Yard on Port Jefferson Line

The LIRR has flexibility built into it's schedules (arriving early at stations) because realistically, things happen which delay trains and being owned by the State, politics measure the LIRR based on it's "On Time Performance". This will NEVER change.

Being owned by the State, the procurement process takes several years..the present diesel fleet which began delivery in 1998 was in the design and funding source stage in 1990. For the LIRR to use technology acceptable and commonplace as late as 1997 or 98 in that procurement would have meant for it to be commonplace and acceptable in 1990 or 91.

Without the taxpayers, the LIRR would be sold for scrap. The reality is since it needs the State to survive, it must adhere to the present procurement process and that means it will never be able to use present-cutting edge technology. What you see today will be reflected in the next fleet procurement. It must be available and commonplace when they begin the design stage or you won't see it.

You see this in what the LIRR bought. The present diesels reflect the LIRR of the early 90's...23 DE ( Diesel only) engines replacing 23 GP-38's..22 Cab Cars replacing 22 converted MP's and F-units used as Power Packs on our "old" push-pull trains. The DM's are the political face of the LIRR. The LIRR of the early 90's had one dual mode train..the FL-9's and C-1's which were a mechanical nightmare and viewed as an anomaly. Politics concerning the "one seat ride" forced them to try to add dual mode trains to the schedules...but as you can see, they tried to rely on their mainstay, tried and proven diesel concept...23 DE's replacing 23 GP's..etc. See the point?

That really does make a good point. I never looked at it that way.

It would be quite actually pointless to even discuss most of this without realizing how expensive electrification is on any line across the country, let alone the massive effort needed to accomodate the sub stations alongside the line. It will be NJ TRansit's last order for Diesels? Is the state and tax payers prepared to pay for electrifying the entire RR? Wait for it, it'll never see the light of day, just like you will never see the entire LIRR electrified, not in this life time anyways.

Ever ridden on the trains during peak hours? Have you ever been on the train and have it slow down or stop in order to wait for another train in front to move? This happens everyday, and quite oftern delays the trains following behind. Whats the cause? Many things, but do you know how much of it is contibuted to commuters? You'd be surprised. So we can tighten up the present schedule, you think that by doing this, this will eliminate the problems? Of course not, and everyone knows this. If you want to run as many trains as possible during rush hours over the present track layout, then it won't matter if the entire branch is Electric, Diesel, Steam, whatever...you'll enctounter delays, and many times, the schedules actually refelect these delays. You would have to essentially have the entire RR as a 4 track line, and that won't happen either.

In order to increase the speed on the PJ branch, MAJOR work would have to be made in the form of curve elimination, grade crossing elimination, and much more, all very costly and very prohibitive. It will never become justifiable to the RR or the state to spend that kind of money for those type of improvements. The yard itself, wether it gets built or not is up to the folks who live around there. But they themselves will be shooting themselves in the foot. So they shouldn't cry about their service, ever. As always, NIMBYs are always ill informed, ignorant, and infringing on progress, simply because they are too special and important to have a rail yard near their neighborhoods. Even just to improve the PJ line such as electrification will require a NIMBY blessing. Forget about all that tilt technology, it's just as extraneous as the DM technology.

You also cannot compare light rail or Rapid Tranist lines to the operations of a commuter RR. There are many reasons for the use of electricity to power these methods of rail transport, one being that many of these lines operate underground. For others that don't have that isssue, rely on Electric power simply because Diesel technology is either not available or not feasable economically on rapid transit lines. It's only been recent that DMU's are making their way into light rail lines and expect that trend to continue. As mentioned before, it is very expensive to electrify a RR and the large distances of Commuter RR's and RR's in general would absolutely make the cost prohibitive.

It may sound as if I'm against electrics, but I'm really not. I argue the case that a need for both modes to coexist on this RR and wherever a dual operation exist. Don't expect to see MNR to electrify all the way up the Hudson line or to Port Jervis.

<i>It would be quite actually pointless to even discuss most of this without realizing how expensive electrification is on any line across the country, let alone the massive effort needed to accomodate the sub stations alongside the line</i>

It's not massive and it's not unknown. In fact, it was studied by MK for Caltrain in the mid 1990's. The results were that 50 route miles of dual track would cost roughly 60 million on the 25kv overhead system, or 88 million on the third rail system. This is not much, when you look at what other rail construction projects cost.

<i>It will be NJ TRansit's last order for Diesels? Is the state and tax payers prepared to pay for electrifying the entire RR? Wait for it, it'll never see the light of day, just like you will never see the entire LIRR electrified, not in this life time anyways. </i>

Oh, you'll see it. NJT already has draw up plans for it. They've been clearencing lines for it, they've been doing small electrifications. I'll predict it right now - you'll see Long Branch to Bay Head done within the next 10 years, the Raritan Valley line, or Boonton to the end of the M&E line, afterwards, fairly shortly.

The first life of a diesel is roughly 15 years. Thus, 10 years from now, they're gonna be thinking about replacing the PL-42s. Noise mitigation walls in crowded areas don't work and are very expensive, dual modes are a nighmare to run. NJT has already stated they will not be buying DMs, and that they're not very receptive to noise walls because of their cost and poor efectiveness.

<i> The yard itself, wether it gets built or not is up to the folks who live around there. </i>

It's not going to be built. Pure and simple. We can moan how badly the LIRR supposedly 'needs' this yard, or how great life will be with it foreveryone who lives far away from it, but the reality is, the community doesn't want it and it's not going to happen.

<I> Forget about all that tilt technology, it's just as extraneous as the DM technology. </i>

No, it's not. When properly implemented, it can lead to drastic reductions in running time. It's becommon increasingly more common in Europe, and not on high speed trains but on regional and commuter equipment. It's used in Japan, it's used in most European countries. When done right, it works, it's very reliable, and it leads to real trip time reductions. It's simply not been implemented well in the US yet - Talgos are limited by antique locomotives, the Acela is too heavy to make use of tilt.

<i> It's only been recent that DMU's are making their way into light rail lines and expect that trend to continue. </i>

It's not. With the exception of 2 LRT lines in the US (Riverline, and a quasi commuter line in San Diego), are planned or under construction ones are electric. The technology used is not new, it's existed overseas for years now. The Riverline cars are an existing European design, the San Diego ones are too. Neither are new technology, or new designs. I believe the SD cars will be based on the Voith hydrostatic transmissions that have sold thousands of units worldwide.

<i>As mentioned before, it is very expensive to electrify a RR and the large distances of Commuter RR's and RR's in general would absolutely make the cost prohibitive. </i>

At the costs estimated in the 1990's by MK, it's a flat out bargain. Look what East Side Access is going to cost. <b>Many</b> times what electrifying the entire LIRR would cost. Heck, it's going to cost more than converting the entire LIRR to 25kv operation would even cost.

Under the verifiable numbers I've seen, it would cost somewhere around 500 million to do all the relevant parts of the LIRR with third rail. i.e., PJ, Oyster Bay, and Babylon to Patchauge. That's really not a lot of money for basically opening the door to a true one seat ride from any eastern terminal to any western terminal, something the DMs simply have not done. The remainder could be run with 2 - 3 DMU shuttles, for the trickle of passengers those parts get.

Sorry, you can't use economics as an excuse when the cost of diesels isn't much cheaper, and you're looking to spend 6+ <b>billion</b> dollars to drill a few miles of tunnel and build a station.

<i>It may sound as if I'm against electrics, but I'm really not. I argue the case that a need for both modes to coexist on this RR and wherever a dual operation exist.</i>

I don't see the case. A dual operation simply makes life harder, costs more, and creates a dual class of service.

<i> Don't expect to see MNR to electrify all the way up the Hudson line or to Port Jervis</i>. I don't think they will anytime soon, but don't be surprised if they wire up to Suffern, or Danbury. The push for a Hudson line electrification will come when NY state finally gets serious about HSR to Albany, and stops screwing around with the failed Turboliners. unless someone gets the bright idea of building a lightweight diesel set, in which case we'll at least be out of the 60's and into the 80's w.r.t. the Empire Corridor.

https://www.newsday.com/amp/long-island ... d-p59r45mz

Suffolk plans to change popular walking trail for possible MTA rail yard in Port Jeff Station

Suffolk County officials are weighing a plan to alter a popular Port Jefferson Station walking and biking path to make room for a possible railroad yard.

A 2,200-foot section of the 3.5-mile Setauket-Port Jefferson Station Greenway would dip south near the path's eastern trailhead at Route 112, Legis. Kara Hahn said, adding specifics of the plan have not been finalized.
...
(the rest is behind a paywall

Love the use of a headline that'll provoke maximum outrage from the NIMBY's.

Imagine - using rail road right of way to run trains instead of joggers and trail bikes? Sounds so silly!

For lack of better terminology
Long Island is perpetually screwed.
Driving here is an absolute disaster. During even a relatively busy time (not rush hour) it can still take 45 minutes to an hour to travel 10-20 miles.
Even on the north shore where you have 25, 25B, 25A, LIE & NSP Traffic is atrocious. In the south we have local 27 and the SSP. Believe it or not the local 27 is faster than the SSP once volume condemns the SSP.
We still Didn’t address the N/S transportation issue. But it’s slightly better than the E/W nightmare.

Even if LIRR was fully restored in Eastern Queens, all of Nassau and Suffolk,
Further Supplemented With some N/S.
LRT/Bus options.
You still won’t address the traffic issue.
LI was designed to function solely on the personal automobile for everything local.
In many cases to correct this would require massive land swaps, acquisitions, understandings, legal battles, and an all out war with the NIMBY crowd.

Whole Neighborhood in some cases would need to be re zoned and developed into a neighborhood that’s walkable and rail/bus friendly.

It can be don’t but the cost, legal battles and politics likely would eliminate it.