Why Is The RiverLine Diesel Powered

I am a strict believe in electrified railroads, and I am glad that the light rail system up north runs off electricity, but it seems that in these times of high fuel prices, perhaps the RiverLine should be electrified.

Can we send you the bill to electify as the State is broke?

It was much cheaper to build it as a diesel line than to electify it.

That didn't stop the state from electrifying the HBLR. The state was broke then as well. It certainly costs more to electrify, although the operating costs are lower; I'd hate to think of the DLRT formerly known as SNJLRT having costs of up to $80 million per mile (from the $33 million per mile it did cost).

There was no big rush to electrify the railroads back during the 1970s oil crisis. Some folk thought of bringing back steam traction, though.

Everything is political when it comes to decisions like this. NJT was buying the railroad from Conrail, who wished to retain rights to run freight over it mostly to access Pavonia Yard in Camden, but also to serve local customers further north. Perhaps putting 750V DC overhead wires on the railroad was a sticking point? Just speculation; I doubt that saving money really was such a concern over in Trenton, otherwise this line would have been reactivated as commuter rail (which would have opened up the possibility of direct Camden-NYP service what with the ALP-45DPs that NJT has now; not so possible nowadays).

Why , i think its fine the way it is...it gets very low ridership compared to NLR and HBLR and it looks like it will stay like that... The stations are also spaced far apart unlike the HBLR or NLR or LRT in general....

Another question I feel worthwhile to ask is why is the Riverline single track? I think that's the biggest obstacle to being able to increase headways enough to warrant electrification.

I agree that it seems there aren't enough passengers now to need service more frequently than every 15 minutes, but it also seems they need at least a bit more double tracking or extending passing sidings in order to help assure they can maintain the current headways, without as much schedule padding as they have. Despite this padding I frequently see trains running at least 5 minutes late delaying all other trains on the line.

I probably shouldn't call 15 minutes the current headway. That had been the rush hour headway until Aug 2011's hurricane caused our current 'temporary' schedule. With a few exceptions they now run 30 minutes.

Patrick Boylan wrote:Another question I feel worthwhile to ask is why is the Riverline single track? ...

Same reason it wasn't electrified: to minimize initial investment, which the legislators confuse with cost. Gov Whitman couldn't have gotten the plan through her legislature if the initial investment had been higher.
Note that some of the passing sidings end (or begin) just before (past) a grade crossing. This was done on purpose because a single track grade crossing was cheaper to build than a double track grade crossing.

It's a conspiracy, I tell ya,...a CONSPIRACY....

chuchubob wrote: Note that some of the passing sidings end (or begin) just before (past) a grade crossing. This was done on purpose because a single track grade crossing was cheaper to build than a double track grade crossing.

Can you point out some of these places where the siding begins or ends just before or after a grade crossing? I don't think they're prevalent enough that we can conclude they planned to do it a lot to hold down costs.

In fact I'd say the double track bridges over rt 73 and Rancocas Creek would have been bigger money savers if they had been only single track.

Do you mean Palmyra-Riverton, where single track begins about halfway between the rt 73 bridge and the 1st of 10 grade crossings, Public Rd?
But then double track in Cinaminson begins just after a single track culvert over a creek, but before the first of 3 grade crossings at Read St
and continues a fair distance after the last of those 3 grade crossings at Taylor's La, but before another single track creek culvert.

Fairview St Riverton does look like it falls under your definition of single track grade crossing near the end of double track.

Oh, and of course when I say 'point out' I mean show us pictures. It's your own fault for having set the precedent these many years of always having excellent photos to share.

The passing tracks also have to be at specific locations relative to each other to permit uniform headways. (And the longer they are the easier it is to accomplish a nonstop meet -- and the shorter they are the cheaper they are to build and maintain.) --sigh-- Nothing is free.

Patrick Boylan wrote: Can you point out some of these places where the siding begins or ends just before or after a grade crossing? I don't think they're prevalent enough that we can conclude they planned to do it a lot to hold down costs...

My statement was based on information provided by NJ Transit during construction. Keeping down initial investment was top priority at the time. Bombardier Transportation has spend much NJ Transit money subsequent to the opening to provide enough service to meet the unanticipated demand.

It's diesel because of it still being a freight line plus the massive cost of wiring such a long stretch of track(s). HBLR would make no sense to run with diesel. It has more of a streetcar operation, whereas the river line is a mini-commuter rail line a-la RDC. That's just my take on it though, having ridden both.

Patrick Boylan wrote:Another question I feel worthwhile to ask is why is the Riverline single track? I think that's the biggest obstacle to being able to increase headways enough to warrant electrification.

I agree that it seems there aren't enough passengers now to need service more frequently than every 15 minutes, but it also seems they need at least a bit more double tracking or extending passing sidings in order to help assure they can maintain the current headways, without as much schedule padding as they have. Despite this padding I frequently see trains running at least 5 minutes late delaying all other trains on the line.

I probably shouldn't call 15 minutes the current headway. That had been the rush hour headway until Aug 2011's hurricane caused our current 'temporary' schedule. With a few exceptions they now run 30 minutes.

I think you meant decrease headways; i.e., shortening the headways.

yep, I need some remedial English classes. Shorten headways = increase service frequency.

diesel powered River LINE track inspection

chuchubob wrote:diesel powered River LINE track inspection

Well, catenary systems can usually be made to accommodate vehicles of different clearances, if that is what you are getting at. The RiverLine could serve as a key part of a much more extensive LRT network for South Jersey but there are definitely obstacles to that.