Railroad Forums
Did the electricfication plans for the PJ go on the shelf?
- Discussion of the past and present operations of the Long Island Rail Road.
Moderator: Liquidcamphor
by Long Island 7285
NIMBY when ESA is over 30 years old, ESA has superiority, the problem is the way our government works, plain and simple. on top of that you got all the liberals and the grass kissers that cry poverty if one blade of plant life is killed. derail all them, and ESA can be done in 3 years, let them win and well be in 2070 and still waiting for ESA. does anyone see the problems with the state Govt here, some one is clearly getting bribed or paid off with our money and once again we the people are so dumb and blind to it. If LIRR was Private. (I know it can't be, I don’t need that lecture) ESA most likely would have been done by 1980 or sooner. The problem lies somewhere in Government, and Liberals, And environment lovers hands.
by Irish Chieftain
on top of that you got all the liberalsSo it's "conservatives" that are for rail expansion? Perhaps moderates, but not too many right-leaning conservatives, and certainly not the pro-highway Neoconservatives (note their opposition to Amtrak for one matter, and their preference to remove federal funding for all transit and commuter rail for another). As I see it, the left-leaning folk are more pro-rail than any other faction, with a preference for electrified rail due to its cleanliness in regards to vehicle emissions.
when ESA is over 30 years old, ESA has superioritySAS is over 75 years old. How are we judging "superiority" in this matter...?
by Long Island 7285
Right, but in 30 or more years how many bonds have passed and how many times did this surface, why can europe build a tunnel to great brittan witch was one hell of a tunnel compared to ESA and we cant even get one train into GCT from LIRR in 30+ years. We as citizans in America and the state of New York need to all sit back and look at what the problem sourses are, find them and finally put them to rest, these problems are eating us out and it's not a good thing. these mostly political issues are causing more harm then good and some one with authority needs to devlope the brass kahonies to go and fight the system and make it happen I cant do it alone im not in politics but some one who is better move. with our SAS ()thanks nimby for makeing sence of that too me 
and ESA both over do what can we the regulars, the scum of the state do to help in this work.
more questions come from the following, why would the city/state remove the 3rd ave EL and not put the 2av line in? where werent the projects done jointly , for every mile of EL removed a mile of SAS should have been built??? why remove a nesisity and not replace it with something better?? would the state remove the 7 or 8 ave lines? and not replace them with somethign else. maby NYS needs another black out, but only blocking subways and trains, and lets see the shut down again, maby august of 2003 was not a big enough wake up call,.
maby this strike better happen to punish all who are derailing the projects.
If this were a murder case, it would be investagated in and out up and down till answers apeared. well where are the answers we the tax payers derserve an answer from the state proveing why it takes american specificly NY state to get projects done, when our former owner great brittan is leuges ahead of us when it some to this.
and ESA both over do what can we the regulars, the scum of the state do to help in this work. more questions come from the following, why would the city/state remove the 3rd ave EL and not put the 2av line in? where werent the projects done jointly , for every mile of EL removed a mile of SAS should have been built??? why remove a nesisity and not replace it with something better?? would the state remove the 7 or 8 ave lines? and not replace them with somethign else. maby NYS needs another black out, but only blocking subways and trains, and lets see the shut down again, maby august of 2003 was not a big enough wake up call,.
maby this strike better happen to punish all who are derailing the projects.
If this were a murder case, it would be investagated in and out up and down till answers apeared. well where are the answers we the tax payers derserve an answer from the state proveing why it takes american specificly NY state to get projects done, when our former owner great brittan is leuges ahead of us when it some to this.
by badneighbor
the funding gets dumped into the black hole called research, consulting firms, architectural studies, environmental studies, fights with NIMBY #$@#!!!-heads, and more studies. Then the ever present Newsday investigation, and public outcry. Then the customary "we are broke" from the MTA, and the endless "we will have to kill a few less used lines" yeah ok... throw more money at pipe dream projects and away we go...
For my two pennies, I don't know what you people have against diesel trains. from a railfan's perspective, I like the option, if I want to photo or video a diesel, I stay near home, say Patchogue. If I want to see electrics, well, KO is just a stone's throw away. As for commuters, I think mainline to yaphank electrification, along with expanded stations at Medford and Yaphank would make the most sense. Even to Riverhead, with an eye to future growth in that area. The biggest problem I see is the circus the parking area at KO is each day.
The real estate along the PJ and MK branches would be more expensive to condemn and buy, than the needed land along the main. it would likely cost less in land aquisition alone, and the prior mentioned straight run for the trains seem to be much better too.
the real story would be there.
For my two pennies, I don't know what you people have against diesel trains. from a railfan's perspective, I like the option, if I want to photo or video a diesel, I stay near home, say Patchogue. If I want to see electrics, well, KO is just a stone's throw away. As for commuters, I think mainline to yaphank electrification, along with expanded stations at Medford and Yaphank would make the most sense. Even to Riverhead, with an eye to future growth in that area. The biggest problem I see is the circus the parking area at KO is each day.
The real estate along the PJ and MK branches would be more expensive to condemn and buy, than the needed land along the main. it would likely cost less in land aquisition alone, and the prior mentioned straight run for the trains seem to be much better too.
the real story would be there.
by Long Island 7285
I think that they did enough studies and now the state needs to stop studying and get building, and if they cant they need to be punished by the feds who should take it over and simply say if you dont like it get out!!!
as for PJ i can see eletric up to northport.
and weather nimbys like it or not and grass lovers are in mourning over the loss of some trees and a few million blades of grass, then PJ-Wadeing river IS clearly NEEDED with that alone with out power to LD, will aid a bit in KOs parking, but it's no only the PARKING thats the problem people go to KO caus they think it's faster, so with extending to Wadeing River and maby eletric to north port(?) more trains will be needed to run on the PJ to make up for the longer ride.
once agan look at great brittan, they built the virgin trains to fit the rails instead of rebuilding every mile of track to fit traditional trains. because of nimbyism and poor actions and waisting of our money by the very people we vote in, were getting shoved deeper and deeper up shits creek.
the very counturies we faught off in the past 200 year are comeing back and whooping our hacks and getting light years ahead of americans when it comes to rail. pretty sad A!
as for PJ i can see eletric up to northport.
and weather nimbys like it or not and grass lovers are in mourning over the loss of some trees and a few million blades of grass, then PJ-Wadeing river IS clearly NEEDED with that alone with out power to LD, will aid a bit in KOs parking, but it's no only the PARKING thats the problem people go to KO caus they think it's faster, so with extending to Wadeing River and maby eletric to north port(?) more trains will be needed to run on the PJ to make up for the longer ride.
once agan look at great brittan, they built the virgin trains to fit the rails instead of rebuilding every mile of track to fit traditional trains. because of nimbyism and poor actions and waisting of our money by the very people we vote in, were getting shoved deeper and deeper up shits creek.
the very counturies we faught off in the past 200 year are comeing back and whooping our hacks and getting light years ahead of americans when it comes to rail. pretty sad A!
by jtr1962
badneighbor wrote:For my two pennies, I don't know what you people have against diesel trains.They make absolutely zero sense in commuter service, especially on a railroad with as much traffic as the LIRR. They're dogs acceleration-wise, they're maintenance headaches, they makes lots of noise, they smell. In fact, in most developed countries diesels aren't even considered an option for anything except maybe on branch lines with very light traffic. Given that the LIRR already owns a huge fleet of MUs, it probably makes the most sense to just electrify the whole railroad. Long term they'll save money. In 15 or 20 years they'll probably have to do it anyway as the operating costs of using diesels go off the chart and traffic increases.
Not to take this too off-topic but I suspect one of the reasons Amtrak has had trouble attracting riders is exactly because it uses diesel locomotives in most parts of the country. They're noisy, smelly, and slow. Lots of passengers don't like them, especially dealing with the nauseating diesel fumes on the platform. For commuter service they're an even worse fit. In fact, while on the topic using locomotive-hauled trains for local commuter service is a dumb idea, period, whether the locos are electric or diesel. Just look at what NJT's use of 10-car comet trains hauled by ALP-44s has done to schedules on the NEC. The NYP-Trenton locals used to take 69 minutes. Now they take a good 15 minutes more unless you happen to be on an express. The same run using diesel locomotives would probably take a good 2 hours. Keep the diesels for the branch lines. IMHO all the Northeast commuter roads should be 100% electrified, as should most of the Class 1 freight lines in the entire country. Electrification eventually pays for itself and then some. Unfortunately, it won't happen so long as we have CEOs and politicians only concerned with the next quarter or next election. The idea of long-range planning in America seems to have gone out of style.
by alcoc420
Here is another side of the coin.
Electric is ideal for commuter service. It accelerates better; it is quieter; and it has more flexibility in terms of train length. But its cost is prohibitive. For the past 40 years it hasn't happened unless it was heavily subsidized. From an accounting standpoint, it is not worth the investment. How many years should an investment pay for itself? six? ten? Electric does not seem to pay for itself.
In 1988, with a lot of hoopla, the LIRR added about 30 miles of electrified line to Ronkonkoma. Note that ridership on the branch grew, but ridership on the LIRR has remained remarkably flat. Passengers switched from the pj and pd branches because of the one seat per ride service, and better travel times.
One seat per ride can provided with DM trainsets, but what about the travel times? At that time the maximum diesel speed was 65 and electric was 80. Now they are both 80. Further, the improvement in travel time was misleading. One train from ko was 59 minutes. But that was an express. Travel time on all trains was improved by moving and eliminating stations. To add insult to injury for PJ passengers, a couple of PJ schedules were lengthened a couple of minutes when the KO was electrified.
Additionally, diesels are less affected by snow, flooding, and heat. Historically on the LIRR, diesels are the trains that come thru in severe weather.
I suspect that maintenance costs are comparable. The electric infrastructure is not maintenance free, and it is extensive.
Moreover, electric is more dangerous. I don't keep track, but it seems like a few people per year are killed coming into contact with the third rail. How much is life worth?
Electric is ideal for commuter service. It accelerates better; it is quieter; and it has more flexibility in terms of train length. But its cost is prohibitive. For the past 40 years it hasn't happened unless it was heavily subsidized. From an accounting standpoint, it is not worth the investment. How many years should an investment pay for itself? six? ten? Electric does not seem to pay for itself.
In 1988, with a lot of hoopla, the LIRR added about 30 miles of electrified line to Ronkonkoma. Note that ridership on the branch grew, but ridership on the LIRR has remained remarkably flat. Passengers switched from the pj and pd branches because of the one seat per ride service, and better travel times.
One seat per ride can provided with DM trainsets, but what about the travel times? At that time the maximum diesel speed was 65 and electric was 80. Now they are both 80. Further, the improvement in travel time was misleading. One train from ko was 59 minutes. But that was an express. Travel time on all trains was improved by moving and eliminating stations. To add insult to injury for PJ passengers, a couple of PJ schedules were lengthened a couple of minutes when the KO was electrified.
Additionally, diesels are less affected by snow, flooding, and heat. Historically on the LIRR, diesels are the trains that come thru in severe weather.
I suspect that maintenance costs are comparable. The electric infrastructure is not maintenance free, and it is extensive.
Moreover, electric is more dangerous. I don't keep track, but it seems like a few people per year are killed coming into contact with the third rail. How much is life worth?
by jtr1962
alcoc420 wrote:Electric is ideal for commuter service. It accelerates better; it is quieter; and it has more flexibility in terms of train length. But its cost is prohibitive. For the past 40 years it hasn't happened unless it was heavily subsidized. From an accounting standpoint, it is not worth the investment. How many years should an investment pay for itself? six? ten? Electric does not seem to pay for itself.Electric does eventually pay for itself, just not in the time frame that the bean counters are happy with. Once you count the increase in ridership from faster schedules, it pays for itself even sooner in commuter operations than it does in busy freight operations. And all railway operations usually require subsidies for capital improvements. Such improvements are usually a one shot deal anyway. If electrifcation is such a bad idea financially, then why is it used almost universally for passenger operations everywhere in the world except the US, even in cash-strapped countries? Maybe they know something we don't like it pays for itself many times over in the end. The PRR electrification dating from the 1930s is still heavily used today, and has undoubtably saved billions of dollars in operating costs and travel time, plus untold amounts of pollution.
In 1988, with a lot of hoopla, the LIRR added about 30 miles of electrified line to Ronkonkoma. Note that ridership on the branch grew, but ridership on the LIRR has remained remarkably flat. Passengers switched from the pj and pd branches because of the one seat per ride service, and better travel times.Passengers will always pick the alternative which is faster overall. As far as attracting new riders, my guess is that would only happen if the system was 100% electrified. Consider that a fair number of potential riders of the PJ may not be able to use the electrified lines because they lack the means to reach them (i.e. no cars or not enough parking) yet they won't use the PJ line because it's too slow. If the line was electrified it would not only get back those who switched, but also attract the riders I just mentioned. Sound like a ridership increase to me.
One seat per ride can provided with DM trainsets, but what about the travel times?They can't match MU travel times. They accelerate like slugs plain and simple even if they offer a one-seat ride into Manhattan. From what I've been reading, DM is turning out to be a costly fiasco. The money would have been better spent on electrification.
Additionally, diesels are less affected by snow, flooding, and heat. Historically on the LIRR, diesels are the trains that come thru in severe weather.I suspect this is a equipment-related issue and the M7s will fair much better than the M1s/M3s. Electrics are in general inherently more reliable than diesels but a poor design or lack of maintenance or just plain age can certainly affect reliability of any equipment.
I suspect that maintenance costs are comparable. The electric infrastructure is not maintenance free, and it is extensive.Any time you maintain different types of equipment, costs go up. Even if the LIRR standardized on DMs instead of MUs I suspect their maintenance costs would be higher. They're certainly higher having two different types of equipment as they do now.
Moreover, electric is more dangerous. I don't keep track, but it seems like a few people per year are killed coming into contact with the third rail. How much is life worth?And diesels have drawbacks of their own such as noise and pollution. As for people killed coming in contact with the third rail, they frankly have no business being on railroad property anyway, plus its not a large number. I'd guess diesel exhaust will eventually kill more people annually from cancer than die from touching the third rail now.
by Irish Chieftain
jtr1962 wrote:As I recall, insofar as winter weather, it's a third-rail versus overhead-wire issue. I've seen several snow storms where NJ Transit's electric service kept running but LIRR and Metro-North shut down due to the third-rail being shorted out by snow.alcoc420 wrote:Additionally, diesels are less affected by snow, flooding, and heat. Historically on the LIRR, diesels are the trains that come thru in severe weatherI suspect this is a equipment-related issue and the M7s will fair much better than the M1s/M3s. Electrics are in general inherently more reliable than diesels but a poor design or lack of maintenance or just plain age can certainly affect reliability of any equipment
As far as heat and flooding? Diesels would be the most vulnerable there; they have traction motors that can be shorted out by flood waters, and their prime-movers could certainly be overheated in extremely hot weather. The only railroad equipment that would be somewhat unaffected by a flood sufficiently high to short out traction motors, and perform better the hotter it is, would be steam locomotives...
by Nasadowsk
<i>
If electrifcation is such a bad idea financially, then why is it used almost universally for passenger operations everywhere in the world except the US, even in cash-strapped countries?</i>
Because it's not, and it's more cost effective, and faster, if you do it right. The payback is faster as volume grows, and for all but lower utilization lines - where a modern DMU can do wonders - it's cheaper than diesel.
The LIRR's current operations are hardly an example of best practice with MU operation - there are diesel trains that are faster than the LIRR's electrics - try the RiverLINE some day.
Modern day best practice is 25hp per ton for an MU. This gives you high enough acceleration to actually run a tight schedule. If we assume an at shoe limit of 850 amps per car (I believe the M-7s are limited by SW to this), that reflects at 750V to theoretically 850HP, remove 50 for HEP loads (which are more out of control than equipment weight these days), assume an 80% inversion efficiency, this is 640HP per car, or 25.6 tons or 51,000 lbs dry weight. Hey, anyone ever look up what a Bart car's specs are? 56,000 lbs, 600 hp - 21hp:ton. That's on a slightly less constrained 1kv system. Bart's average speed is up near 40mph or so, on tighter station spacing than the LIRR's. Imagine a 40mph average speed on, say the Port Washington line. 27 minute locals sound slow? With lower overall costs than the existing system?
The LIRR's operations and equipment don't even come close to representing what real electrics (and for that matter, DMUs) can achive.
<i> Consider that a fair number of potential riders of the PJ may not be able to use the electrified lines because they lack the means to reach them (i.e. no cars or not enough parking) yet they won't use the PJ line because it's too slow. If the line was electrified it would not only get back those who switched, but also attract the riders I just mentioned. Sound like a ridership increase to me.</i>
Even more pathetic, look at Oyster Bay. Up to Glen Cove, the population density is insane, getting tighter every year, yet ridership's a joke. The line simply is far too slow to attract people. Even with the traffic on Glen Cove Road, etc, it's still faster to drive. The potential ridership's there, the LIRR doesn't seem to feel a need to utilize it, but hey, look at the east end's constant screaming for service, and the dead stored locos at Morris Park...
<i>They can't match MU travel times. They accelerate like slugs plain and simple even if they offer a one-seat ride into Manhattan. From what I've been reading, DM is turning out to be a costly fiasco. The money would have been better spent on electrification.</i>
The DMs are a joke. Everyone on LI knows it, the whole industry knows it. Nobody realistically proposes DM operations, save for braindead managers and politicians. It simply doesn't provide any advantages, and doesn't work well in any case. Amtrak got them only because of the unique situations with the Empire Corridor services, MN got them only because they inherited the FL-9 mess. The LIRR had no need or use for DMs, but Prendergast, et al thought they were cool and bought a bunch of them.
<i>I suspect this is a equipment-related issue and the M7s will fair much better than the M1s/M3s. Electrics are in general inherently more reliable than diesels but a poor design or lack of maintenance or just plain age can certainly affect reliability of any equipment.</i>
Wake me up when the LIRR gets 200,000 miles MDBF on the DM-30s. Hell, wake me up when they get 50k miles...
The M-7s aren't that terribly unreliable (yet - in 10 years when the DC link filters start fading out, it'll be interesting), but they ride like crap and are slower than just about any other EMU out there. Even if the LIRR wanted to, they can't do much to get the average speed up, so utilization, ridership, track capacity, etc suffer.
What'll be fun is 10 years from now when the current LIRR can't handle the traffic at all, especially out east. There's nowhere to build new lines, and there's going to be hundreds of thousands more looking to get to Manhattan every day. If the LIRR can't move them guess what - new roads are going to be bulilt. Guess where the ROW's comming from. Right now, it's downright amazing the Oyster Bay line and main past Ronkonkoma haven't been paved over.
Well, if/when the OB line closes, what do you think is going to happen? With clogged roads up there and nowhere else to build....Someone at the NY state DOT's gonna make the connection sooner or later - 6,000 pax a day or 600 cars an hour....
If electrifcation is such a bad idea financially, then why is it used almost universally for passenger operations everywhere in the world except the US, even in cash-strapped countries?</i>
Because it's not, and it's more cost effective, and faster, if you do it right. The payback is faster as volume grows, and for all but lower utilization lines - where a modern DMU can do wonders - it's cheaper than diesel.
The LIRR's current operations are hardly an example of best practice with MU operation - there are diesel trains that are faster than the LIRR's electrics - try the RiverLINE some day.
Modern day best practice is 25hp per ton for an MU. This gives you high enough acceleration to actually run a tight schedule. If we assume an at shoe limit of 850 amps per car (I believe the M-7s are limited by SW to this), that reflects at 750V to theoretically 850HP, remove 50 for HEP loads (which are more out of control than equipment weight these days), assume an 80% inversion efficiency, this is 640HP per car, or 25.6 tons or 51,000 lbs dry weight. Hey, anyone ever look up what a Bart car's specs are? 56,000 lbs, 600 hp - 21hp:ton. That's on a slightly less constrained 1kv system. Bart's average speed is up near 40mph or so, on tighter station spacing than the LIRR's. Imagine a 40mph average speed on, say the Port Washington line. 27 minute locals sound slow? With lower overall costs than the existing system?
The LIRR's operations and equipment don't even come close to representing what real electrics (and for that matter, DMUs) can achive.
<i> Consider that a fair number of potential riders of the PJ may not be able to use the electrified lines because they lack the means to reach them (i.e. no cars or not enough parking) yet they won't use the PJ line because it's too slow. If the line was electrified it would not only get back those who switched, but also attract the riders I just mentioned. Sound like a ridership increase to me.</i>
Even more pathetic, look at Oyster Bay. Up to Glen Cove, the population density is insane, getting tighter every year, yet ridership's a joke. The line simply is far too slow to attract people. Even with the traffic on Glen Cove Road, etc, it's still faster to drive. The potential ridership's there, the LIRR doesn't seem to feel a need to utilize it, but hey, look at the east end's constant screaming for service, and the dead stored locos at Morris Park...
<i>They can't match MU travel times. They accelerate like slugs plain and simple even if they offer a one-seat ride into Manhattan. From what I've been reading, DM is turning out to be a costly fiasco. The money would have been better spent on electrification.</i>
The DMs are a joke. Everyone on LI knows it, the whole industry knows it. Nobody realistically proposes DM operations, save for braindead managers and politicians. It simply doesn't provide any advantages, and doesn't work well in any case. Amtrak got them only because of the unique situations with the Empire Corridor services, MN got them only because they inherited the FL-9 mess. The LIRR had no need or use for DMs, but Prendergast, et al thought they were cool and bought a bunch of them.
<i>I suspect this is a equipment-related issue and the M7s will fair much better than the M1s/M3s. Electrics are in general inherently more reliable than diesels but a poor design or lack of maintenance or just plain age can certainly affect reliability of any equipment.</i>
Wake me up when the LIRR gets 200,000 miles MDBF on the DM-30s. Hell, wake me up when they get 50k miles...
The M-7s aren't that terribly unreliable (yet - in 10 years when the DC link filters start fading out, it'll be interesting), but they ride like crap and are slower than just about any other EMU out there. Even if the LIRR wanted to, they can't do much to get the average speed up, so utilization, ridership, track capacity, etc suffer.
What'll be fun is 10 years from now when the current LIRR can't handle the traffic at all, especially out east. There's nowhere to build new lines, and there's going to be hundreds of thousands more looking to get to Manhattan every day. If the LIRR can't move them guess what - new roads are going to be bulilt. Guess where the ROW's comming from. Right now, it's downright amazing the Oyster Bay line and main past Ronkonkoma haven't been paved over.
Well, if/when the OB line closes, what do you think is going to happen? With clogged roads up there and nowhere else to build....Someone at the NY state DOT's gonna make the connection sooner or later - 6,000 pax a day or 600 cars an hour....