Metro-North Hudson Line Electrification

[njt/mnrrbuff]

It would be great if all four tracks from Croton Harmon Station to CP13 had third rail. It would help provide flexibility, especially for the Croton-Harmon super expresses being able to go around another local train.

[Rockingham Racer]

What's a "Croton Harmon super express"?

[njt/mnrrbuff]

These trains often run express from 125th Street to Tarrytown. They run during the week and during the rush hours-heading south in the am and north in the pm.

[ExCon90]

guaranteed the cost to restore is less than the 30 years maintenance they saved.

Absolutely. On the PRR the rule of thumb was that if a track was expected to be out of service for more than one year it was cheaper to tear it up and then put it back later if necessary.

[Jeff Smith]

Same deal as the Tracks You Want Back thread except here is where we can discuss Hudson electrification, and I'm guilty of it as well, let's leave Danbury out of it.

[NHRRJOHN]

Before thinking of going to overhead electrification, you need to check the clearances on the bridges, etc. along the Hudson Line. The amount of clearance required is actually very significant.

[Rockingham Racer]

There's a tunnel or two to be concerned about as well.

[EuroStar]

No reason to worry about the tunnels or the bridges below Croton. Those would never get catenary. The extra cost would never be justified and the NIMBYs are going to be too strong against the poles messing up their views of the Hudson. North of Croton is much easier, but it is really dependent on the state whether it wants to pony up the money for the catenary and realistically I do not see it. It is a lot of wire to justify it up to Poughkeepsie or Albany. Diesels it will be for my and your lifetime. The diesels will probably get some Tesla like batteries to address the gaping issue across switches, but wire ... I do not see it.

[GirlOnTheTrain]

They're never gonna string wire to Poughkeepsie. I think CTrailfan is the only person who thinks it's a logical idea.

[Jeff Smith]

A few years back, it MAY have been mentioned in a 20-year plan by MNRR. I'm pretty sure it was for third rail, not catenary. Catenary makes no sense at all for MNRR, and either would require an EIS that would take years and generate much opposition.

[Rockingham Racer]

A few years back, it MAY have been mentioned in a 20-year plan by MNRR. I'm pretty sure it was for third rail, not catenary. Catenary makes no sense at all for MNRR, and either would require an EIS that would take years and generate much opposition.

When I used to hang out at JO Tower in Woodlawn, the rumor was on the move then, too. That was around 1970.

[nomis]

Mod Note: moved the Danbury Re-electrification talk to the Danbury thread which has the study and historical info in the 20+ some pages.