Railroad Forums 

  • Suburban LRV on Subway Surface Lines

  • Discussion relating to Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (Philadelphia Metro Area). Official web site can be found here: www.septa.com. Also including discussion related to the PATCO Speedline rapid transit operated by Delaware River Port Authority. Official web site can be found here: http://www.ridepatco.org/.
Discussion relating to Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (Philadelphia Metro Area). Official web site can be found here: www.septa.com. Also including discussion related to the PATCO Speedline rapid transit operated by Delaware River Port Authority. Official web site can be found here: http://www.ridepatco.org/.

Moderator: AlexC

 #1588098  by Silverliner5
 
Imagine if septa one day converted the wires on the subway surface lines to support pantographs. Will septa one day do a fan trip where suburban trollies can run together in a fan trip with PCC III and city LRV?
 #1590239  by mcgrath618
 
Part of SEPTA's modernization project includes a pole-to-pan conversion, though I would love to see something like what the Illinois Railway Museum has: a system that supports both.
 #1590244  by BuddCar711
 
Silverliner5 wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 10:16 pm Imagine if septa one day converted the wires on the subway surface lines to support pantographs. Will septa one day do a fan trip where suburban trollies can run together in a fan trip with PCC III and city LRV?
But the problem is that the suburban LRVs are 9' wide and I think it would not fit in the tunnel.
 #1590340  by Silverliner5
 
BuddCar711 wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 2:50 pm
Silverliner5 wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 10:16 pm Imagine if septa one day converted the wires on the subway surface lines to support pantographs. Will septa one day do a fan trip where suburban trollies can run together in a fan trip with PCC III and city LRV?
But the problem is that the suburban LRVs are 9' wide and I think it would not fit in the tunnel.
That is true but they could do fan trips without going into the tunnel but i hope some day the 23 and 56 or any abandon lines come back
 #1590381  by JeffK
 
ExCon90 wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 11:13 pm Where would the connection be?
The closest routes are the 102 with the 11 and 13 somewhere in the Yeadon / Darby area. I unfortunately can't get enough detail on my puny cellphone screen to see what the local infrastructure looks like. That area's very built up which could complicate any new ROW, absent street running.
 #1590383  by PHLSpecial
 
ExCon90 wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 11:13 pm Where would the connection be?
Connection at Germantown Ave. There is plenty of land on Erie Ave for a second trolley depot and maintenance. 56 would make a ton of sense with a ROW already in the middle on Erie Ave. Would love less cars on that street. Torresdale would be stuck in traffic all day. One thing would be helpful is moving the bus/trolley loop at Cottman to the Tacony RR station.
 #1590455  by ExCon90
 
My question was about the connection between the Subway-Surface lines and 101/102. Somehow you'd have to get from Darby to the 102, probably via either MacDade Blvd. or Chester Pike (see JeffK's post above), and I have visions of local residents forming human chains to block the bulldozers.
 #1590460  by mcgrath618
 
ExCon90 wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:43 pm My question was about the connection between the Subway-Surface lines and 101/102. Somehow you'd have to get from Darby to the 102, probably via either MacDade Blvd. or Chester Pike (see JeffK's post above), and I have visions of local residents forming human chains to block the bulldozers.
It would help SEPTA from an operational standpoint to run them up Chester Pike to connect, especially when the fleet is unified.
 #1590497  by JeffK
 
ConstanceR46 wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:43 am install a crossover on the MFL, run them dead there
Hmmm ... not sure what the safety implications of that might be.

Then again, the Taylors originally wanted to operate their trolleys on the MFL itself. The trolleys were to be equipped with shoes as well as poles. Ron DeGraw (miss you, Ron!) once told me that the plan likely underlay the choice of broad gauge for the MFL. That said, you have to wonder how difficult scheduling would have been, not to mention the fate of a trolley if it were hit by a multi-car subway train.
 #1590529  by R36 Combine Coach
 
JeffK wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:21 pm
ConstanceR46 wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:43 am install a crossover on the MFL, run them dead there
Hmmm ... not sure what the safety implications of that might be.

Then again, the Taylors originally wanted to operate their trolleys on the MFL itself. The trolleys were to be equipped with shoes as well as poles. That said, you have to wonder how difficult scheduling would have been, not to mention the fate of a trolley if it were hit by a multi-car subway train.
Not many instances of trolley running or trackage sharing with heavy rail, though some examples of interurbans
converted to heavy rail (IRT Steinway Tunnel between Grand Central Terminal and Queens as an example).

And Penn's Landing Trolley was a historic trolley running on national network PBL freight trackage.
 #1590547  by ExCon90
 
Didn't the Cleveland Rapid Transit heavy-rail line share Shaker Heights trackage with PCCs for some distance eastward from Terminal Tower, and doesn't it still do so with the Shaker Heights LRV's? I seem to remember that the center platforms were one level and the side platforms were the other, but I forget which was which.
 #1590550  by ExCon90
 

And Penn's Landing Trolley was a historic trolley running on national network PBL freight trackage.
And now that they've moved the entire operation to Scranton they're sharing some track with Delaware Lackawanna, as a result of which the volunteer motormen are required to be FRA-qualified engineers, although I believe temporal separation is maintained.