|
|
| Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) (675202) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (676796) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 4 16:37:10 2008, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central), posted by WillD on Thu Sep 4 15:49:11 2008. Aw, c'mon. The dual-powered ALP-45DPs are coming! Now they can get a one-seat ride to Manhattan from Tenafly (via an as-yet unfunded and undesigned connector)! They might even re-extend the line to Nyack NY  (right?)
|
|
|
| (676797) | |
Re: NYS&W route (Re: Weehawken) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 4 16:39:59 2008, in response to NYS&W route (Re: Weehawken), posted by timz2 on Thu Sep 4 15:33:30 2008. That's right. The broken connection, though, was supposed to be rebuilt for allowing NJT trains to go from Sparta to Hoboken via the NYSW, Main Line and |
|
|
| (676828) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal)Correction |
|
|
Posted by RedbirdR33 on Thu Sep 4 19:01:19 2008, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal)Correction, posted by Bill West on Thu Sep 4 03:21:19 2008. Bill: Great information. For a two week period in the spring of 1940 the Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth and the Normandie were all together at the West Side Piers.Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (676934) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Fri Sep 5 01:42:59 2008, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central), posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 31 15:13:49 2008. Yeh. But it's really a nice place to take a train from. But the whole setup always feels like a giant train set to me. With the backdrop scenery and all, the neat-o track switching, the uber modern station facilities and the jaunty cars trundling by. The site is still a primo ferry launch location. It's great to watch the boats crossing back and forth, and the view of midtown is the best. Now with the HBLR line passing there, in a stripped down sense, the circle is complete. I can walk across midtown to the North River, take a ferry to a Weehawken passenger rail station and ride a streetcar through parts of New Jersey.This seems like a good thing. |
|
|
| (676941) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 5 02:13:11 2008, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central), posted by ntrainride on Fri Sep 5 01:42:59 2008. Better than the original setup? |
|
|
| (676964) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Fri Sep 5 07:35:49 2008, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Sep 4 12:14:52 2008. IINM, originally Exchange Place, then Erie Terminal, then that bus stop in North Bergen. |
|
|
| (676994) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Fri Sep 5 09:15:13 2008, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central), posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 4 15:28:51 2008. If the Erie had a bit more money, they might have ended up connecting with the NY Central at Yardsley or Dobbs Ferry; the intent of the original president was to bridge the Hudson from Piermont, where the railroad's original terminal was, back in 6-foot-gauge days.That would have been an interesting junction to accomplish. Shame the Putnam Line was so late... and once down the middle of Main Avenue in Passaic; see below Shame they didn't keep it as a trolley... |
|
|
| (677024) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Fri Sep 5 11:37:30 2008, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central), posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 5 02:13:11 2008. Naw. Baby steps for sure. Oh well, at least you can ride down to Hoboken. Catch a train to the Delaware River... |
|
|
| (677131) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Sep 5 17:55:04 2008, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central), posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Fri Sep 5 07:35:49 2008. Exchange Place hosted so many railroads over its history. Of course, the PRR had to junk it in 1961, even though it was electrfied (not in this view, though). |
|
|
| (690702) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 4 15:32:26 2008, in response to Weehawken Terminal (NY Central), posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 31 02:32:28 2008. Shoulda known that Family-images.com would have had something good related to this. An "Old & Weary" steamer at the platform in Weehawken Terminal. |
|
|
| (1323052) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928 |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 10 22:32:05 2014, in response to Weehawken Terminal (NY Central), posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 31 02:32:28 2008. Looks like the photos are gone from their original hosts.FB has this image, though.  |
|
|
| (1323067) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928 |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Nov 11 00:27:26 2014, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 10 22:32:05 2014. Thanks for bumping this! |
|
|
| (1323075) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928 |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Nov 11 00:58:20 2014, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928, posted by 3-9 on Tue Nov 11 00:27:26 2014. One of two NJ Hudson waterfront terminals with no H&M (PATH) connection.Used to be trains out of there to Albany, too. |
|
|
| (1323183) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) |
|
|
Posted by WhiteBus on Tue Nov 11 16:35:43 2014, in response to Weehawken Terminal (NY Central), posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 31 02:32:28 2008. West Shore psrg service ended in Dec 1959. Ferry service ended in March 1959. With no ferry connection ridership dwindled very quickly, but this was part of the plan. NYC management was determined to eliminate the West Shore service which it did. West Shore psgr trains could even have been routed to Hoboken Terminal since there was a connector track in the northeast quadrant where the NJ Junction line (now HBLR) goes under the DL&W (now NJT) tracks. There have been numerous "studies" for reestablishing the service altho today we are dealing in fantasy for many reasons. That is really too bad since the West Shore route would have been a really good commuter route. Ridership was substantial thru the 1950s. BTW NYO&W also ran freight trains on the West Shore since it had trackage rights. I have seen pix of NYO&W diesel powered coal trains going thru Dumont. |
|
|
| (1323184) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928 |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Nov 11 16:54:49 2014, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Nov 11 00:58:20 2014. In retrospect, I think PATH would have reached rush hour capacity even earlier if more Jersey terminals were added without more tunnels and maybe terminals in NYC (I personally think the route from Hudson terminal to JSQ and Hoboken should have been 4 tracks for that reason). Otherwise, maybe something on the NYC side could have designed - west side subway or el line(s) to the ferry terminals, for instance. |
|
|
| (1323186) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928 |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Nov 11 17:26:03 2014, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928, posted by 3-9 on Tue Nov 11 16:54:49 2014. I've often theorized that the waterfront terminals would have been more viable if the PATH system were somehow merged with the NYC subway system, in addition to other crosstown lines going under the Hudson to serve them. |
|
|
| (1323187) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928 |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Nov 11 17:55:59 2014, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Nov 11 17:26:03 2014. Merged or at least better integrated, yeah, I agree. Might have saved some or all of the terminals, at least until rail travel became popular again. |
|
|
| (1323191) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928 |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Nov 11 18:13:30 2014, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928, posted by 3-9 on Tue Nov 11 17:55:59 2014. Well, traffic jams certainly add to train travel's popularity. And they've had traffic jams going back to the height of passenger train travel (see below; Spring Street in Elizabeth NJ circa the 40s or so I'm guessing, nowadays US 1&9, but no CNJ Spring Street Station to serve it now).Being in earnest about high speed rail would have helped too. The original promises surrounding the Budd Metroliner involved it eventually operating at 160 mph, which would have made it the fastest passenger train in the world back then if that had come true.  |
|
|
| (1323214) | |
Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928 |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Nov 11 21:15:01 2014, in response to Re: Weehawken Terminal (NY Central) 1928, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Nov 11 18:13:30 2014. But gas and driving in general was still cheap then, and rail cars were by and large getting old and creaky. Pre-war cars were still the mainstay of many commuter rail lines. The Metroliners may have been capable of 160 mph, but was the signal system sufficient? Per wikipedia, the FRA cited that as a reason. Add to that the general deterioration of the NEC and the fact that most of it wasn't really designed for that speed, made high speed rail even less of a possibility. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
