Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.

Moderators: Tadman, nick11a, Kaback9, ACeInTheHole

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby Jtgshu » Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:47 pm

There is a few freights daily that go over that section back and forth to Browns yard - but they enter at Wood (east of PA station) and exit at Essay (east of South Amboy, right over the bridge) - The steel plant is currently shut down, but there is a railcar scrapper there, and they go in a few times a week to drop off cars to get eaten by the big scissors.

A 3rd track wouldn't be necessary for freight, but for passenger trains to pass each other in that section while still allowing trains on the other track to move in the other direction, and not totally clog up the RR. An express could over take a local in that stretch, and putting in high speed (60mph) xovers at Wood would result in absolutely NO change in speed for trains diverting to the outer (or inner) track, as its only 60mph through there anyway. Right now, especialy during evening rush, an express will come in on track 2 going west, then a local on track 1 at woodbridge. The local gets held at Wood (or even Graw) for the express to pass. the express "gets ahead" but then the local catches up anyway. Also would be a good place to turn "Rahway Rockets" on the weekends (or weekdays if they were ever implemented during the week)

At least Somerville looks like they could put in other platforms if necessary in the future. Ive also been told that Westfield could have a 3rd track put in, I don't necessarily see it, but Id assume it would be on the eastbound side, adn that would become an Island. Plainflied doens't look like a 3rd track could ever be put in because of the bridges on either side of the station...

the track swing and jogs are not a big deal. They don't have speed restrictions associated with them (at least on the RVL) and the most notable one would be Cranford, where the track goes to the outside of what was the 4 tracks
On the RR, "believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see"
John, aka "JTGSHU" passed away on August 26, 2013. We honor his memory and his devotion to railroading at railroad.net.
User avatar
Jtgshu
 
Posts: 11744
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:32 pm
Location: MP 39.1

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby cruiser939 » Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:31 pm

michaelk wrote:
cruiser939 wrote:
Jtgshu wrote:
So there is still hope then for them to shift the platforms to the outside to leave room for a center third track through there maybe sometimes in future????? :)

Yes, but only if rail ops ask for that to be done.


is there a reason anyone is aware of that wouldn't always be a standard request-- dreaming of future expansion?

Yeah... it usually costs more.
To loosely quote Capt. Jack Aubrey from the movie Master and Commander: "NJT runs a railroad, not a private yacht! WE DO NOT HAVE TIME FOR YOUR DAMNED HOBBIES, SIR!"

Originator of Jeff Smith rules!
Cruiser "Awesome Justice Train Freedom America" 939
User avatar
cruiser939
 
Posts: 4060
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 3:15 pm
Location: Waiting 47 minutes at New Brunswick for my train

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby michaelk » Tue Jun 28, 2011 8:21 pm

Sucks that money always gets in the way of all the fun! ;-)
michaelk
 
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 8:53 am

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby cruiser939 » Wed Jun 29, 2011 12:12 pm

michaelk wrote:Sucks that money always gets in the way of all the fun! ;-)

I said the same thing about discovery zone. That place was the sh!t.
To loosely quote Capt. Jack Aubrey from the movie Master and Commander: "NJT runs a railroad, not a private yacht! WE DO NOT HAVE TIME FOR YOUR DAMNED HOBBIES, SIR!"

Originator of Jeff Smith rules!
Cruiser "Awesome Justice Train Freedom America" 939
User avatar
cruiser939
 
Posts: 4060
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 3:15 pm
Location: Waiting 47 minutes at New Brunswick for my train

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby amtrakowitz » Sun May 20, 2012 6:47 pm

Update from the Star-Ledger.
Emphasizing the plans are in the initial stage and that no funding sources have been identified to pay for the upgrades, NJ Transit spokeswoman Nancy Snyder said the project is moving toward that goal.

“The next step is the plan will undergo additional investigation and assessment,” Snyder said. “We expect to hit the 30 percent completion mark (of the design) by the end of the year.”

The renovation is expected to both modernize the train station and make it more accessible to people with disabilities, officials said. …

In 2009, NJ Transit announced plans to renovate and upgrade the station, which is not wheelchair accessible. Riders need to climb about 20 steep steps to get to their trains.

The new design includes an elevator shaft, two elevators, a stair/elevator landing, a high-level island platform and canopy and ramps with enclosures that connect to the existing pedestrian bridge. The bridge would be renovated and there would also be new station entries on both the eastbound and westbound sides.

Snyder said there is no timetable for construction to start because the project is in its first stage design. There are 885 boardings daily at the station, according to 2011 figures, the latest NJ Transit has.

So it's definitely an island platform. Wonder just where the funding may be coming from, when it shows up. Wonder if a third track to allow freights to pass will be included, if anything to avoid any damage to the platform by wide freight cars.
User avatar
amtrakowitz
 
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby 35dtmrs92 » Mon May 21, 2012 11:34 pm

Jtgshu wrote:A 3rd track wouldn't be necessary for freight, but for passenger trains to pass each other in that section while still allowing trains on the other track to move in the other direction, and not totally clog up the RR. An express could over take a local in that stretch, and putting in high speed (60mph) xovers at Wood would result in absolutely NO change in speed for trains diverting to the outer (or inner) track, as its only 60mph through there anyway. Right now, especialy during evening rush, an express will come in on track 2 going west, then a local on track 1 at woodbridge. The local gets held at Wood (or even Graw) for the express to pass. the express "gets ahead" but then the local catches up anyway. Also would be a good place to turn "Rahway Rockets" on the weekends (or weekdays if they were ever implemented during the week)


Any third track on the CL is a welcome improvement. But an island platform with a third track to one side would make operations messy. For example, if the third track is outside of the westbound track of the island platform, a westbound express will have no problem passing a stopped westbound local and will also leave the eastbound platform track clear for an eastbound. An eastbound express, however, would present problems if a eastbound and a westbound local are in the vicinity; the two locals would be unable to platform at the same time until the express cleared.

The obvious reason Transit is going for the island platform is to save money on staircases and elevators. I almost hope they fail to cobble the funding together before the 2013 election cycle. At least there's the chance of a more transit-friendly governor being elected, making a two-platform solution an easier sell.

As for Rahway locals, a great solution would be to extend the three tracks coming off the NEC all the way around the curve over the creek--to move GRAW away from the curve. The eastbound hole track could end in a pocket track where the line narrows to two mains, providing a layup spot for said locals. There seems to be more room to play with than where GRAW is now, and the interlocking would not be on a curve. That may be good news for speeds. Again, this depends on a change of command in Trenton and in Congress for that matter.
35dtmrs92
 
Posts: 499
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:40 am
Location: New Haven, CT

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby ryanov » Wed May 23, 2012 2:21 pm

Jtgshu wrote:Also it would be every station from NY to Red Bank with high levels - the only low levels east of Long Branch would be Monmouth Park and Little Silver (which should be combined into a year round, high level, park and ride station at Monmouth Park and LS closed but thats another topic for another thread.........)


Those downtown stations all seem pretty walkable. I'd be pretty annoyed if my station closed and became a park and ride I'd need to drive to.
|=| R. Novosielski |=|
User avatar
ryanov
 
Posts: 4815
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Newark, NJ

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby OportRailfan » Wed May 23, 2012 7:03 pm

ryanov wrote:
Jtgshu wrote:Also it would be every station from NY to Red Bank with high levels - the only low levels east of Long Branch would be Monmouth Park and Little Silver (which should be combined into a year round, high level, park and ride station at Monmouth Park and LS closed but thats another topic for another thread.........)


Those downtown stations all seem pretty walkable. I'd be pretty annoyed if my station closed and became a park and ride I'd need to drive to.


Jtgshu, you share my sentiments exactly (plus I'd rather have the station in Oceanport) ;)

Little silver's going to be the last low level on the upper CL (Monmouth Park doesn't count as it's seasonal)... something's going to need to be done soon.
Dock & Q: Last of a dying breed
User avatar
OportRailfan
 
Posts: 1825
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:43 pm
Location: MP29.7

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby 35dtmrs92 » Wed May 23, 2012 9:05 pm

I'd say that the generally intransigent attitude of LS toward trains and the impending development of Fort Monmouth will push Transit to consolidate the stops (a little bit) sooner rather than later.
35dtmrs92
 
Posts: 499
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:40 am
Location: New Haven, CT

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby OportRailfan » Thu May 24, 2012 8:59 am

35dtmrs92 wrote:I'd say that the generally intransigent attitude of LS toward trains and the impending development of Fort Monmouth will push Transit to consolidate the stops (a little bit) sooner rather than later.


Well they already tried floating the idea of a new station back by Hazen Ave. in Oceanport, but that got shot down immediately by town residents. If anything, I'd like to see a high level platform and park and ride in between the current ROW and the old Monmouth Park running track
Dock & Q: Last of a dying breed
User avatar
OportRailfan
 
Posts: 1825
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:43 pm
Location: MP29.7

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby Jtgshu » Thu May 24, 2012 1:37 pm

IIRC, NJT has made it known to Little Silver that eventually they want everything east of Long Branch to be a high level platform. Little Silver, in the usual cooperative manner that they seem to operate in, made it clear to NJT that they don't want a high level platform. It would make it more difficult to clear up the hind end (Sycamore Ave going west, Oceanport Ave going east) if it was a high level platform. They also don't want to give up the cash cow that is the parking lot.

I sometimes wonder if NJT would be quite content to close Little Silver all together and relocate the station. I know there was talk of a station at the Leonard Ave Xing behind Fort Monmouth, but that didn't seem to get real far either. That would be a great location for a station! Don't like the trains clogging up the traffic in town? No problem! Just zoom through there at 80mph then! Traffic will clear up in no time!!!

However, a full time stop at Monmouth Park (and ride!) would be ideal as well, and maybe with the redevelopment of the racetrack in the coming years (hopefully) it would warrant a year round stop as well as using that huge empty field for a commuter lot would be great!

It would also be nice to consolidate the stations, and have one less station stop in the summer time (speaking of which, service starts this weekend to MP, btw)
On the RR, "believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see"
John, aka "JTGSHU" passed away on August 26, 2013. We honor his memory and his devotion to railroading at railroad.net.
User avatar
Jtgshu
 
Posts: 11744
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:32 pm
Location: MP 39.1

Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby jp1822 » Thu May 24, 2012 9:26 pm

Jtgshu wrote:While creeping down a the Coast Line tonight following a delayed "express" ahead of me, I was thinking how horrendous the scehdules sometimes are on the Coast Line.....

But as cruiser said, "its not the NEC"....so that means its basically a one way road. It might as well be 251 from Graw to Bay Head....


Even as a "one way road" the North Jersey Coast Line (NJCL) schedules could use overhauling to better allow for express train service. A super express train, followed by a regular express, and then a local wouldn't be that hard to try and put in place.

Example of a super express: Woodbridge, Matawan, Middletown, Long Branch. This would be ideal for the 5:26 p.m. out of NYP, followed by a regular express train such as the 5:32 p.m. (and perhaps that train skips stations served by the Super Express).

Scheduling hasn't changed on the Coast Line - except for adding stops and time, even to express trains - in over a decade. And new traffic patterns seem to warrant this.

So planning stations for passing sidings etc. or a third track should be considered by NJT.
jp1822
 
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 10:03 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby OportRailfan » Fri May 25, 2012 1:38 pm

jp1822 wrote:
Jtgshu wrote:While creeping down a the Coast Line tonight following a delayed "express" ahead of me, I was thinking how horrendous the scehdules sometimes are on the Coast Line.....

But as cruiser said, "its not the NEC"....so that means its basically a one way road. It might as well be 251 from Graw to Bay Head....


Even as a "one way road" the North Jersey Coast Line (NJCL) schedules could use overhauling to better allow for express train service. A super express train, followed by a regular express, and then a local wouldn't be that hard to try and put in place.

Example of a super express: Woodbridge, Matawan, Middletown, Long Branch. This would be ideal for the 5:26 p.m. out of NYP, followed by a regular express train such as the 5:32 p.m. (and perhaps that train skips stations served by the Super Express).

Scheduling hasn't changed on the Coast Line - except for adding stops and time, even to express trains - in over a decade. And new traffic patterns seem to warrant this.

So planning stations for passing sidings etc. or a third track should be considered by NJT.


Something needs to be overhauled. Trip times suck.
Dock & Q: Last of a dying breed
User avatar
OportRailfan
 
Posts: 1825
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:43 pm
Location: MP29.7

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby amtrakowitz » Fri May 25, 2012 4:58 pm

jp1822 wrote:
Jtgshu wrote:While creeping down a the Coast Line tonight following a delayed "express" ahead of me, I was thinking how horrendous the scehdules sometimes are on the Coast Line.....

But as ------- said, "its not the NEC"....so that means its basically a one way road. It might as well be 251 from Graw to Bay Head....

Even as a "one way road" the North Jersey Coast Line (NJCL) schedules could use overhauling to better allow for express train service. A super express train, followed by a regular express, and then a local wouldn't be that hard to try and put in place.

Example of a super express: Woodbridge, Matawan, Middletown, Long Branch. This would be ideal for the 5:26 p.m. out of NYP, followed by a regular express train such as the 5:32 p.m. (and perhaps that train skips stations served by the Super Express).

Scheduling hasn't changed on the Coast Line - except for adding stops and time, even to express trains - in over a decade. And new traffic patterns seem to warrant this.

So planning stations for passing sidings etc. or a third track should be considered by NJT.

Hmm. NJT reduced Perth Amboy from four tracks to two, and recently reduced South Amboy from three tracks to two. Something tells me that such a trend would not reverse itself in spite of any practicality or even need.
User avatar
amtrakowitz
 
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: Perth Amboy High Level Platforms

Postby Jtgshu » Sat May 26, 2012 1:41 am

Not quite a valid comparison Amtrakowitz....

Perth Amboy was double tracked in the 80s, I want to say 1985 but im not positive off hand, but either way, it was a long time ago, and things are much different now than they were then. Also, the Chemical coast was/is no longer a major passenger route so to have 2 tracks heading directly onto the CC and the local tracks on the outside is just a bit overkill for the level of passenger and freight service in that area then, and to a point, now.

An Island platform there makes sense, saves on construction costs and maintenance, having to only deal with one platform. Also, it does allow an extra track to be possibly built on the outside, and if they wanted to, they could put an outer platform for it in the future, otherwise, it would just pass through the station area with no interference from the passengers, etc. It also prevents the problem that exists at Westfield and Plainfield on the RVL, where they killed the chance of expansion out there by building the 2 platforms on the ROW of the outer tracks. Even if NJT doesn't do it, now, building it this way would allow them to do something in the future if they wanted to.

South Amboy did go from 3 tracks to 2, but you neglected to mention the building/rebuilding of "the turn track" west of Rare. (actually the Raritan River interchange track was wired up, and a new track was built next to it as the "new" Raritan River interchange track). While occasionally track 4 (the track that was removed in SA) was used to pass broken down trains or locals to overtake expresses, the same thing is done now with the turn track. Track 4 became useless when Oleary Blvd Xing was built, as the track 4 pocket, inbetween Rare and the former home signal at Church (now an automatic) was shortened and made quite tight. Track 4 was used often to turn SA Locals, but it was a slow move, as they had to cross over at Essay (10mph) or a faster move at Wood, but then that delayed eastbounds by SA Locals running west on track 2. There are flaws with the Turn Track, but it does work and seems to speed things up faster than moves down track 4 would. Not to mention, track 4 was in HORRIBLE shape....

It would be great if the schedules were overhauled, but the Coast Line doesn't exactly have a whole lot of capacity....lots of times trains are riding each others signals. But there are a few ways to speed things up a little bit, unfortunately, they cost money....but i think sooner or later, they are going to have to put a third track in, or a few more interlockings and crossovers in in a few places to squeeze out a lil more capacity....
On the RR, "believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see"
John, aka "JTGSHU" passed away on August 26, 2013. We honor his memory and his devotion to railroading at railroad.net.
User avatar
Jtgshu
 
Posts: 11744
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:32 pm
Location: MP 39.1

PreviousNext

Return to New Jersey Transit NJT Rail and Light Rail LRT

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests