Comments on: New York Regional Rail: A Coda

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 21:27:52 +0000

I don’t know. All I know is that it was done in the 1980s to the Morris and Essex Lines.

By: Michael Schaeffer

Michael Schaeffer — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:31:48 +0000

The map should be revised a bit. BTW, since there is a lot of talk about developing the MOM (Monmouth Ocean Middlesex) Rail Link, that should be included in this new system, with the new line following either the Lakehurst to Matawan alternative or the Lakehurst to Monmouth Junction alternative, with the option to extend the line on an unused right of way to end in Downtown Toms River. Also, I figured out a way to implement through running while having catenary and third rail. We purchase trains from Bombardier with the capability to do dual running, similar to what the Eurostar had before High Speed 1 was built. We did build catenary for new construction, NJ Transit’s unelectrified lines and segments, as well as on the Danbury Branch, New Caanan Branch, the Hudson Line, and the LIRR Main Line and Ronkonkoma Branch (With the last 3 being done to accomodate dedicated high speed rail tracks, built along the corridor. Then, we will bring up the Third Rail lines to catenary over time, and remove the shoes needed for third rail running, like Eurostar did.

By: Michael Schaeffer

Michael Schaeffer — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:08:08 +0000

It’s probable though. How hard would it be?

By: Nathanael

Nathanael — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 23:51:58 +0000

I’m hoping the alterations at least immunize the signal system against a future frequency change and provide wire suitable for changing voltage, so that it’s possible to simply swap out transformers when the time comes…. but like Alon I have seen absolutely nothing out of Amtrak indicating any intent to even prepare for changing the voltage. Though they did change a short section of the Hell Gate line, that’s it.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:59:54 +0000

You know, I didn’t think about it. On the regional fantasy map on my computer, there’s a link from the North Shore Branch to the Raritan Valley Line, turning at Cranford, with an intermediate station at the junction with the NEC. It might make sense to instead make all Raritan Valley trains go through Staten Island.

On the other hand, the NEC is much faster than the Staten Island lines; the North Shore Branch only has two tracks and has very tight stop spacing, and even with timed overtakes it can’t realistically support higher speeds than 100 km/h at rush hour. But it might have to come to that if traffic on the NEC and the Morris and Essex Lines exhausts the capacity of two tunnel pairs.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:38:34 +0000

I believe it’s the latter. At least, none of the press releases mentions anything about changing the voltage.

By: Michael Schaeffer

Michael Schaeffer — Mon, 29 Aug 2011 03:21:42 +0000

I would like to make a suggestion regarding some of the lines. You should reroute the Brown Line (Formerly Raritan Valley Line) over the Staten Island North Shore Branch, through the Staten Island-Lower Manhattan Tunnel to Grand Central Terminal, where it would return to your originally proposed route. Add a new Linden station where the North Shore Branch crosses the NEC, and you can create another transfer station where Red Line passengers (Former Northeast Corridor and North Jersey Coast Line) can connect with the Brown Line. Rerouting the Brown Line would reduce pressures on the NEC. Also, capacity pressure could further be relieved as Red Line passengers traveling to Lower Manhattan and other areas from stations south of Linden could switch to the Brown Line to complete their journey. Let me know what you think Alon.

By: Michael Schaeffer

Michael Schaeffer — Mon, 29 Aug 2011 03:10:56 +0000

Will the upgrades currently planned for the NEC between Trenton and New Brunswick, change the voltage over to 25 kv 60hz? Or will they wait until the entire NEC between D.C. and New York has their electrification systems upgraded?

By: Michael Schaeffer

Michael Schaeffer — Mon, 29 Aug 2011 03:09:10 +0000

So, it should be 1 Billion to change all the third rail lines to a 25 KV 60 Hz Overhead Standard and to electrify the gaps (I.E. Fully electrifying the current electrified lines, such as the Morristown Line, Montclair Boonton Line, Hudson Line, and North Jersey Coast Line), 1.2 Billion for the diesel only lines (Raritan Valley Line, West Shore Line, Bergen County Line) Total of 2.2 Billion Dollars. Perhaps we should write up a list of the individual projects needed (Ex. tunnels, track construction, and electrification projects). This would simplify things a bit for those who r new to this page. BTW, since the NEC will be having their electrification upgraded soon (Albeit for a short length), should it make sense for NJ Transit to change the 11 kv portion of the North Jersey Coast Line to 25 kv?

By: Nathanael

Nathanael — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 23:48:26 +0000

The trick is drainage. You can lower tracks easily if you don’t have drainage issues, but if you do… cost starts going up and it start to be easier to raise bridges.

I suspect the road-over-rail bridges aren’t actually that serious a problem though. They’re not a problem at *all* on the Metro-North Hudson Line, and I believe they’re unliekly to be a problem on the NJT diesel lines. LIRR is another matter, but there the tricky part is probably the Brooklyn (Atlantic Avenue) branch, not the miscellaneous suburban bridges.