Waterbury Branch Thread

[Jeff Smith]

Okay, now I know the second "Jim": WTNH (AP)

This article is more clear than the article from Rep-Am. Not surprising.

Waterbury rail commuters to comment on state transit plans

Jim Gildea (Gill-‘day), vice chairman of the Connecticut Commuter Rail Council, says the express train to Stamford has been restored and weekend service increased in the past year. The Waterbury branch links to the New Haven line of Metro-North between Connecticut and New York City.

Rick Dunne, executive director of the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments, said commuters’ views are being sought as the state Department of Transportation makes more improvements along the Waterbury branch.

The Connecticut Commuter Rail Council is sponsoring a forum for commuters at 7 p.m. Wednesday at the Naugatuck Historical Society at the Naugatuck train station.

[runningwithscalpels]

The P40's are for SLE service and only one SLE set makes trip on waterbury only cause same crew runs that set to stamford and runs revenue rush hour train for SLE.
MN does not normally run SLE sets in MN services.

Hey, don't shoot the messenger, just because I shed light on a rumor being spread doesn't mean I believe it

They haven't run SLE equipment since they changed the Waterbury set to being based out of Stamford. I liked taking that train Friday afternoons!

Rumor has it, good old Blumenthal was supposed to grace this meeting with his presence so now I'd love to know what transpired.

[Bill D]

Rumor has it, good old Blumenthal was supposed to grace this meeting with his presence so now I'd love to know what transpired.

First the good news, Blumenthal was a no-show.

This meeting was calmer than some of the previous ones. CDOT commissioner Jim Redeker did most of the talking, touting the state's transportation plan (Link here: http://www.ct.gov/dot/site/default.asp - refer to the "Let's Go CT" documents). Mike Donnarumma of Metro North was also among those participating in the discussion.

Some of the items discussed:

Work on the Derby siding will ramp up as soon as work is complete on the interlocking west of Stamford, probably late October to early November.

A Beacon Falls siding will be included in the signalization project, which is expected to be completed by 2018.

PTC testing will commence on a portion of the east end of the New Haven Line in the spring of 2016. It will not be fully implemented before 2018, at the earliest.

The SLE locomotives, as well as the 4 units being purchased from NJT, will be rehabbed within 2 years. (Redeker jokingly mentioned that he received the "former employee's discount" on the NJT locomotives)

A 5 year goal is to replace all the current CDOT locomotives and coaches with new equipment.

Static testing of M-8's on SLE is expected to being in the near future, with more rigorous testing to follow. (Did not hear any firm date on this)

Walk bridge will be replaced by building a pair of two track bridges which will be floated into place of the existing structure, as to minimize service disruptions.

The fall schedule will go into effect October 4, but Devon transfer will remain in service until about November 15. At that time train 1923 will resume running through to Stamford.

In response to audience questions:

The current level of service on the branch is the maximum that is possible until the signalization and siding project is complete.

CDOT is working with the city of Waterbury to make improvements at the station there, including better parking, security and amenities utilizing the old waiting room of the station building.

It is not possible to add Stratford as a regular stop for Waterbury branch trains. Also not possible to have an afternoon peak through train from Stamford.

Through service from Waterbury to New Haven would not be feasible, but once more frequent branch service is available, there would be more opportunities to make transfers at Bridgeport to reach New Haven.

Some people asked if Devon transfer could become permanent, but were told no. There was no mention of any future plans for a station there.

I believe that this covers most of the points brought up at the forum.

Bill

Edit: Funding sources to complete all the goals have not yet been identified.

[Scalziand]

$20 says the people who have been complaining about the deadheading set not picking them up and being told that it affects > 1000 other passengers will again complain about it. I am interested to see what the story with the NJT P40's are - the people organizing this seem to think they were bought for the purpose of increased Waterbury service...although I suspect that myth will be swiftly debunked.

Right on with the deadheading complaints again.

Btw, I had the question about Waterbury-New Haven service. Not that surprised that past service was poorly patronized, after all, the branch linking Derby and New Haven was abandoned.

[Jeff Smith]

I've also mentioned NH-Waterbury service, but I guess they're concerned with already having one side (Bridgeport) of cross-over traffic interference; two would be too much. The alternative is via Berlin; something they may be looking at in conjunction with NHHS. That could be a connection or direct/"around-the-horn" service. And a lot may depend on how they develop East Bridgeport (from the notes above, and thanks) they seem to have eliminated Devon as a possibility for a permanent transfer.

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

$20 says the people who have been complaining about the deadheading set not picking them up and being told that it affects > 1000 other passengers will again complain about it. I am interested to see what the story with the NJT P40's are - the people organizing this seem to think they were bought for the purpose of increased Waterbury service...although I suspect that myth will be swiftly debunked.

Right on with the deadheading complaints again.

Btw, I had the question about Waterbury-New Haven service. Not that surprised that past service was poorly patronized, after all, the branch linking Derby and New Haven was abandoned.

New Haven isn't a bad enough commute from Waterbury. I-691 from Cheshire to Meriden is a breeze, and you can do a pick-em' of I-91 or Wilbur Cross Hwy. from the interchange in Meriden to get to all parts of New Haven County. The route duplication Meriden-North Haven makes that pretty much the most consistently tolerable segment of I-91 anywhere between New Haven and Northampton, MA during rush. And the last couple infill miles of I-84 add-a-lane Cheshire-Waterbury is finally under construction for solving the last clog in reaching 691 from Waterbury. Throw in fact that at full ramp-up a Hartford-Bridgeport service pattern on the Hartford Line is is inevitable then I think all New Haven County demand from Waterbury is amply covered by a long-term stable highway drive to Meriden, then picking up the train there.

Hartford is the way worse commute from Waterbury today. It was yesterday. It'll be even moreso tomorrow. It'll be virtually impossible when 84mageddon wreaks havoc. So there's no change in trending here over the long haul: Hartford rail service is an acute need from Waterbury, New Haven rail service isn't. Bridgeport is where things start to get intriguing if it becomes a more substantial transfer node of converging routes. Hartford Line is serendipitously set up where overlapping service patterns of Springfield-New Haven and Hartford-Bridgeport both clock in at roughly the same 60 miles round number, and probably not a heck of a lot different on the schedule if stop selection west of NHV were kept judicious and fairly wide-spaced. Hartford/Bradley-Waterbury + Waterbury-Bridgeport run-thrus are an obvious attractive prospect if the Highland gets commuter rail, since Bridgeport may as well be on Long Island as far as New Britain, Farmington, Bristol, Plainville, etc. are concerned. For off-peaks it would probably cost less to operate HFD-WBY and WBY-BGP as one contiguous service instead of terminating halves at Waterbury with separate schedules.


As for Devon transfer, I don't think that's gone. It's just going to take a lot of $$$ to reconfigure stuff around the wye so the transfer can happen on Waterbury's and not New Haven's track. That means touching the land around the electrical substation, or simply swapping the piece of the substation that's right in the middle of the wye to the other side next to the river. Not too expensive in the grand scheme of things, but you need a reason to do it because of the up-front utility costs. And there's no reason to do that until service levels on the branch are on an accelerating upward trajectory. Not going to happen at minimum until the signal system is built, a layover is built, and the next equipment procurement cycle gives CDOT a shot at transactionally netting a few more (new or old) cars. Realistically...the "go for it" trigger re: Devon probably is rooted in whether Hartford-Waterbury is a go and offers up a cumulative service pattern potpourri diverse enough to demand it.

[NH2060]

The SLE locomotives, as well as the 4 units being purchased from NJT, will be rehabbed within 2 years.

WELL IT'S ABOUT TIME! Even the best Alcos need fixing

A 5 year goal is to replace all the current CDOT locomotives and coaches with new equipment.

This one really threw me for a loop.. I would've assumed that they would just pick up however many NJT/SEPTA/MBTA, etc coaches and Amtrak Gennies end up on the second hand market. Perhaps they think shiny new trains will entice more potential riders and -in the long run- provide a better return-on-investment. The timing will certainly be right to do so. And I admit the idea of NH "McGinnis" painted Chargers, F125s, whatever is quite intriguing

Static testing of M-8's on SLE is expected to being in the near future, with more rigorous testing to follow. (Did not hear any firm date on this)

At this point why are they even bothering? Unless this is to aid in the design of the M8A/M10.

Also not possible to have an afternoon peak through train from Stamford.

Good grief how many times has this question been asked and answered over the years?? They'd be better off turning one of the Bridgeport semi expresses into a WTBY through train. And that won't even be on the table for who knows how long.

Some people asked if Devon transfer could become permanent, but were told no. There was no mention of any future plans for a station there.

As harsh as it sounds at first it makes total sense. No point in spending $175M for a station without the infrastructure up and down the branch to support 2x or dare I say 3x the current frequencies. It does show that there was at least some interest in keeping the current setup as a permanent transfer point. 'Course it would need a proper station name like "Devon Junction". But I digress.

Edit: Funding sources to complete all the goals have not yet been identified.

Aaaaand there lies the rub

Hartford/Bradley-Waterbury + Waterbury-Bridgeport run-thrus are an obvious attractive prospect if the Highland gets commuter rail, since Bridgeport may as well be on Long Island as far as New Britain, Farmington, Bristol, Plainville, etc. are concerned. For off-peaks it would probably cost less to operate HFD-WBY and WBY-BGP as one contiguous service instead of terminating halves at Waterbury with separate schedules.

Since CDOT has been looking into have a yard/facility @ WTBY it would probably make sense to just have all but say the first and last trains of the night run Bridgeport-Hartford and just have the Branch + the Highland renamed the "Waterbury Line" with WTBY as the epicenter similar to Hartford with the Hartford Line. Doesn't make sense to require a transfer if both BPT-WTBY and WTBY-HFD are being run and funded by the same agency with no conflicts. The first and final run(s) or two of the night could be that way just to permit the equipment to head into the yard without needing to deadhead

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

Hartford/Bradley-Waterbury + Waterbury-Bridgeport run-thrus are an obvious attractive prospect if the Highland gets commuter rail, since Bridgeport may as well be on Long Island as far as New Britain, Farmington, Bristol, Plainville, etc. are concerned. For off-peaks it would probably cost less to operate HFD-WBY and WBY-BGP as one contiguous service instead of terminating halves at Waterbury with separate schedules.

Since CDOT has been looking into have a yard/facility @ WTBY it would probably make sense to just have all but say the first and last trains of the night run Bridgeport-Hartford and just have the Branch + the Highland renamed the "Waterbury Line" with WTBY as the epicenter similar to Hartford with the Hartford Line. Doesn't make sense to require a transfer if both BPT-WTBY and WTBY-HFD are being run and funded by the same agency with no conflicts. The first and final run(s) or two of the night could be that way just to permit the equipment to head into the yard without needing to deadhead

That was my thinking. At rush hour it makes sense to operate them as halves because that allows for packing the schedule a little denser on two lines that are going to still be majority single-track, and keep the efficiency square on the HFD or Fairfield County commute destinations. And thus the layover is going to be critical infrastructure for staging first/last trains of the day and doing shift changes from peak to off-peak.

But on off-peaks you'd probably net a fuller and more economical schedule to just do run-thrus sweeping all the way through. Fewer crews and trainsets required, better seat utilization of the trainsets that are running, and meets few and far between meaning little need to hedge on extra double-track padding. And it would net better ridership catchment overall being able to put any intermediate stop pair on the same schedule.


May mean that as a non-GCT route some new agreements get hashed out where the Waterburys get trimmed off the Metro North system map and re-grouped under the CDOT/Central CT umbrella. So long as that can get worked out where a crew change isn't required to run thru from Devon to Bridgeport it's probably a cleaner way to organize the system. As long as CDOT has dreams of thru-running something from Hartford to NYC there's going to be horse-trading talks going on and on and on with the MTA. So squaring the Waterburys as part of whatever the final verdict becomes on Hartford shouldn't be a hard detail, since it would just be a footnote tacked onto the more consequential Hartford decision.

[jdb]

Looks like they may be getting more equipment .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterbury_Branch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Jeff Smith]

JDB, welcome to the forum. However, I don't see any details on the Wiki page about getting more equipment. Am I missing something or can you provide an alternate source? I do note they are talking about "newer equipment", but that's not really providing much detail. I'm not sure the Wiki page is accurate in that regard. MNRR/CtDOT have nothing in the near future for pooled equipment for this line. The only place I know of where equipment needs to be acquired MAY be The Hartford Line. CtDOT's current non-pooled equipment being used on SLE is sufficient for start-up of that service, but they're probably looking at additional equipment for full service. But that's not Waterbury.

[jdb]

Thanks. Under the upgrade section it mentioned "CTDOT also purchased locomotives from NJ Transit that, once overhauled, will be put into branch line service." Not sure who updates that site, Tried to click on link but it didn't work.

I'll just have to keep an eye on this site to see what happens.

[Jeff Smith]

There's a separate thread in here on the NJT equipment transaction. According to others, the equipment is sitting on the Lackawanna Cutoff. I'm not sure if the deal closed or not. For that matter, that same thread posits CtDOT even asked MNRR how it could get the FL9's running again.

CtDOT has quite a diverse group of power, even including some old Amtrak Gennies. Supposedly the idea is to get some of the power out for rebuild/overhaul. There's nothing new on the immediate horizon. CtDOT has been adept at getting life out of someone else's "stuff". In some manner, they've behaved like a Class-III. I imply no criticism; it's been effective at kicking the can down the road. Once NHHS/Hartford Line is up and running, there'll be a lot of pressure for other service improvements and expansions, and a lot more pressure on the equipment pool that isn't part of MNRR. And at some point, "hand-me-downs" isn't going to get it.

[Backshophoss]

Believe the ex-NJT P-40's are still stuck somewhere at MMC,the ALP-44's are rusting on the Cutoff's trackage.
The ex-Amtrak P-40's have become "Honorary" Alcos,need a overhaul NOW(or new tubros at least).
Has there been an announcement of when ConnDOT/MN will finally start the Branch signal project?

[Jeff Smith]

Thanks BSH; I knew I waas mixing it up a bit. I've been reading too many threads

My Citizen News
<SNIPS>

Sidings to allow for more trains 8/3/15
...
The state Department of Transportation has begun a project to signalize the single-track rail line, which runs from Bridgeport to Waterbury. As part of the project, the state plans to build passing sidings in Devon, Derby, Beacon Falls and Waterbury.

The branch is scheduled to be fully signalized by December 2018. The passing sidings also will be installed by that time, allowing two-way train traffic to commence.
...

[Jeff Smith]

My Citizen News 9/6/15
<SNIPS>

Upgrades coming for branch line
...
Metro-North has begun installing a passing siding in Derby, which is scheduled to be finished by early November. Other sidings are planned for Devon, Beacon Falls and Waterbury.

Signalization, which will control the movement of train traffic on the single-track line, must be implemented before the passing sidings can allow two trains to pass.

The siding in Devon could potentially be used to free the tracks of a disabled train, even before signalization is completed, said Mike Donnarumma, superintendent of the Waterbury branch for Metro-North.

As it stands, when a train breaks down in “dark territory,” an 8-mile stretch from Devon to Beacon Falls that lacks signals, it can be stranded for hours. Due to federal regulations, a rescue train can only travel at a top speed of 15 mph in dark territory, Donnarumma said.