|
|
| Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station (898795) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 6 |
||
|
| (898976) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Feb 12 23:12:26 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by fisk ave jim on Fri Feb 12 23:02:29 2010. Let's not forget that Metro-North's overall long range plan is to have the M-8s compatible with all of their third rail turf. As in go to Harmon Or Southeast in a pinch in times where equipment is short. Like as it is done nowadays when u see the big red stripe on the side heading north on 3(r)d rail territiory t(ow)ards Harmon or Brewster North (sorry, Southeast) Also, Metro Morth spent big (bucks) on their (H)ighbridge car maintenance facility to service all their equipment. So, since there is no wire in the (H)ighbridge area, the M-8's will need compatible 3(r)d rail shoe to get their occcasional South Bronx bath.So any thoughts that the M-8s only need pantographs in a mistake How is it not thus compatible already? You're talking all Metro-North territory, and the M8s already are compatible with the same kind of third rail—otherwise they aren't going to get into GCT. Other people are talking having the M8s run on the LIRR's over-running third rail into NYP. That's where the waste is, due to the existing wires that the Amtrak equipment uses. |
|
|
| (898977) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Feb 12 23:13:25 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Fri Feb 12 22:33:54 2010. They can come *here* if they want to write to me.ROAR |
|
|
| (898978) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Michael Wares on Fri Feb 12 23:15:14 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Feb 12 22:56:01 2010. " (What about the washboard MUs?) "As far as I know, the washboards and the older MUs never ran to Penn Station. The New Haven did have some of the older MUs that were AC only for use on the Harlem River line. (The New Haven Harlem River line, not the NY Central Harlem line). |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (898984) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Feb 12 23:24:52 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by fisk ave jim on Fri Feb 12 19:05:56 2010. Doesn't have to be all that complicated. If the M8s don't pan out (and maybe even if they do) just tag a few extra locomotives onto NJT's ALP46A order and make a dedicated NYP to New Haven or New London fleet. NYP is only going to gain the space for at most 5 trains during the morning and evening peaks, and I'd imagine Amtrak may add an Empire Corridor run. Thus they'd really only need maybe 6 ALP46As and about 35-40 push pull coaches. It'd be really nice if they could find a way to stash some cars in NYP and run those trains during the day in a frequent service up to the Co-op City stations. An ALP46A with 5 to 6 coaches should have about the same performance as an M8.Course if MN and SEPTA could have just unified their order MN would have gotten an EMU with 3-4 real streams per side instead of this "three streams divided by two door" garbage the MTA keeps purchasing. And they would have gotten EMUs which were already designed with 25hz capability, so operation into NYP would simply be a matter of installing a proven retractable shoe design instead of an unproven variable position shoe. |
|
|
| (898989) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Feb 12 23:32:35 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Feb 12 22:13:39 2010. The pantographs would be more than enough.The M-8s will not work on 25hz power... |
|
|
| (898998) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 13 00:00:18 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Feb 12 23:32:35 2010. The M-8s will not work on 25hz powerTMP says they can, so don't quote me on the matter. They would need to in order to reach the East River Tunnels anyhow. (It's 25 Hz frequency, BTW, which is independent of power, which is in watts.) |
|
|
| (899011) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Larry,RedbirdR33 on Sat Feb 13 00:38:51 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Michael Wares on Fri Feb 12 22:51:43 2010. The PRR/PC/Amtrak employee who gave me the timetables told me that the FL9s arced badly on the LIRR third rail.Truth be told the Fl-9's didn't run to well on third rail either into GCT or Penn. When they ran for Conrail and later Metro-North they frequently ran diesel all the way to GCT. Ten units were rebuilt by ABB/Republic in 1994-95. Seven of these went to Metro-North and they ran pretty well on straight electric. Three units went to the LIRR but I don't think that they did very well there. Maybe some of the LIRR guys have info on this. Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (899016) | |
Re: Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 13 00:44:14 2010, in response to Re: Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Feb 12 22:32:57 2010. Well, the Second Avenue Subway is being built! |
|
|
| (899019) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 13 00:47:30 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Feb 12 23:12:26 2010. Maybe they wanna use M8s on other LIRR tracks too. Why not? Added flexibility. |
|
|
| (899020) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 13 00:48:31 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Feb 12 23:11:41 2010. The will build a 3rd rail if they bring Hudson Line trains into Penn. |
|
|
| (899038) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Feb 13 01:26:04 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 13 00:47:30 2010. Sure, so they can run to Greenport, Montauk, Oyster Bay, and Port Jeff (or at least the latter two depending on how the budget things shake out) when we string the high voltage wire to them.After pushing the idea of an electric locomotive I'm beginning to think a solution similar to the Dutch DD-ARs wouldn't be the way to go if we want a bilevel EMU, particularly here in the US. We'd need new cars designed around the C3 car, but more than likely without a lower level. That lower level would be occupied by the power equipment. The cars would definitely need to be in married pairs so as to provide 4 third rail shoes per side. I'm not sure if both cars would need to have their lower level occupied by equipment, but it's possible one car could retain its lower level. The other car in the pair would exist to collect current and as a motor car. Presumably it'd also have the restroom, the pantograph, brake resistors, and so on in an effort to balance the car weight between the two cars. I don't see why it'd be out of the question for this pair to have somewhere on the order of 4000hp, and thus be capable of pushing another four existing C3 cars with performance similar to the M7s. The other alternative would be to utilize an electric locomotive with a semipermanent coupled current collector car. So long as there's a cab on the outward facing end of the collector car then no operational flexibility is lost relative to the locomotive itself (unless there are sidings just 100 feet long), and it'd have the capability of spanning the same gaps as an EMU pair. |
|
|
| (899042) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 13 01:30:24 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Michael Wares on Fri Feb 12 22:33:17 2010. Amtrak might not want to supply power; or charge too much for itAmtrak gotta use the juice of Metro-North and ConnDOT from Shell to New Haven anyhow. (Besides, there were those football specials to Secaucus, so there's precedent.) Should we call a Metro-North/ConnDOT ALP-46 the EP-6, besides? |
|
|
| (899043) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 13 01:32:17 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Fri Feb 12 22:23:25 2010. Again, there are plans of extending third rail up the Hell Gate to the limits of Gate Interlocking on both Tracks 1 and 2, and that will be the transition point from catenary to third rail and vice versa for M-8 consists that run over the Hell Gate LineThat would be an absolute logistical disaster, never mind a waste of money. If they're really intending to spend that kind of money for duplicate electrification, they may as well extend the wires all the way into GCT too and do away with M8 third-rail equipment, eh? |
|
|
| (899063) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 06:54:15 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 13 01:30:24 2010. The M-8 can not use the Amtrak 25 Hz power, they can only handle 60 hz.Besides any contact with third rail by shoes will force the pantographs down as a safety precaution. There is currently no budget to extend the third rail from Harold to Gate, a distance of about one mile. The extention would require two tracks of third rail for a mile and a new substation to deliver the power. |
|
|
| (899064) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 06:56:48 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Feb 12 23:11:41 2010. four tracks ??? in a one track tunnel ???the empire connection only has a single track tunnel connecting old west side freight line with NYP. |
|
|
| (899065) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 07:01:12 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 13 00:00:18 2010. The M-8 is NOT capable of running on 25 Hz, only 60 Hz.and no the new third rail shoes have not been tested yet as he claims. |
|
|
| (899067) | |
Re: Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Images on Sat Feb 13 08:16:43 2010, in response to Re: Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 13 00:44:14 2010. Well, the Second Avenue Subway is being built!As long as the money is there. Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (899071) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 08:59:50 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 07:01:12 2010. lets rephrase that they tested the shoes on MNCR, on a M-7 but the testing on LIRR was not satisfying.The current M-8's delivered are equiped with MNCR shoes only. |
|
|
| (899073) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 09:05:59 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Fri Feb 12 22:18:33 2010. Wait, wasn't there also a hoopla because the Long Island passengers was upset at losing the name 'Long Island Rail Road'? |
|
|
| (899075) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 09:08:40 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 13 00:48:31 2010. Don't have to if they use the Diesel fleet and coachesI am not sure u wanna put a 3rd rail there anyways as you have AFAIK homeless that live in that tunnel and other tresspassers the 3rd rail will be too much of a danger |
|
|
| (899078) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 09:17:56 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Feb 12 22:28:36 2010. Sorry but I believe you are wrong. I have never seen AMTK crews on LIRR trains and have seen LIRR workers brake testing LIRR trains. I live not far from LIRR and take them every so often. Unless the AMTK crews are wearing LIRR uniforms.Sorry you're talking 20 years ago things have changed. If MNR does go to NYP my guess it will be MNR workers brake testing. I also know for a fact that when the football specials run from NH to NYP then onto NJT, there are MNR crews stationed at NYP and I know this as I was once stationed there. Come back and talk when you know current facts. |
|
|
| (899080) | |
Re: Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 09:20:04 2010, in response to Re: Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 13 00:44:14 2010. Well partially anyways. Sorry but it will not be really built until it goes downtown like it should.Also, who knows if the $$ will stay. |
|
|
| (899082) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 09:27:53 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 13 00:00:18 2010. I never said the M-8 would run on overhead to reach Penn, if the service was to become a reality!!! I clearly stated that if the M-8 were to be run into Penn, it would do so via LIRR-type overrunning third rail, and not 25Hz overhead, and contrary to what some say, and given I know persons who ran the M-7A test with the dual-capability third rail shoe, the test WAS SUCCESSFUL on BOTH third rails, with no considerable failures noted. And furthermore I never said the M-8 was indeed going to be equipped with the dual capability third rail shoe, but was planned to be equipped with such, if the service to Penn off the NH Line is ever actually implemented. And I am quite sure such a shoe will be tested at some point on an M-8. |
|
|
| (899085) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 09:34:01 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 13 01:32:17 2010. I don't draw up the plans good buddy!! IMHO I could care less how the M-8 gets into Penn.....my only concern is that IF such a service happens, and I am qualified to make the run, I and my crew make it there safely, and that if something occurs, I have the knowledge of the equipment and operating policy to keep us out of any trouble, and get us moving as soon as possible. And with all plans, everything is subject to change. |
|
|
| (899087) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 09:36:58 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 09:05:59 2010. That too!! As long as the "Long Island Railroad" name has been around, I would hate to see it lost as well, given I grew up near and along the LIRR, first railroad train I ever rode (Far Rockaway Branch), first railfanning I ever did as a kid (in order....Morris Park Yard, Kew Gardens Station & Jamaica Station), first trains I ever took photos of with a Kodak film camera and thensome. I'd hate to see the name go away too!! |
|
|
| (899089) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 09:39:40 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 09:36:58 2010. Me too :)Maybe MTA can have their MTA Railroad, but trains on the old LIRR can be: MTA Railroad: Long Island Rail Road Division and trains on the old MNR can be: MTA Railroad: Metro-North Division? |
|
|
| (899097) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 10:39:46 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by WillD on Sat Feb 13 01:26:04 2010. GAPS at NYP are 600' long.ROAR |
|
|
| (899098) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 10:40:58 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 09:08:40 2010. If they contact the third rail they will not be homeless anymore.ROAR |
|
|
| (899099) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 10:42:41 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 10:39:46 2010. is that a rumor or a fact ??there is no switch in world that is 8 cars long without any kicker rails for third rail, not even on MNCR high speed crossovers. |
|
|
| (899100) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 10:44:00 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 06:56:48 2010. LION thought that there were originally four tracks in there, there certainly is room for more tracks through most of the west side, but there may be a bore through the rocks at the north end that is only one track.LION does not have a diagram of the tracks there and is using his dim recall mode for his information. LIONS are smart, but they are not ELEPHANTS, and do not have a vast memory stashed in their nose. ROAR |
|
|
| (899101) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sat Feb 13 10:44:41 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 10:42:41 2010. Almost certainly rumor, considering the length of EMU trains which can run out of NYP. |
|
|
| (899104) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 10:51:17 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 13 01:32:17 2010. Wires cannot go to GCT. PERIOD. EOSROAR |
|
|
| (899105) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 10:53:26 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 10:44:00 2010. Lion speaks of things he lacks knowledge off.The west side freight line was 2 tracks only, currently two pieces are single track only, the Empire tunnel from 42 street to NYP and the bridge at Spuyten Duyvil. |
|
|
| (899106) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 10:55:58 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by R30A on Sat Feb 13 10:44:41 2010. the longest crossovers in GCT even all way from track I to ladder O has several kicker rails and a train can power across, without to much problems.only time trains sometimes gapped was a 4 car consist with a shoe missing or a shoe fuse blown. |
|
|
| (899108) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 10:56:37 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 09:05:59 2010. YESLong Island Railroad is now the oldest continually chartered railroad in the nation. That is a heritage that needs to be maintained. Unlike those DORKS at CSX... They brought the B&O charter back to the Maryland government, and asked for a new charter as CSX... such CRASS disregard for heritage! Anyway, they got their comeuppance: B&O was exempt from property tax in Maryland. The State's Attorney General smiled a big grin as he handed them the new charter. The next day they got their new tax bill. ROAR |
|
|
| (899109) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 10:59:49 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 10:56:37 2010. Bring "Chessie" back!!! MEOW!! :-D |
|
|
| (899111) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by 9 local on Sat Feb 13 11:03:58 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Fri Feb 12 22:09:24 2010. It still doesn't make sense when you've got perfectly good overhead catenary running all the way into Penn Station. The only reason you'd use the LIRR third rail would be to store trains at West Side Yard.Keep in mind that once all of the M8s are in, I'm sure that NJT will request the MNR use their own equipment for Meadowlands service, which would most likely be M8s. You have to use the overhead for NYP to SEC regardless. |
|
|
| (899114) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 11:09:21 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 10:42:41 2010. It is a FACT spoken out by the President of the LIRR and published in TRAINS magazine. If you need me to, I will fetch and scan my copy and show it to everyone.Remember we are not talking of one switch here, but of stacked switches and slip switches. Undoubtedly this is their longest gap, but equally undoubted is the fact that they must have other long gaps down there. ROAR |
|
|
| (899116) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 11:11:31 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by 9 local on Sat Feb 13 11:03:58 2010. The M-8s cannot run on 12,000V, 25Hz overhead catenary power (GATE outh to Penn and DC), which is why it would not use the overhead catenary to get into Penn, and why if such a service was to be instated, third rail would have to be extended up to Gate Interlocking on both tracks.About MNR running trains to the Meadowlands with M-8s, again refer to above about why the M-8 cannot run into Penn on overhead, and there is, no will there ever be, any third rail extensions further down, plus there is no place to simply turn trains once they are done business at Secaucus Junction without impacting NEC schedules and movements, and the costs of additional qualification of MNR crews for NORAC and for characteristics are something MNR cannot afford for the time being. So drop the idea of M-8s going to the Meadowlands. |
|
|
| (899117) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 11:13:03 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 11:11:31 2010. "(GATE outh to Penn and DC)"CORRECTIONS.....first I meant "south", not "outh", and actually it is WEST!! My mistake!! |
|
|
| (899118) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station ?? |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Feb 13 11:13:18 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Feb 12 22:16:06 2010. Ain't gonna happen. And it certainly wouldn't be due to LIRR opening ESA.There have been mixed statements. If you go by the ESA documents, which are issued by MTA CC and LIRR, then there will be no peak service cuts when ESA is operational, and LIRR with add 24 AM trains during the peak hour while retaining full current peak hour service. However, most of us don't believe that. For one thing, ESA is approaching completion, and LIRR simply doesn't have the EMU fleet to add 24 peak trains when their monthly meeting minutes reveal that they've barely been meeting EMU car requirements for years. Word is also that LIRR means to retire its M3 fleet and replace that fleet with an M9 fleet, meaning that LIRR would have to get to MTA to sign off on a rather large capital expenditure, which seems doubtful in the present climate. There are other problems too. A major one is that the proposed ESA service increases are major league overkill. E.g., Port Washington and Port Jefferson Branches AM peak hour service were supposed to double. No one in his right mind actually believes that ridership could actually occupy all of those trains, assuming that they're even bought and run. And there's also the issue of LIRR running that many more trains pretty much bankrupting MTA given LIRR's very high subsidy rates. Another problem is that the rates of turning trains around at ESA are faster than what LIRR has been able to accomplish at stub-end terminals, so likely the 24 tph capacity for ESA is in fact wrong by up to 20-25%. So realistically, it's natural at this point to expect that LIRR will be re-routing certain existing service to/from ESA. Thus I'd expect, e.g., that 40-50% of Pt Washington branch runs would be ESA trains, with the remainder remaining NYP trains. If so, that would free up capacity at LIRR. MTA of course wants to give that capacity to MNCR. However, NJT and AMTK probably want that capacity, so it will be a bureaucratic fight for LIRR to gift that capacity to MNCR when NJT and AMTK want at least some of it. On the other side of it, MTA CC claims that PSA (Penn Station Access) is real and they were up to draft scoping alignments. Remember MTA was going to merge LIRR and Metro-North into "MTA Rail Road" as well? That died too. Correct. In fact, I speculate that part of that move would've made the transfer of capacity rights at NYP easier than it might now turn out to be. At this point we have questions, not answers. Finally, there is also the issue that there's no budget item, to my knowledge, dealing with the required third rail extension, and Dutchrailnut informs us in this discussion that the test of the third rail shoe design wasn't satisfactory. |
|
|
| (899119) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 11:13:24 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 10:53:26 2010. Ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put. (Esp if you misspell it.)ROAR |
|
|
| (899120) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 11:15:25 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 11:11:31 2010. Of note, about the trains that run thru to Secaucus Junction from NH, those trains upon entering Penn become regularly scheduled NJT Northeast Corridor westbound revenue runs to Trenton, i.e. 3133 becomes 7833, 3137 becomes 7837 and 3141 becomes 7841, all from NYP to Trenton. |
|
|
| (899123) | |
Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Feb 13 11:29:38 2010, in response to Re: No Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 13 10:42:41 2010. NYP doesn't have the kickers, but I think that high number relayed by Mr. Lion is on account of a slinking switching move that's not to the nearest pair of East River Tunnels, e.g., from tk 14 heading east via interlocking C instead of via JO, or tk 17 heading east not via C but via JO. Maybe the longest gap is from JO to tk 5, but that's not one that LIRR confronts since it's on the south side of the terminal.Once I was on an 8-car LIRR train of M1s reversing through A and WSY and although the engineer didn't appear to gap the train, he did stop the head end, say, the leading 3 cars in a gap waiting for a stop signal to clear, which took several minutes, but by then the engineer's controls were unresponsive. There was some chatter with control that I didn't catch but the net effect seemed to be that the train was moved very slowly forward - in the direction that we'd been moving in - from the rear end until the head end was on third rail again. I assume that what happened was that the head pair of cars somehow couldn't sustain the power required for the engineer's control stand to be operable even though the rear of the train was powered atop third rail, but I don't know. |
|
|
| (899140) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 12:33:16 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 13 10:40:58 2010. Sorry, I hope you meant that in jest because that is very mean. I don't like the fact that there are homeless living there but don't think they should die either. |
|
|
| (899141) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 12:37:31 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by 9 local on Sat Feb 13 11:03:58 2010. The Meadowlands service is a joint operation between MNR & NJT. NJT will most likely not mind keeping their trains in use for the service, AFAIK they have yet to complain about it. |
|
|
| (899143) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by arnine on Sat Feb 13 12:38:26 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sat Feb 13 11:15:25 2010. Yup. Also NJT runs this service with MNR and AFAIK they have yet to complain about their cars in the service. |
|
|
| (899144) | |
Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Feb 13 12:38:42 2010, in response to Re: Future MNR New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Fri Feb 12 19:50:55 2010. NJT's increased service to NYP will be handled by ARC. Existing infrastructure is still limited. Amtrak controls it, and the LIRR has guaranteed access it for a set number of trains. |
|
|
| (899148) | |
Re: Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Feb 13 12:41:51 2010, in response to Re: Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by italianstallion on Fri Feb 12 20:35:36 2010. Money is now a problem. These expansion plans will probably be the first on the chopping block. CDOT has to pay for hundreds and hundreds of new MU's. When that's done, the P32DM's will be up for their midlife rebuilds. When that is done, the Shoreliner I's will be reaching the end of their lives and will need replacement. When THAT is done the remaining M3A's will need replacement. |
|
|
| (899150) | |
Re: Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Feb 13 12:43:29 2010, in response to Re: Future MN New Haven Line Service to Penn Station, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Feb 13 12:41:51 2010. When THAT is done the remaining M3A's will need replacement.That one's not on CT DOT, though. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 6 |
||
