New Dinky to Nassau Street

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

Moderators: Tadman, Kaback9, nick11a, ACeInTheHole

Post Reply
amtrakowitz
Posts: 1112
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by amtrakowitz » Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:04 pm

25Hz wrote:Show me a link to LRVs that can serve BOTH high and low platforms on the SAME LINE. I have never seen any ever anywhere online or in person
Well, Pittsburgh Light Rail has doors for both high and low platforms, albeit separate doors. So does the Karlsruhe Stadtbahn (tram-train) in Germany, those being the same doors. So does the San Francisco Muni light rail, also the same doors.

ExCon90
Posts: 4216
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:22 pm

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by ExCon90 » Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:31 pm

In France, the light-rail system in Nice has two stretches crossing very wide plazas where overhead wire was rejected for aesthetic reasons. The cars drop the pans and operate on stored energy in some form, then when they get under the wire on the other side they raise the pans to recharge the batteries or whatever they are while powering the cars. Seems to work OK.

Rodney Fisk
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:30 pm

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by Rodney Fisk » Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:49 pm

Continuing what seems to have become mainly a dialog (diatribe) between me and 25Hz: As Amtrakowitz points out there are LRVs (streetcars) than currently operate from both high- and low-level platforms, but that question is moot in the current situation. The New Dinky will operate between two high-level platforms ONLY.

Based on the current proposal for GRT coordinating with LRT, supercaps will no longer be required for operation beyond the catenary. But if they were still in the picture, energy would be stored not in one, but in a series of off-the-shelf supercaps, just as electric buses use a series of batteries for energy capture and storage. Furthermore, the VLRTs we are proposing are neither huge nor heavy; they weigh 22 tons. (The current Dinky weighs 140 tons.) Fact after fact, compared with your progressively more hare-brained assumptions and suggested alternatives. Extending Jersey-Avenue trains with a new wye at Princeton Junction: sheer lunacy. Additional operating subsidy would approach $5 million a year, all to serve fewer passengers. Now that goes beyond lunacy to being truly daft.

The New Dinky system will be independently operated with input from NJ Transit limited to schedule coordination, with no financial contribution whatsoever. The widely used Federal "Small Starts" program is designed to provide capital support for projects just like this. Princeton University's capital expenditures for the new station and surrounding infrastructure will provide more than the required "local match".

The LR55 system (concrete lintels in pavement with steel track laid in a polymer matrix) has been in service for 18 years in England with no maintenance, even around curves, with no lateral bracing. In Princeton the entire length of the track extension is on a straight alignment. However, the new track would be obviated by the use of GRT instead, so this also is moot.

Between this topic and the one on NJ Transit Rail, serious comments and criticism seem overwhelmed by petty bloviation.

Rodney Fisk
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:30 pm

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by Rodney Fisk » Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:04 pm

25Hz wrote:The more i hear details of this concept the more i'm certain it will never happen. Have fun with it though, seems like a hobby you're really into.

If the main issue is service, then they should rework the agreement or whatever needs being done to provide 5-8 round trips an hour.
Hobby? My entire professional career has been devoted to transporting passengers for hire under the provisions of the Railway Labor Act. I organized the National Interurban Consortium, including Siemens and GE Signal. I convinced Bucks County to contribute $2 million and PennDOT to contribute $7 million, with Lehman Brothers underwriting the entire project for $45 million. In addition, Siemens redesigned their European DMU for our needs and contributed $16 million in shadow equity.

Rework the labor agreement? SEPTA has been trying for forty years and NJ Transit for thirty to do just that. If the unions gave in on this, it would be the dreaded "foot in the door". The only way around this impasse is to start anew, and that's what we're working with stakeholders to do.

dowlingm
Posts: 1173
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:42 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by dowlingm » Wed Jul 16, 2014 3:13 pm

How many miles of LR55 have been laid at this point? My understanding was that it only existed in small stretches of the Sheffield system, and a test installation somewhere else.

Rodney Fisk
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:30 pm

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by Rodney Fisk » Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:15 pm

You're correct. What is so surprising to me that this new concept hasn't been more widely adopted.

Matt Johnson
Posts: 4153
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:57 pm
Location: Hazlet, NJ

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by Matt Johnson » Sat Jul 19, 2014 6:37 pm

I'm still curious as to whether a solution similar to this could be implemented for relatively low cost and also be operated by non-union hourly wage employees, greatly reducing labor costs.

Rodney Fisk
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:30 pm

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by Rodney Fisk » Mon Jul 21, 2014 12:06 pm

I guess cuz any train as slow as the Toonerville Trolley just ain't worth running, but of course your post was a joke. . .

25Hz
Posts: 4625
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:06 pm
Location: Newtown, PA (or PATH towards WTC)
Contact:

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by 25Hz » Sun Aug 03, 2014 3:02 am

Rodney Fisk wrote:
25Hz wrote:The more i hear details of this concept the more i'm certain it will never happen. Have fun with it though, seems like a hobby you're really into.

If the main issue is service, then they should rework the agreement or whatever needs being done to provide 5-8 round trips an hour.
Hobby? My entire professional career has been devoted to transporting passengers for hire under the provisions of the Railway Labor Act. I organized the National Interurban Consortium, including Siemens and GE Signal. I convinced Bucks County to contribute $2 million and PennDOT to contribute $7 million, with Lehman Brothers underwriting the entire project for $45 million. In addition, Siemens redesigned their European DMU for our needs and contributed $16 million in shadow equity.
Contribute to what?

Also, why is anything in pennsylvania paying for a princeton light rail system? What happened to no subsidy?

Again, the more i learn the more i'm convinced that this is a farce beyond logic & reason. In all likelihood, the rail branch will be totally shut & a bus put in if anything were to change.
Next stop the square, journal square station next!

Rodney Fisk
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:30 pm

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by Rodney Fisk » Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:14 pm

Siemens contributed to the viability of the proposal by agreeing to buy back its DMUs at their purchase price, depreciated over 25 years. The county and state contributed the local match. This was a Pennsylvania project, rejected after a year's refining the contract when Septa determined that having non-union crews operating through its territory (even if closed-door) would be untenable during upcoming union negotiations.

The Princeton project is a completely separate proposal, capital financing by Princeton University (local match) and the Federal "Small Starts" program covering all other capital costs. The New Dinky will cover all operating costs with fare-box revenue, thus requiring no operating subsidy whatsoever, a first in seventy years.

When NJ Transit proposed converting the Dinky to BRT, some 200 townsfolk turned out a a public meeting (and some 7000 more on Facebook) to argue for continuing the Dinky as a rail link to the Junction. NJ Transit conceded and has not even mentioned BRT as an alternative since--and never will.

With a New Dinky meeting every train on the NEC and returning $2800 per day in operating subsidy to the state, this is a win-win for everyone concerned. Your farcical logic and illogical reasoning seem to have convinced no one but you. By the way, what are your credentials beyond membership in the American Luddite Association?

25Hz
Posts: 4625
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:06 pm
Location: Newtown, PA (or PATH towards WTC)
Contact:

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by 25Hz » Sun Aug 10, 2014 1:46 am

So there is a subsidy. Farebox won't be enough to cover operating costs. Public passenger transportation is a money losing paradigm. t's not meant to make money, it's meant to serve the public. Electricity costs alone will eat up farebox revenue.
Next stop the square, journal square station next!

dowlingm
Posts: 1173
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:42 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by dowlingm » Sun Aug 10, 2014 8:40 am

If a public transit service doesn't need subsidy there's a pretty good chance not enough service is being run.

25Hz
Posts: 4625
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:06 pm
Location: Newtown, PA (or PATH towards WTC)
Contact:

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by 25Hz » Sun Aug 10, 2014 7:19 pm

dowlingm wrote:If a public transit service doesn't need subsidy there's a pretty good chance not enough service is being run.
Image
Next stop the square, journal square station next!

morris&essex4ever
Posts: 2012
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:11 pm
Location: MP 20.5

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by morris&essex4ever » Sun Aug 10, 2014 8:40 pm

dowlingm wrote:If a public transit service doesn't need subsidy there's a pretty good chance not enough service is being run.
Well, NJT's NEC service makes money(because NJT doesn't pay for maintenance of the ROW) so does that the NEC needs more service between Trenton and NYC? :)
"To cure the British disease with socialism was like trying to cure leukaemia with leeches." Margaret Thatcher

kilroy
Posts: 897
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 am
Location: Central Jersey

Re: New Dinky to Nassau Street

Post by kilroy » Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:34 pm

25Hz wrote:So there is a subsidy. Farebox won't be enough to cover operating costs. Public passenger transportation is a money losing paradigm. t's not meant to make money, it's meant to serve the public. Electricity costs alone will eat up farebox revenue.
If you're referring to the statement "returning $2800 per day in operating subsidy to the state" that sentence says the State will be getting back $2800 a day that is is paying to subsidize the current operation. I don't know if the statement is accurate but I can comprehend english.
Why do we drive on parkways and park in driveways?

Post Reply

Return to “New Jersey Transit NJT Rail and Light Rail LRT”