Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Discussion relating to the operations of MTA MetroNorth Railroad including west of Hudson operations and discussion of CtDOT sponsored rail operations such as Shore Line East and the Springfield to New Haven Hartford Line

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, Jeff Smith

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby SecaucusJunction » Thu Feb 09, 2017 11:11 pm

How about a station and yard at Woodbury Commons. That place is world known and is growing by the day.
I think it may be possible that NJ Transit might not be the perfect, infallible organization that most people assume it is.
SecaucusJunction
 
Posts: 2988
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 9:40 pm
Location: NS Watchdog

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby TDowling » Fri Feb 10, 2017 9:42 pm

Secaucus, a woodbury common station is quite attractive co sidering it's popularity. I suggested a part time station when I first joined the forum but my suggestion was shot down for many reasons, one of them being the fact that it would favor one business over another. If it were a full time station on the other hand then there would be outrage from the community because of traffic. I predict a full time station will materialize once the 131 interchange is reconfigured.
TDowling
 
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: West Point, NY

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby CentralValleyRail » Mon Feb 13, 2017 2:03 am

While Woodbury Commons is World Renown (especially in Asia) it's prime days have come and gone. They are in the process of a major transformation there but the deals being offered there are no longer what they were 5-10 years ago and patronage is down overall. Time will tell.
CentralValleyRail
 
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 4:51 pm
Location: Wayne, NJ NJTR-MP (20.8)

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby SecaucusJunction » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:45 am

Whoever voted for Campbell Hall wins a prize...

http://www.recordonline.com/news/201702 ... pbell-hall
I think it may be possible that NJ Transit might not be the perfect, infallible organization that most people assume it is.
SecaucusJunction
 
Posts: 2988
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 9:40 pm
Location: NS Watchdog

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby rhallock » Wed Feb 15, 2017 11:10 pm

I attended the meeting in Goshen today. At Campbell Hall the NS/M&NJ freight yard will remain the same. The new MN yard will be south of the main on what is now farmland. After the presentation I spoke with one of the MN representatives. He essentially said that the reason that the yard will be in Campbell Hall is that it is the only place where NIMBYs will probably not be howling for blood. It took eight years and $9.4 million to figure this out. A few other titbits: a) the Stewart airport branch is still being considered by another study (cost unknown); b) this man admitted that it was a great mistake to have torn out the line from Harriman through Monroe, Chester and Goshen, and that it would be next to impossible to bring it back due to the rail-trail people. Most commuters from those towns switched to bus rather than drive to Harriman. c) A graph showed the ridership levels since 1983. There was a sharp drop after 2008 recession and another after Irene. It has started to come back a bit the last couple years, but not much. They project up to 22 round trips on the line once the work is done. My own opinion is that many of these off peak trains will run almost empty and that there will be relatively little increase in overall ridership on the line. d) Freight service was barely mentioned, except to say that MN has priority over freight and that they are unconcerned about it. When asked, they said that there was only one freight and that it only operated at night, completely ignoring the fact that a daytime freight now operates from Hillburn to Campbell Hall and sometimes beyond. Rather dismaying to hear them display ignorance like that.
rhallock
 
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 2:19 pm

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby Backshophoss » Wed Feb 15, 2017 11:44 pm

Remember WOH service is handled by NJT dispatch,that freight moves only if they allow it.
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4579
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby EuroStar » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:52 am

While the person at the meeting might have been ignorant of the second freight, there is certainly no need for them to be concerned much with freight traffic. Unless there is something I am unaware of, there are not enough or big enough customers on the line to justify more freight service. I also cannot foresee need for NS to run more through freight to Croxton either. Another freight or two can be added without much effect on passenger capacity, especially after the addition of the passing sidings.

I am surprised that they are going with so many shorter passing sidings as opposed to fewer long ones that actually allow opposing trains to pass each other without stopping and waiting (with proper scheduling if trains run on time). Before the announcement I would have guessed that Tuxedo-Harriman gets double tracked completely. I guess what they are proposing is ok too. It does seem that they are purposefully avoiding double tracking through any station -- probably to save on costs. Most of the high traffic station have somewhat uncertain future (Harriman vs proposed at Woodbury Commons), so investing in the station infrastructure might lock them to inferior location. Tuxedo and Sloatsburg are forever staying where they are, but why invest $15 million or so per station for high platforms and elevators at low traffic locations.

Until direct service to NY Penn is available, ridership will not switch away from buses in those towns (and yes, the Erie main through the towns is lost forever). Most commuters prefer one seat ride. The transfer at Secaucus definitely wastes 7-10 minutes each way and unless the train is 14-20 minutes faster than the bus (probably even more than that is needed accounting for driving time to Harriman Station) people will not be willing to switch to the train. I am estimating that for the average person one minute wasted in the transfer is roughly equivalent to 2 minutes spent moving.
EuroStar
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 8:26 pm
Location: Middle of Nowhere

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby SecaucusJunction » Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:21 am

While I agree the freight traffic point is moot right now, the plan will not be completed for at least another 6 years. Who knows what freight traffic would be like then? I'm sure not even NS. The fact that the sidings will be 2 miles in length would allow an occasional freight to sneak in if necessary.

I think there could be some good ridership gains with more frequent service. Look at the results when the Pascack Valley Line introduced reverse service. It will be a good way to show reliable service for when the new tunnels open. Right now, going to dinner and a show, or a sporting event in NYC is not possible. Working late would be difficult with late evening options as they are. Anyone who doesn't routinely work a 9-5 job would look to find other ways to get to work.
I think it may be possible that NJ Transit might not be the perfect, infallible organization that most people assume it is.
SecaucusJunction
 
Posts: 2988
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 9:40 pm
Location: NS Watchdog

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby SecaucusJunction » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:17 pm

Looks like the first phase of the new signal system will be cut in this weekend. I guess the old Erie signals along Rt17 will be gone shortly.

http://www.njtransit.com/sa/sa_servlet. ... ntId=15544
I think it may be possible that NJ Transit might not be the perfect, infallible organization that most people assume it is.
SecaucusJunction
 
Posts: 2988
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 9:40 pm
Location: NS Watchdog

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby R92 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:47 pm

Yes, the old signals are starting to disappear - Driving along Route 17 in Sloatsburg I noticed the new signal at CP Sterling has been cut in. The signals at MP 33.2 right next to Route 17 just before the Thruway have been removed. Also in this area, it looks like the new communication huts have been energized – each have a white LED pilot light mounted on the side. North of Sloatsburg, the signal at the Contractors Road grade crossing in Tuxedo and the signal at MP 39 near the intersection of Route 17 and 17A are both still in place and working.
R92
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 2:02 pm

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby TDowling » Thu May 11, 2017 4:40 am

As someone who has lived in Orange County for quite a while, I can safely say that it is rather hard to get around via public transportation, yet it is possible.

These improvements would give the local economy a boost, bearing in mind that the loss of the Main Line actually did not deal a fatal blow to businesses here.
TDowling
 
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: West Point, NY

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby trainbrain » Thu May 11, 2017 5:09 pm

I don't think the new yard would be that big at all and the existing yard in Port Jervis would continue to be the main base for the line. Currently Port Jervis accommodates 9 trains. Trains 42 through 58 are all on their first run of the day and train 62 is the first where that isn't the case, getting it's set from train 43.

In another thread, someone posted that MTA planned to have 22 trains each direction with the new yard vs only 14 now. That means another 8 departures in each direction each day. I'm guessing one to two more trains in each direction could go all the way to Port Jervis, and that means 6-7 trains departing and terminating at the new yard. That means a maximum of 6 sets will need to be stored in the new yard and likely less than that.

I assume this upgrade means double tracking from Sloatsburg to Harriman. No way the Moodna Viaduct gets double tracked and there's already a siding around Campbell Hall.

I think the new yard will allow for reverse peak service in both rush hours, and improve mid day and evening service. If any other full length run were added, I would think it would be in the late evening, or as a reverse peak train going all the way from Port Jervis. I think a rush hour super express going all the way from Middletown to Secaucus without stopping could also be possible, as the short turn runs would handle passengers at the further east stations.
trainbrain
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 7:11 pm

Re: Port Jervis Potential Yard Locations

Postby SecaucusJunction » Thu May 11, 2017 10:52 pm

I think it may be possible that NJ Transit might not be the perfect, infallible organization that most people assume it is.
SecaucusJunction
 
Posts: 2988
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 9:40 pm
Location: NS Watchdog

Previous

Return to MTA Metro-North Railroad and CtDOT Passenger Rail

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests