Metro-North Hudson Line Electrification

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: Metro-North Hudson Line Electrification

Postby Patrick A. » Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:08 pm

This push for electrification as a top priority for NEC branch corridors (Empire Corridor, Springfield Line, Danbury Branch) ignores the many less arduous improvements that could be made at a fraction of the cost of electrification. Raising running speeds through improvements either in signaling, track geometry, additional track, bi-directional/high-level station platforms) should all be exhausted prior to any iota of institutional dollars or energy is focused on electrification. Some ideas for the Empire Corridor:

-High level platforms at RHI, HUD (easily saves 5 minutes of dwell time) accessible from all tracks (eliminates potential bottleneck)
-Double track Empire Connection in Manhattan and upgrade to higher operating speed running if possible (bottleneck reduction, running speed improvement)
-Reconfigure Empire/Spuyten Duyvil interchange to reduce conflicts with MNRR (eliminates potential bottleneck)
-Make all grade crossings HSR compliant, if not already

The express runs from NYP-ALB are already at 2:30, close to a 60 mph average speed, definitely beats the car. If you can squeeze another 10-15 minutes with the above improvements, the locals could be clocked at 2:30 as well. Plus all of the above would reduce the risk and severity of en-route delays, thereby making the service more reliable and attractive than it already is.

Let's get to a state of good repair and optimize what we already have first before sinking capital into pie-in-the-sky ideas.
I have lived to ride on the M8.

Complete Constant Tension on the New Haven Line ETC: Mid-2018
Patrick A.
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:52 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Metro-North Hudson Line Electrification

Postby Railjunkie » Mon Jun 12, 2017 3:09 pm

High level platforms at HUD and RHI are not going to happen, Conrail tried to remove the canopy at RHI and was stopped cold. As for I believe the Hudson station is on some form of historic registry. Adding a bridge to access high level platforms would take an act of congress. We wont even bring the freight siding into the conversation its still active by the way.

Dwell times for both RHI and HUD are two minutes, if we are there longer its for heavy travel, ADA, or just waiting on time.

The Empire connection is double tracked, MAS of 60mph. The only two spots that are not, CP12 to Innwood and Empire through the tunnel to NYP. All of about 1.5 miles out of 10. I dont see how one could reconfigure CP12 to relieve a supposed bottle neck. Ive taken a couple of minute hit waiting for a MNRR train to clear, no biggie there.

I know Amtrak re did all the crossings on the Hudson HSR compliant Im not sure. As long as they work when Im coming.

Express out of ALB still makes two RHI and HUD we had trains back in the day that only stopped in Harmon and I think the running time was 2:10. The trip can be done in 2:20 with all the stops and a good run down MNRR I average 2:30 making all the stops and 2:25 with added fat and D stops at night.
Railjunkie
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 7:24 am

Re: Metro-North Hudson Line Electrification

Postby Jeff Smith » Tue Jun 13, 2017 7:51 am

Back to electrification: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id= ... 9;size=125

See page 31.

Apparently, there was a plan afoot back in 1973 to electrify to Peekskill:

Extending Electrification and Increasing Power

A study was begun early in 1973 to extend electrification from Harmon to Peekskill. It will also cover the power requirements to enable the new Metropolitan cars to operate at full capability, and the replacement of obsolete elements of the present power system for savings in operating and maintenance costs. Preliminary planning and engineering will also be included.

A related, second study is also being made at the same time. It will determine the feasibility of changing the present automatic, wayside signal system to a modern cab signalling and train control system. The new Metropolitan cars were designed to accommodate this equipment at a future date.
...


A very interesting link; lots of stuff system-wide. Obviously, the extension never happened. Interesting to note that they were aware the Metropolitan's needed more power; when the Harlem north of NWP was electrified they apparently had already forgotten this fact.
Next stop, Willoughby
~Jeff Smith (fka "Sarge") :: RAILROAD.NET Site Administrator
Jeff Smith
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7444
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:28 am
Location: MP 67.2 Georgia Southern Railway

Re: Metro-North Hudson Line Electrification

Postby DutchRailnut » Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:36 am

not really forgotten, but at time there were almost no trains longer than 6 cars, and no one expected the electrification to open up region as it did.

they never expected to run trains within 6 minutes of each other either so signal system is designed for 6 minute headway.
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer
User avatar
DutchRailnut
 
Posts: 21200
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Previous

Return to MTA Metro-North Railroad and CtDOT Passenger Rail

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests