NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Discussion related to NYAR operations on Long Island. Official web site can be found here: www.anacostia.com/nyar/nyar.html. Also includes discussion related to NYNJ Rail, the carfloat operation successor to New York Cross Harbor that connects with NYAR.

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby BobLI » Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:19 am

MTA Bridges and Tunnels make a fortune off the truck tolls and its going to go up again. The PA NYNJ also makes a fortune off the truck tolls.

Why improve freight to LI if you can charge huge amounts for trucks? Its all about the money!
BobLI
 
Posts: 982
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 7:46 am
Location: NY

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby Sir Ray » Tue Dec 18, 2012 12:09 pm

BobLI wrote:MTA Bridges and Tunnels make a fortune off the truck tolls and its going to go up again. The PA NYNJ also makes a fortune off the truck tolls.
Why improve freight to LI if you can charge huge amounts for trucks? Its all about the money!

Well, the MTA/PJNY could add a surchage of 150.00[?] per road-railer transit, that would about match the tolls for a 5 axle round-trip at current cash rates.
Sir Ray
 
Posts: 2023
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: The Industrial Northeast

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby KEN PATRICK » Tue Dec 18, 2012 12:19 pm

roadrailer is too high for lirr. floating is uneconomic . trucking from nj is about $450. nothing there for cross harbor and nya. even with a larger barge, floating will not work. transit time? wow. how about 2 more days from nj to long island. the roadrailer people are smart. i'm sure they tried all avenues to expand their business. after all, they sucked ns into running money-losing trains. railroads are bulk haulers. they truly die trying to make money against 18 wheels on time-sensitive dry freight. i looked at roadrailer years ago for msw. not feasible. freight to long island is weight and volume sensitive. as such, many have tried, many have failed. remember the rail bogey fiasco? only early retirements to mark the graves. ken patrick
KEN PATRICK
 

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby Sir Ray » Tue Dec 18, 2012 1:38 pm

KEN PATRICK wrote:roadrailer is too high for lirr. floating is uneconomic

For once, I'd agree with KEN that floating roadrailers is not a viable option, they have to be brought down the Hudson line...just like ConRail could do in 1982.
Railroads are bulk haulers. they truly die trying to make money against 18 wheels on time-sensitive dry freight

Once again, KEN is Absolutely, Positively, 100% Correct!
Sir Ray
 
Posts: 2023
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: The Industrial Northeast

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby mikey cruz » Tue Dec 18, 2012 4:10 pm

Agree with Ken & Sir Ray if they could be brought down the hudson it would actually be easier. And @Backshophoss: think about how many steps it would take and how long it would take to lower the legs on all the trailers, let alone the fact that the legs may not line up flat between the rails, the logistics would be a nightmare to get RoadRailers on a barge unless it's specially built for them. I think LIRR & NYA should seriously look into and work on figuring out how to get certain loads onto LI, clearance & weight being the worst problems. Maybe offer incentives to businesses that relocate to the areas near rails. LIRR needs to remember the less NYA does the less they do because NYA leases from them and pays them to use the rails.
mikey cruz
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby gregorygrice » Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:18 pm

Ocala Mike wrote:And there are posts in another thread suggesting that the LIRR is no longer using the Lower Montauk for its deadhead equipment moves (having already run its last revenue train over it).


Sorry if I'm kinda late (I usually stick to the MNR thread) but when did they stop using the section? I caught a deadhead and NYA running on the line about 3 months ago (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ba8HTYGCK_4).

I've also caught NYA using the line about 5 months ago (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXBRymmeO2U)
User avatar
gregorygrice
 
Posts: 990
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Queens, NY

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby Backshophoss » Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:36 pm

Roadrailers are under the plate "B" spec's, at worse trailer would be 14.5 ft when mounted on the rail bogie(33" wheels),under current
FHWA rules allow 102" wide trailers(NY State and city allow 96" wide trailers) allowed distance from an STAA road(I-495) is 1 mile
While the 1 mile rule is streached at bit in reality,the roadrailers would fit on LIRR and on the roads till delivery destination.
In road mode it's no higher than the avg highway trailer (13'-6" high) and only 2-3 ft longer due to the tongue used to connect the
trailers together in rail mode. The cube/size is the same as a highway 53' trailer.
Roadrailers are ment to be moved like a unit train when assembled together.

I would never think about floating Roadrailers across the Harbor to begin with.
It would tie up too many adapterailers to work.(The bogie with the standard coupler on)
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 5429
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby mikey cruz » Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:43 pm

^^ oh sorry man that's what I thought you were referring to.
mikey cruz
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby Backshophoss » Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:25 am

The "Dream" would be to use 2 slots in the overnight on the NEC thru NY Penn,1 EB and 1 WB slot to move the
Roadrailers to/from the island,all Haz-Mat loads will have go the long way around(a given),hand off to NY+A at Harold,
then get the roadrailers to where the yard is to be delivered by road to destination. Loads and empties would be gathered
the sent west,handed off at Harold then delivered to a nearby NS yard.(a "happy" retirement home for a few HHP-8's)
It would depend on Amtrak giving up(allowing) the 2 slots.

Now the reality,NJNY is still in rebuilding mode on the NJ side(Greeville),Only CSX(CP by "tradeoff" of routes) and P+W
stone trains service the island with interchange to the NY+A at Fresh Pond, the unloved long detour via Selkirk,
and long haul truck drivers not wanting to deliver on the Island(Lack of outbound freight,the biggest reason,
then tack on traffic cogestion,and going thru NYC in/out,etc...)
NY+A is "hamstrung" by LIRR's indefference to freight in general.
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 5429
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby Insideman » Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:10 pm

1 problem: Customers

No one has stepped up and asked for service.

There is NO FACILITY to unload trailers.
You could have a solid train come in every 24 hours but without real estate your sunk.

Its easier and cheaper to truck them from jersey or port of your choice. That said if people want then someone will provide........
"Those who can, build. Those who can't, criticize."
R. Moses
User avatar
Insideman
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:25 am
Location: Lawn Guyland

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby DogBert » Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:57 pm

BRT could keep some space with their expansion, though they probably have it all planned out already.

i still think kicking jetro out of the small part of the old phelps dodge site, combined with all the real estate that'll be cleared out under and next to the BQE when the bridge is replaced, could make for a decent sized spot. UPS is across the street, FedEx is opening in LIC in a few months.

if port authority keeps jacking up toll rates, the pricing might start making sense.
DogBert
 
Posts: 1725
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 7:08 pm

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby jayrmli » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:03 pm

Nothing is set in stone at BRT, but as I've said before intermodal does not work for Long Island. Aside from the point insideman mentioned above, for intermodal to work, it must be fast. Having it loaded at BRT for example, then waiting for NYA to come get it to bring it to Pond, then moving it at 10 MPH to Bay Ridge to float it (if that's how it's going), then loading on a barge, then floating it across New York Harbor before having it head wherever it it going would never work. Having it travel 10 MPH to Oak Point for a 2 day run up to Selkirk and back won't work either. You might as well just truck it to Jersey. Even with traffic, it's faster and cheaper.
Check out my website about railfanning in the Northeast!

http://www.northeastrailfans.com
jayrmli
 
Posts: 1760
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 3:23 pm
Location: Moriches, NY

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby KEN PATRICK » Sat Dec 29, 2012 1:47 pm

i looked at roadrailer using open-top walking floor trailers for msw. i went with 5 sided containers on a 89' flat instead. road railer is too high for lirr. you need to consider the height of the truck bolster- it's 24" added to the wheels. standard trailer is thus 18.25' atr. lirr is 17' atr. not only is road railer too high, it is too expensive a railroad move. i suspect ns is losing money on it's roadrailer moves. hence no expansion. other posters are correct in citing the 2 days via floating. probably 3 via selkirk. floating cofc and fileting at 65 st is challenged financially and operationally. the gorilla in the room is the truck. work out a rail method and trucks will drop prices. i had a railroad drop price when the non-delivering railroad looked at intermodal for a power station. the market supports freight trucking on long island. ken patrick
KEN PATRICK
 

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby Sir Ray » Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:09 pm

KEN PATRICK wrote:i looked at roadrailer using open-top walking floor trailers for msw. i went with 5 sided containers on a 89' flat instead. road railer is too high for lirr.

Ken, what on Earth are you talking about now?
Triple Crown Services wrote:All units conform to AAR Plate B clearance diagram for height.
Triple Crown Services Equipment Specification

Plate 'B' clearance - most restrictive clearence diagram on current NA railroads.
Sir Ray
 
Posts: 2023
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: The Industrial Northeast

Re: NYA operates the Lower Montauk Branch now ???

Postby KEN PATRICK » Mon Dec 31, 2012 11:51 am

sir ray- i was not on pluto when i opined that roadrailer was 17.25' atr. a 13'6" trailer, a truck bolster riding on 33" wheels and 5th wheel attachments is 207" or 17.25 ( 12" wheels to 5th wheel fixture) . this brings me to ponder how ns can advertise plate b 15'1". what am i mssing? is this marketing excess or are the trailers really 11' ? does anyone care about plate b except for those posters who think roadrailer could be used in the tunnels and long island. advertised plate b is of no impact to railroaders since universal clearances are at least plate c, 15'6" . lirr is 17'. as i posted, roadrailer is too high. ken patrick
KEN PATRICK
 

PreviousNext

Return to New York & Atlantic Railway/NYNJ Rail

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest