Lackawanna Cutoff Passenger Service Restoration

Matt Johnson wrote:The way I look at it is, New York to Albany is almost the same distance. That trip takes over 2.5 hours even with higher speed running, and is an Amtrak inter-city route rather than a commuter corridor. I don't know if there are any daily commuters on that line, but probably not many. I don't know if you can justify Scranton based on the commuter model. But then, I'm amazed that people commute every day to NYC from places like Montauk or Port Jervis!

One of my co workers at one of my internships commutes from Allentown, PA to Montclair and back every weekday, his car as a result is a 2004 with over 360,000 miles on it, over 3 times th mileage on my car of the same model year. Pretty sure at least some people would like to avoid that kind of wear on their car. I mean yes, is it a long trip? Of course, can a car do it quicker? Of course, I've done the trip to Scranton in about an hour and a half, hour and 45 minutes or so from Millburn on a Saturday morning with no traffic, I was heading elsewhere but I passed through Scranton, excuse the inaccurate estimate but it was last year, so my memory on how long it took til I passed through Scranton is fuzzy. it's a straight shot down 80/380 once you connect from 24/287, but here's the thing, the wear on the car from that kind of commute would catch up to a car much faster than it would a locomotive, not to mention, the traffic could easily add quite a bit to that time, possibly making it close or equal to the train.

In 1968 the eastbound Erie Lackawanna No. 6 (The Lake Cities) made it from Scranton to Hoboken in three-hours-and-six-minutes. And it was a commuter-type schedule in that it departed Scranton at 5:39 am and arrived Hoboken at 8:45 am.

The problem today is, for a variety of reasons, trains on the former EL lines have actually gotten a little slower than they were years ago. For instance, in a 1939 DL&W employee timetable, No. 1018 made it from Hackettstown to Hoboken in 98 minutes versus today's Train No. 872 which takes 14 minutes longer. One difference is Lackawanna 1018 ran via the Boonton Branch.

The New York-Albany/Rensselaer trains run on the Water Level Route, New York State has spent millions of dollars speeding up travel times on that line. The distance is similar to the Scranton-Hoboken route (A/R is a bit longer, about 142 miles) but they are two very different routes.

Yea. I really don't think scranton trains will make every stop in NJ. Makes no sense Clearly there will be different trains going different places and stopping at stations that make the most sense for that particular move. And 40 mph? Uh, pretty sure that number is ridiculously low as well. The cutoff was rated to 70 then up to 80 mph, surely NJT can put tracks in that can see trains doing at least that.... between water gap and scranton they should be able to do 65-70 if not faster.

If you look at the section between water gap and just north of tobyhanna, the route has a lot of straights with the worst curves that trains could handle at 60 mph.

"suburban trains at 40mph"... This was the main line for the DL&W... 40 mph woulda put them out of business before they even got started.

You're confusing average speed with maximum speed. EL No. 6 took 186 minutes to go from Scranton to Hoboken with limited stops. It's 135 miles from Scranton so 186 minutes averages 43 mph.

Nobody is saying the train would make every stop. If it did it would take a lot longer than three hours.

I've replied to your specific comments, so how about being a good guy and replying to mine? I asked you how you would answer people who say, "If all the trains NJ Transit runs in North Jersey right now haven't solved the congestion problem, how is running a few more trains going to solve it?" Do you have an answer?

I also suggested you look at Transit's website or the Lackawanna coalition and see what kind of running times they're talking about. Did you do that?

One could say that the congestion problem's unsolvable, but that the North Jersey trains are valuable for helping to ease the problem, the bad situation might be worse if we didn't have the trains.

Isn't NJ Transit going to put a layover yard in Greendell? My best guess if for local trains from Hoboken.
Also, will this line be a part of the MB or ME or will it be named?

NJT4115 wrote:Isn't NJ Transit going to put a layover yard in Greendell? My best guess if for local trains from Hoboken.
Also, will this line be a part of the MB or ME or will it be named?

Probably would be named, especially once it's completed, as it would need something to fit in with its Pennsylvanian route.

Congestion problems.....

I'm on a kick with numbered lists so let me make another one.. :D

Hoboken div could be expanded quite a bit.

One: Extend RVL to phillipsburg.
Two: Extend MBL/ML to phillipsburg.
Three: Have satellite park and ride lots with busses that connect to the trains.
Four: PA needs to have service to/from phillipsburg and jim thorpe.
Five: Connect the PA trains with NJT trains across the platform at phillipsburg.

Six: Have some PA trains go between scranton and philipsburg.
Seven: Have some NJT trains go between scranton and new york penn & hoboken.
Eight: Upgrade the ROW/tracks and crossings to squeeze every possible second out of every foot of the route within reason.
Nine: Advertise like crazy, with tax deductions and special deals and other promotions to get things started.
Ten: You will have less congestion.

Another thing PA could do is extend service with push-pull equipment to harrisburg over the old reading line and connect from reading up towards the ABE area and of course phillipsburg. I think phillipsburg should be at least a 6 track station to handle all the through and connecting trains. Further, PA should develop rail routes in the north 1/3 of the state to connect to all mentioned above, routes that connect to elmira and corning in NY, and the line that runs north of the mountains though lock haven and williamsport. Connect those trains to scranton and make that their hub.

Some of these would be commuter trains, while others would be intrastate corridor trains, but that topic would best be discussed further in the general passenger rail section. My main point though is NJ's railroads connected in from new york and PA, places where people now drive with no train service at all. Put those trains back and you will see a significant impact in congestion and all of the positive things that result.

Patrick Boylan wrote:One could say that the congestion problem's unsolvable, but that the North Jersey trains are valuable for helping to ease the problem, the bad situation might be worse if we didn't have the trains.

I agree that would be a more realistic claim to make. That the Cut-Off trains will also help a bit.

I guess I would add, we need to complete what seems to be the most logical network in order to get the most out of what we have already established.

Personally I'd be taking the Scranton service to get to Steamtown.

Tommy Meehan wrote:If all the trains NJ Transit runs in North Jersey right now haven't solved the congestion problem, how is running a few more trains going to solve it?" Do you have an answer?

Getting on the train solves the road congestion problem(s) for the people on the train.

No matter how fast they run trains between Scranton and Dover, they aren't going to be able to run rush hour trains on the M&E faster than they do now. So, commuting from PA would be a long haul. Commuting from Scranton doesn't seem practical. But, right now many people commute to NYC by bus from the Poconos. The train from the Poconos in rush hour might beat the bus. And, it would be more comfortable. It won't be a fast trip, but there is some demand for it, and it would get a few cars off 80. From the Poconos to Hoboken would probably be comparable to Port Jervis.

JoeG wrote:No matter how fast they run trains between Scranton and Dover, they aren't going to be able to run rush hour trains on the M&E faster than they do now. So, commuting from PA would be a long haul. Commuting from Scranton doesn't seem practical. But, right now many people commute to NYC by bus from the Poconos. The train from the Poconos in rush hour might beat the bus. And, it would be more comfortable. It won't be a fast trip, but there is some demand for it, and it would get a few cars off 80. From the Poconos to Hoboken would probably be comparable to Port Jervis.

You have the trans-bridge busses... So yes there is definitely demand.

http://www.transbridgelines.com/daily.htm

None of the Trans-Bridge buses (in the schedule linked above) serve points common to the Cut-Off, do they?

Martz Trailways serves Scranton-New York City with stops en route. Here's their schedule.

I've seen these schedules and I've wondered if the ones that run in rush hour actually meet their advertised schedules. If they do, I don't think the trains would be faster, but they would be more predictable and more comfortable.

JoeG wrote:...I've wondered if the ones that run in rush hour actually meet their advertised schedules...

I wonder about them too. If I can be excused for going a bit off-topic:

A few years ago me and a buddy from work decided to see a football game at West Point. Neither of us wanted to drive so we decided to take a Short Line bus. He lives in Manhattan so we met at PABT. On the way back, when the bus stopped in Suffern, I considered getting off. My buddy asked why would I want to do that? I said because it was just about 6 PM and my girlfriend had to go to a family function and leave at about 8:00 PM. I said if I knew what times the Rt. 59 bus ran I could ride to Nyack and take a cab to Sleepy Hollow across the TZB (where we lived then). Otherwise I could go to Manhattan and try and get a 7:20 train out of GCT.

I stayed on the Short Line bus and my buddy thought I'd make it no problem. I wasn't too sure. As I feared, we got stuck in some really horrible Saturday night traffic approaching the Lincoln Tunnel and arrived at PABT about 7:45 PM. That's one-hour-and-forty-five minutes from Suffern.

So I wonder about Martz too.