growth from 2025 to 2040, and could consider the potential for a bike and pedestrian pathway parallel to the proposed transitway.

Post a New Response

(1535914)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by AlM on Sun Jan 19 03:36:20 2020, in response to NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 18 22:17:27 2020.

autonomous high headway service

Don't they mean low headway?

Post a New Response

(1535919)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 19 07:39:13 2020, in response to NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 18 22:17:27 2020.

IOW, they're at it again trying to convert it to a fancy bus.

Post a New Response

(Sponsored)

iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It

(1535924)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Union Tpke on Sun Jan 19 09:56:31 2020, in response to NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 18 22:17:27 2020.

Stupid.

Post a New Response

(1535932)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jan 19 11:08:30 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 19 07:39:13 2020.

Precisely.

Post a New Response

(1535933)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jan 19 11:15:27 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by AlM on Sun Jan 19 03:36:20 2020.

Do they ever say what they mean?

Post a New Response

(1536085)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by 3-9 on Mon Jan 20 15:59:23 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 19 07:39:13 2020.

To be honest, why not turn it into a busway? A bus can go much farther than just Princeton University, and won't be significantly slower than the Dinky. I hate to give up rail transit, but c'mon, it's a 2-stop shuttle, with no hope of ever being more than that.

Post a New Response

(1536095)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 20 16:26:20 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Mon Jan 20 15:59:23 2020.

To be honest, that makes no sense. Unless you're the owner of a road construction company looking for a government contract, that is, never mind a seasonal snow plower looking to keep a busway open that a blizzard would shut down anyway . . .

Post a New Response

(1536097)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Mon Jan 20 16:28:20 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Mon Jan 20 15:59:23 2020.

First off, people are far more apt to ride a train than a bus. If you make it a bus, many will drive to Princeton Jct.

If it goes farther than the University, then it will hit streets, which means it will be slowed, delay prone, and miss connections at Princeton Junction.

There is absolutely no reason to make it a bus except that NJT's stupid equipment policies for 42 years have meant no MU's.




Post a New Response

(1536122)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by nasadowsk on Mon Jan 20 18:43:14 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Mon Jan 20 15:59:23 2020.

They just built a fucking new station at the end of the line, too.

Post a New Response

(1536126)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 20 19:19:41 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by nasadowsk on Mon Jan 20 18:43:14 2020.

It's at the new "end". They had a perfectly good station beforehand, which was closer to town.

Post a New Response

(1536127)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 20 19:25:22 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Mon Jan 20 16:28:20 2020.

NJTR hasn't been around for 42 years.

And NJDOT was fine with MUs when Conrail ran the trains, isn't that funny.

Post a New Response

(1536151)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 05:15:49 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 20 16:26:20 2020.

Unlike the govt-run NJT? And a blizzard would shut down a railroad, esp. a 2-stop shuttle which would have much less priority than, say, the rest of the NEC.

Post a New Response

(1536152)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 05:36:41 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Mon Jan 20 16:28:20 2020.

What's the difference if you change to another train or change to a bus at Princeton Junction? It's not like we would be cancelling a 1-seat ride from NYC or Philly, or even Trenton.

Getting buses for a busway is a lot cheaper and easier than being held to using MU cars for a 2-stop shuttle.

A busway opens up a lot more options. Worried that the bus to the station may be late? Have a bus which just goes the route of the Dinky, ON TOP of the service which can serve the surrounding areas and even Princeton U's own circulator.

Post a New Response

(1536153)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 05:40:10 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by nasadowsk on Mon Jan 20 18:43:14 2020.

It's not like this was an unforeseen event. Everybody who knew about NJT and the Dinky knew those cars were getting old and NJT wasn't interested in buying a fleet of MU cars.

Post a New Response

(1536154)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 05:41:18 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 20 19:19:41 2020.

The "new" station is just a stopgap measure, dependent on what the long term fate of the Dinky was going to be.

Post a New Response

(1536155)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Tue Jan 21 06:58:42 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 05:36:41 2020.

Because nobody wants to ride a bus.

Post a New Response

(1536156)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Tue Jan 21 07:00:24 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 05:40:10 2020.

We do what is best for the customer, not to satisfy NJT's whims, which are driven by a lazy MMC. Nobody cares that NJT is not interested MU's. They are subsidized and should do what they are told, or they should get no subsidy.

Post a New Response

(1536158)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by JayZeeBMT on Tue Jan 21 08:19:20 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 05:40:10 2020.

I still don't understand what NJT's bias against MU cars really is, given the amount of electrified territory the system has. They should have ordered new MUs somewhere around 2005 or so, to accommodate the Arrows' end of useful life, and anticipate growth. Instead, they went with push/pull sets and locomotives, some of which (ALP-44) had an abbreviated service life.

If NJT actually had more MUs, the Dinky wouldn't even be a discussion. Buses don't have the service life trains do, and are more maintenance-intensive. Plus, as others have pointed out, buses aren't reliable, and have to negotiate traffic if the route extends beyond the Dinky ROW. People want their direct, cross-platform transfer to Princeton, and are unlikely to give that up for a bus.

Post a New Response

(1536159)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by nasadowsk on Tue Jan 21 08:50:03 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by JayZeeBMT on Tue Jan 21 08:19:20 2020.

There was an FRP and spec for Arrow IVs, and a bid, til Warringon killed it. Rumor has it CAF was the low bidder, not snowmobiles Inc...

Post a New Response

(1536161)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by JayZeeBMT on Tue Jan 21 09:03:57 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by nasadowsk on Tue Jan 21 08:50:03 2020.

That's just messy!

Post a New Response

(1536162)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 09:24:44 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by JayZeeBMT on Tue Jan 21 08:19:20 2020.

I'm not 100% sure either, but I think they wanted to simplify the fleet to coaches and locomotives. Plus, I believe there would be less FRA checking if they don't have a fleet of MUs considered to be "locomotives".

Unlike MU cars, buses can be off-the-shelf models or leased from a larger fleet. In the end, it's so much simpler to get buses than to purchase MU rail cars from the tiny number of manufacturers that still remain.

Post a New Response

(1536171)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 12:33:16 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Tue Jan 21 06:58:42 2020.

They're more likely to ride something that stops much closer to where they are and drops them off right at Princeton Junction.

Post a New Response

(1536181)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Tue Jan 21 17:24:54 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 12:33:16 2020.

Not if it gets stuck in traffic in downtown Princeton.

Post a New Response

(1536182)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Tue Jan 21 17:28:22 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 09:24:44 2020.

Everybody else deals with FRA cab inspections, so can these lazy asses.

Bus last 1/3rd as long as a rail car, and you'll need twice as many to replace rail cars. Then consider the capital cost of paving over the track, including the D&R Canal open deck bridge.

This is not New York City. People who are not transit dependent do not ride local buses. They will all drive to Princeton Jct.

Post a New Response

(1536210)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Jan 22 01:40:06 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Mon Jan 20 16:28:20 2020.

One solution is literally 2 stops away - cut a deal with SEPTA to use Silverliner Vs, rotate them in/out with the Trenton line on some schedule.

If this causes union issues, contract the entire operation out to SEPTA, sell them the track for $1 if need be. Beyond that, every time a legal hurdle is thrown, simply say ... "or we pave it over for a busway". It's pretty obvious that's what NJT wants to do, so the threat has enough teeth to force the issue to a head.

Post a New Response

(1536216)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by 3-9 on Wed Jan 22 06:46:36 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Tue Jan 21 17:28:22 2020.

Everybody else deals with FRA cab inspections, so can these lazy asses.

Until there is a major change in policy, it's extremely impractical to buy MU cars for a 2-stop shuttle. This is, after all, taxpayer dollars we're talking about here.

Bus last 1/3rd as long as a rail car, and you'll need twice as many to replace rail cars. Then consider the capital cost of paving over the track, including the D&R Canal open deck bridge.

But it's not like NJT doesn't have experience with buses. NJT may not even need to provide the service, and let someone else do it. And how many people use the Dinky per day? Less than a thousand?

As for the bridge? Rip out the tracks, ballast, and signals, pave it over. Done.

This is not New York City. People who are not transit dependent do not ride local buses. They will all drive to Princeton Jct.

Unless the person has some reason where they cannot take a bus 2.7 miles, I really don't think it's going to make a difference if the person previously rode the Dinky.

Post a New Response

(1536217)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by 3-9 on Wed Jan 22 06:51:04 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Tue Jan 21 17:24:54 2020.

Oh, downtown Princeton is a traffic nightmare? Like I said, if that's such a concern, have a bus do the route of the Dinky, in addition to other services, such as Princeton's own circulator, which currently uses a roundabout route to Princeton Jct.

Post a New Response

(1536281)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 17:21:21 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Wed Jan 22 06:51:04 2020.

There's is no excuse to have a bus do the route of the Dinky.
Yes downtown Princeton can be gridlocked, and all buses, FreeB, Tiger Transit, NJT, and Suburban Transit get delayed.

Post a New Response

(1536283)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 17:24:05 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Wed Jan 22 06:46:36 2020.

No it is not impractical to run MU cars fora 2 stop shuttle. They have doing it for 100 years.

Nobody cares that NJT has experience with buses. Nobody wants their Dinky train to become a bus.

Again, non transit-dependent people in the suburbs do not ride buses.

Post a New Response

(1536284)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 17:24:50 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Jan 22 01:40:06 2020.

That is one of several heavy rail solutions.

Post a New Response

(1536290)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 17:36:41 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Jan 22 01:40:06 2020.

You don't seem to understand how things like that work. You don't simply "contract out" anything to SEPTA in the same way that the former Erie commuter rail service to Port Jervis got split between New York MTA and New Jersey DOT, with Metro-North getting the service in part when Conrail was ordered to stop running passenger trains.

Post a New Response

(1536291)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 17:43:31 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 17:36:41 2020.

They can lease cars from SEPTA.

Post a New Response

(1536292)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 17:47:43 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 21 05:41:18 2020.

Yes; that's their twisted plan. The old station could have been integrated just fine into their new arts center.

Post a New Response

(1536293)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 17:51:07 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 17:43:31 2020.

I wonder if that does go both ways, with SEPTA contracting Arrow Is from NJT in mind. I shudder to think of what the MMC won't do with respect to the upkeep of oddballs like the Rotem MUs.

Really stupid concept to have MLV MU "power cars" with no cabs, because that necessitates a minimum of three cars.

Post a New Response

(1536297)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 18:17:31 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 17:51:07 2020.

Also stupid to have these 3 cars MLV trains run on the low density Gladstone Branch.

The MMC tail wags the dog as NJT, has for 30 years, and puts out the shittiest service of any commuter railroad in the continent, maybe even the western hemisphere.

First thing that needs to happen is to outsource MMC to a contractor, so that they no longer have a seat at the management table.

Post a New Response

(1536298)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 18:18:33 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 17:47:43 2020.

They would have had to shift he Art Center about 8 feet.

Post a New Response

(1536301)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jan 22 18:27:26 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 17:36:41 2020.

Why can't you contract service out to SEPTA? 40 years ago, SEPTA ran all the way to Newark, NJ (RDG Crusader/Wall Street), without any difficulty at all. I actually buffed that train way back in high school, it was operated by RDCs. Yes, I know it was NJDOT in those days, but still...

As has been pointed out, PJ is close enough to Trenton that the SEPTA cars could be run back to Philly for scheduled maintenance or rotation. That would keep the Dinky going until new NJ Transit EMUs came along...

Post a New Response

(1536302)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 18:28:52 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jan 22 18:27:26 2020.

I don't think SEPTA ran that ex-RDG service. Conrail did with a Penn DOT subsidy.

Post a New Response

(1536305)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jan 22 19:02:56 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 18:28:52 2020.

The Crusader/Wall Street was indeed a SEPTA service.
I clearly remember the SEPTA decals from when I rode. You can see the SEPTA RDCs that were used in pics accompanying the post in this link.

Post a New Response

(1536325)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 20:36:37 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 18:18:33 2020.

That's 76 percent of the width of an Arrow MU.

Post a New Response

(1536327)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 20:45:27 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by 3-9 on Wed Jan 22 06:46:36 2020.

Until there is a major change in policy, it's extremely impractical to buy MU cars for a 2-stop shuttle. This is, after all, taxpayer dollars we're talking about here

So spend taxpayer dollars for completely gutting the ROW and putting buses on it, never mind the higher maintenance costs of roadways and the shorter-by-comparison service life of buses that nobody would want to ride by contrast?

NJT's excellent at profligate spending, don't forget. They had no problem shelling out $12 million a unit for sight-unseen ALP-45DPs, something definitely not off the shelf, never mind spending the most per mile that I've seen for LRT (hundreds of millions per mile on HBLR, which is on pre-existing rights of way for the most part).

And how many people use the Dinky per day? Less than a thousand?

There used to be a lot more than that before NJT started making the Dinky miss connections deliberately. They probably also factor service cancellations due to shoddy maintenance into "ridership".

As for the bridge? Rip out the tracks, ballast, and signals, pave it over. Done

LOL, not "done". Guess you don't know what goes into roadway maintenance. BTW, as for signals, the Dinky runs on track warrants; after all, what other trains occupy the ROW?

Unless the person has some reason where they cannot take a bus 2.7 miles

How many city buses can get up to the same average speed as the Dinky over the same 2.7 miles? Absolutely none, even if it were on a dedicated ROW. What makes you think that Arrows have high operating costs versus a bus?

Post a New Response

(1536329)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 20:53:20 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jan 22 19:02:56 2020.

Conrail ran SEPTA Regional Rail service until they were ordered by the federal government to cease all passenger operations. Most exemplary of that service was the diesel operations, which ceased when Reading Terminal closed.

Conrail also ran the MTA commuter services out of GCT that became Metro-North.

Post a New Response

(1536330)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 20:56:21 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 17:21:21 2020.

Yes downtown Princeton can be gridlocked

Oh boy, does it. Nassau Street is no fun at certain times of day.

Post a New Response

(1536333)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 21:02:59 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 22 17:24:05 2020.

Well, the branch was electrified in 1936, so that's 83 years; and it was double-tracked for about twenty years of that time. For three years before that, the PRR ran gasoline-electric cars on there.

Of course, the point is that the MU operation has stood the test of time. And MP54s ran on there for a very long time; this pic on Wikipedia is from 1971.

Post a New Response

(1536344)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Jan 22 21:52:54 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jan 22 19:02:56 2020.

Wow you rode it! I'm jealous.

I've seen pics of the SEPTA RDCs in Newark Penn captioned as such.

I forgot about that service, it makes for a nice precedent.

Post a New Response

(1536350)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 22:59:18 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jan 22 18:27:26 2020.

40 years ago, SEPTA ran all the way to Newark, NJ

No, Conrail did. There was no SEPTA Regional Rail railroad until 1983.

PJ is close enough to Trenton that the SEPTA cars could be run back to Philly for scheduled maintenance or rotation

There used to be a wye at Princeton Junction, but that's long gone. And how are you going to negotiate with Amtrak to permit SEPTA crews east of Trenton?

Post a New Response

(1536375)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Thu Jan 23 07:53:53 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 20:56:21 2020.

The 605 is fucked over royally in the AM and PM rush, not only in downtown Princeton, but on US1 and US206. It runs at 75 - 80 minute intervals. Someday it will have to go to 90. My mother does not even go out to catch the first bus around 8am for shopping as that bus is always very late. There is little recovery time at each end of the line and drivers do not cut their small breaks very much.

Post a New Response

(1536376)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Thu Jan 23 07:56:21 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 20:53:20 2020.

SEPTA cleansing themselves of all diesel operations with Center City Tunnel did not help the situation. But this service should have been based out of Jenkintown or Wayne Jct. Jenkintown is where most people got on, not much from Philly itself. The equipment came down in the morning on a very early scheduled trip from Bethlehem.

Post a New Response

(1536377)

view threaded

Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW

Posted by Joe V on Thu Jan 23 07:58:46 2020, in response to Re: NJT conducting “Princeton Transitway Study” on Dinky ROW, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 22 22:59:18 2020.

Another option is extend the River Line along a 5th track along the NEC to PJC and have it subsume the Dinky. Add a couple of stations along the way for park and ride, such as Lawrenceville near the Intersate highway overpasses.

Post a New Response

[1 2 3]

 

Page 1 of 3

Next Page >  


[ Return to the Message Index ]