• Lackawanna Cutoff Passenger Service Restoration

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

Moderators: lensovet, nick11a, Kaback9

  by photobug56
 
Is that a result of rail regulation, excesses by EPA, corrupt government agencies, etc.? I will grant that some railroads seem capable of a task like this in a tiny fraction of the time, though they have their own issues.
  by amtrakowitz
 
west point wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 1:53 am Could it be that NJT will ever order a full 2 level commuter car? That would be close to what is close to being ordered in Europe. If that is even in (N)JT’s very long-range plans, then the tunnel ceiling would need clearance for that CAT. Is the present end of line CAT 25 Kv?
What exactly are you calling “a full 2-level commuter car”? and how does it relate to this particular planned service?

Most bilevel cars in the USA average between 15½’ to 16’ tall, and some are even taller. If you really want to compare European rolling stock, the TGV Duplex, at just over 14’ 1” tall, would fit in the North River Tunnels; others, like the Bombardier TwinDexx EMUs (at 15’ 2”) would not.
  by amtrakowitz
 
photobug56 wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 10:12 pm Is that a result of rail regulation, excesses by EPA, corrupt government agencies, etc.? I will grant that some railroads seem capable of a task like this in a tiny fraction of the time, though they have their own issues.
I would say a combination of all of the above.
  by photobug56
 
amtrakowitz wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 10:24 pm
west point wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 1:53 am Could it be that NJT will ever order a full 2 level commuter car? That would be close to what is close to being ordered in Europe. If that is even in (N)JT’s very long-range plans, then the tunnel ceiling would need clearance for that CAT. Is the present end of line CAT 25 Kv?
What exactly are you calling “a full 2-level commuter car”? and how does it relate to this particular planned service?

Most bilevel cars in the USA average between 15½’ to 16’ tall, and some are even taller. If you really want to compare European rolling stock, the TGV Duplex, at just over 14’ 1” tall, would fit in the North River Tunnels; others, like the Bombardier TwinDexx EMUs (at 15’ 2”) would not.
I know this is off topic, but would it be practical for LIRR to acquire bilevels that would fit into the 63rd Street tunnel and ESA / GCT?
  by JohnFromJersey
 
photobug56 wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 9:23 pm Very true. These days regulation is mostly reactive, years later than needed, and weak.
Generally speaking, regulation makes things artificially more expensive. This project is a good example of that.

The drop in price for freight service since the Staggers Act is another good example too.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
west point wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 1:53 am Could it be that NJT will ever order a full 2 level commuter car?
Mr. West Point, are you possibly addressing cars of the same design as Chicago and San Francisco Peninsula cars, as well as Amtrak Superliners, as distinct from those presently in service iwith numerous agencies including NJT?

Just to clarify for those "doubting Thomases" around here.
  by west point
 
About getting rid of duplicate routes. I cannot find it but there is a very good article showing how USSR, Russia, and Ukraine are able to maintain their military and civilian train service with many duplicate routes. Kind of makes sense?
  by JohnFromJersey
 
west point wrote: Thu Apr 21, 2022 10:10 pm About getting rid of duplicate routes. I cannot find it but there is a very good article showing how USSR, Russia, and Ukraine are able to maintain their military and civilian train service with many duplicate routes. Kind of makes sense?
Those railroads are heavily subsidized by the state; in fact, the United States is one of the few countries in the world where all rail isn't nationalized. I'd imagine the profits from freight get funneled to losses from passenger rail. Not an option in America

In addition, the Soviets prioritized rail for their military; as a result, a lot of the successor states to the Soviet Union, some of them being Ukraine and Russia, have continued the policy.
On the contrary, the United States prioritized highways for the military, which is why there are so many compared to the rest of the world, and why there are duplicated/redundant highways.
  by west point
 
The problem of military on the road is fuel consumption. Remember the Russian 40 mile back up? Anyone know what the various vehicles of the US military range with a full load of fuel? Russian tanks certainly seem to be restricted.
  by photobug56
 
Always an issue, but USSR and post USSR, Russia has been known at times to have equipment that's powerful but of low reliability. Their cruiser Moskva was very good at launching missiles, but has been said to have had most of its munitions exposed to attack and to have crews with little to no damage control capability. In WW2, and from what I've read still, they build lots and lots of subs, tanks, planes, and don't worry too much about reliability, fuel mileage, safety, survivability. And their logistics seem pretty poor. And they are heavily reliant on conscripts, very top down in control, and pay very poorly, not even worrying if their soldiers are fed.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
JohnFromJersey wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 12:18 am .... United States prioritized highways for the military, which is why there are so many compared to the rest of the world, and why there are duplicated/redundant highways.
Mr. John, lest we note how the Eisenhower era Interstate Highway Act was once referred to:

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-docu ... ghways-act

While the "die hard passenger rail enthusiast" community may disagree, most will hold that our society is the better owing to this public works project.
  by JohnFromJersey
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Sat Apr 23, 2022 9:23 am Mr. John, lest we note how the Eisenhower era Interstate Highway Act was once referred to:

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-docu ... ghways-act
Exactly, the Interstates were a way to be able to run planes anywhere and at any time in case of invasion - hence why any interstate you drive on is boring, flat, and extremely low maintenance when compared to other highways.
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Sat Apr 23, 2022 9:23 am While the "die hard passenger rail enthusiast" community may disagree, most will hold that our society is the better owing to this public works project.
Better for the economy? Maybe, since you could drive products anywhere at any time and not need to rely on a "middle-man" like the railroads, but the interstates killed a lot of rail jobs and the rail companies themselves. Eisenhower was very disappointed how highways ended up killing a lot of city neighborhoods when they went through the cities instead of around them, like in Europe. As a result of that, you have the issue of inner-city communities being plagued by pollution and crime.

The highways are certainly a backbone of the American economy, but in many ways, they have caused immense economic and social issues; suburban sprawl has done a lot to make society more atomized vs. pre Interstate Act
  by photobug56
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Sat Apr 23, 2022 9:23 am
JohnFromJersey wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 12:18 am .... United States prioritized highways for the military, which is why there are so many compared to the rest of the world, and why there are duplicated/redundant highways.
Mr. John, lest we note how the Eisenhower era Interstate Highway Act was once referred to:

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-docu ... ghways-act

While the "die hard passenger rail enthusiast" community may disagree, most will hold that our society is the better owing to this public works project.
Roads are important, but the elimination of most passenger rail service, and the move of so much freight from rail to road has filled all those roads and vastly increased air pollution. So we got both good and bad. I get that there are many places where rail won't work for a given trip, but part of that is how disconnected different types of passenger rail can be, and the lack of a first and final mile connection. So let's say I want to go from Long Island to Montreal (at least pre COVID). Need to take something like a 4AM train to Penn, if one is running, and need a very expensive taxi to get to that train. Go any later and you can't count on making the train to Montreal. Get into Penn, drag your baggage up the stairs (if you can find an escalator or elevator, they are probably either way out of the way or broken). Through the hellacious LIRR concourse, if at the east end take a hopefully working escalator up one level, then go west to Amtrak. Oops, forgot the Taj Mahal Station, so I THINK you go from LIRR, under the 8th Ave Subway to the Taj, figure out where to go, and wait for your train. Once on, the very long ride with no edible food (OK, you can get a nuked greaseburger or two).

Back in the 1950's, my dad would hop on a Lackawanna train in Scranton, have a nice dinner, sleep (in a room) heading out to Detroit for meetings. Breakfast also on the train. Not sure if he had to change trains out west for Detroit. No hotel, train took him close to where his meetings would be. Superior form of travel to what one would do now for the same trip.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
photobug56 wrote: Sat Apr 23, 2022 8:02 pm Back in the 1950's, my dad would hop on a Lackawanna train in Scranton, have a nice dinner, sleep (in a room) heading out to Detroit for meetings. Breakfast also on the train. Not sure if he had to change trains out west for Detroit.
Mr. Photobug, I believe you will find there was a Pullman line Hoboken-Chicago via DL&W-Buffalo-MC. In all likelihood that was the line on which your Father rode.
  • 1
  • 388
  • 389
  • 390
  • 391
  • 392
  • 393