River Line

Not enough trains that are operational and aren't breaking down all the time. Less frequent service requires less functional trains.

It works, they have cancelled no trains on some days and only one train on others, compared to 15-20 cancellations daily over the previous few weeks. However, the bus schedule is inconsistent (buses will sometimes leave ahead of schedule so you show up on time and you've missed it). Also, my train this morning had to reboot its engine twice, resulting in an arrival of 10 minutes behind schedule causing me to miss my Regional and take an NJT express instead.

Increased crime near River Line stations
https://www.courierpostonline.com/story ... 971277007/

lmao, this trope again?

and the solution to someone struck by the train is reduced speeds? not paying attention to gates being down? maybe they should assign some of the sheriffs to hand out citations for walking around downed gates?

lensovet wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2024 8:30 pm lmao, this trope again?

and the solution to someone struck by the train is reduced speeds? not paying attention to gates being down? maybe they should assign some of the sheriffs to hand out citations for walking around downed gates?

Yup,
Never mind that the police reports for most people arrested for those crimes show they steal a car, then drive to crime location.
Should we restrict auto usage , too?

lensovet wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2024 8:30 pm lmao, this trope again?

and the solution to someone struck by the train is reduced speeds? not paying attention to gates being down? maybe they should assign some of the sheriffs to hand out citations for walking around downed gates?

The article is quoting the police about increased property crimes committed by criminals who arrive via the trains.

There are no direct quotes that say that, because of course there is literally no way to prove this unless you have mass surveillance everywhere.

"Many people jump off the River LINE and aren't necessarily in town for the right reason.”

Okay chief, got any numbers to back that up?

“The impression of the officers and the [police] chiefs is that it’s very much a growing problem,” said state Sen. Troy Singleton (D-Burlington) who helped obtain state funding for the program.

Aha, the impression! Can we now arrest people based on impressions?

I love that not having to buy a ticket somehow makes it more likely that criminals will apparently use the train to steal packages off your porch. Because there's nothing like walking down the street with a giant package and lugging it to the river line station…and skimping on a $2 ticket! What idiot swipes packages off the porch and walks with them to the light rail? These people have cars where they can stash that stuff in their trunks and then transfer to another vehicle to prevent being caught.

A decade ago, Riverton had the 4th-lowest ridership on the entire line, beating only Delanco (by 3 passengers), Aquarium, and Entertainment Center. I doubt much has changed since then (unlike say Cinnaminson which saw the completion of its residential development next to that station). They aren't as much of a destination – for porch pirates or anyone else – as they think they are.

Again, arrest stats show that people steal cars, to commit crimes. Using public transit as a get away vehicle generally happens if it's spur of moment, and the person is getting chased.
It sounds to be he's using Antidotal evidence, not statistical.
And er yeah, they have been arresting people based on "impressions" , for years.

People steal cars to commit crimes because cars make it easier to commit them and stolen cars are harder to track.

A transit vehicle makes it harder to commit most crimes and gives you zero control over your escape, as it runs on a schedule (or frequently on something approximating a schedule).

Worse, a transit vehicle can be immediately stopped by police, at which point the criminal is either trapped and captured or decides to use an emergency exit and is no better off than running on foot. I guess we should ban running?

Ban cars, just to be sure.

Got this "criminal" complaint when I was on the Gloucester City rail committee. We're on Camden's border and at the public meeting we have people complaining the train will bring drug pushers in. I said can't they take a bus? Can't they bike? Can't they drive in? They can walk for crying out loud. Made no difference. They train was the conveyance that would cause Gloucester City to be over run with undesirables. We were going to have fences put up, close some street crossings and make the other 4 no horn blowing crossings so this was the only argument they had left. They were furious with me that I wouldn't agree that the train line would destroy the town.

Interesting editorial. Covers a lot of what's been said here. I'll let you peruse and quote:

https://www.nj.com/opinion/2024/10/the- ... utType=amp

JS and Everyone: After reading the editorial it seems that the River Line is becoming a victim of NIMBY
opposition that will not be satistfied until the line speed limit is cut to the point of being uncompetitive
with other transport modes - or even the extreme circumstance of shutting down the line altogether...

The two fatalities - the HS student that ran out in front of a moving train instead of waiting a matter of
extra seconds until the RL train had passed by...The Train Operator from a tree that had fallen down onto
the ROW at some point overnight and ended up being struck by the first SB run before sunrise are both
coincidential...Could they have both been prevented? Yes and maybe respectively being speculative...

With the mention of the proposed Camden-Glassboro Line and its pronounced NIMBY opposition
does this new route stand a chance of being built taking note to the River Line's current problems?

In the very least NJT should focus on trying to solve River Line problems and save the service...
MACTRAXX

What a dumb article. Slower trains would kill the already-low ridership on this line. As it is, it's actually highly competitive with driving and buses.

The for-profit operator makes zilch on this and would probably love to be let out of the contract.

lensovet wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 11:36 pm The for-profit operator makes zilch on this and would probably love to be let out of the contract.

The line could be profitable.

The main issue, is tickets on the River LINE are absurdly cheap. For reference, from Walter Rand Transportation Center to Trenton Transit Center, the fare is less than 2 dollars for about an hour ride. The Newark Light Rail, a trip between its terminus points is the same price for a much shorter ride.

The River LINE, from end to end, is about 34 miles. A trip from Trenton Transit Center to Edison Station (roughly about the same distance) is $11.

The other thing I've heard about the River LINE, from my coworkers that take it everyday to work, is that they barely check tickets for it. There's only one train operator, and I don't think they have any conductors, so no shocker that fare dodging is super common.

If the fare is not even 2 dollars to traverse the whole route, and there's nothing done to stop fare dodging, no wonder the line doesn't make any money for the for-profit operator.

I don't think the line could be profitable. The density is simply not there. The clientele is not exactly rich either.

It's a POP system (join us over in the other thread to argue that to death), so there is no ticket checking, only sporadic enforcement. The fine is "up to" $100. I'm not entirely clear how the revenue sharing works, because NJT (not Alstom) sells the ticket, NJT hires and pays salaries for the fare enforcement, and presumably NJT collects the fines (if they are ever able to collect them). That said, I've seen people clearly commuting to work in suits not bothering to activate their tickets until the fare inspectors show up. It's 2024 and people feel entitled to get things for free for some reason.