The Raritan Valley Line Thread…

[michaelk]

as far as under the current 'emergency' situation- and hunter negating any ability to run to NYP- there's a number of trains now and in the past (well with the normal schedules) that do the dance to get over to A or 1 on a regular basis. Either to go to hoboken or to yard someplace beyond Newark Penn. Those particular trains could just continue to NYP if that were the only issue.

It's not a stretch that if somehow the 45DP's are much "easier" to fix then something else electirc that NJT could get double secret permission from Amtrak to use them into Penn. Particularly if somehow the bottleneck for NYP service were to become electric engines for a long term- Christie would do what he does in the media and call Obama and FEMA and complain that bureaucrats in Amtrak are "making the people of NJ suffer"

But still I wouldn't hold my breath. NJCL would have to be out really long term. And the point about giving one seat rides and taking that away isn't something to ignore.

[ThirdRail7]

as far as under the current 'emergency' situation- and hunter negating any ability to run to NYP- there's a number of trains now and in the past (well with the normal schedules) that do the dance to get over to A or 1 on a regular basis. Either to go to hoboken or to yard someplace beyond Newark Penn. Those particular trains could just continue to NYP if that were the only issue.

Agreed. Hunter has little to do with this. I don't think you'll see this happen, By the time they work out the logistics, parts of the NJCL will be in service, eliminating some of the slots.

[lirr42]

Well if somehow that magically did happen, your fun would have been short. This article linked to in the Hurricane Sandy thread said NJT plans to have NJCL service from New York to Long Branch going by the end of this week:

...Weinstein said the goal is to run North Jersey Coast Line service from New York to Long Branch by the end of the week, helped largely by a repair of a rail drawbridge over the Raritan Bay...

[Zeke]

The RVL trains will eventually single seat ride into NYP. The last thing NJT needed was Sandy,however single seat will probably take form in weekend High Bridge NYP service using a dual mode multi-level consist. Amtrak is not as busy on weekends and can accommodate possibly 4 or 5 SAT -SUN schedules. The initial plan may have two morning ,two afternoon and one mid evening NYP -HB trains. At present RVL weekend service is manned by six full train crews plus a few ticket collectors during a 20 hour service window. The flyover is only a dream at this time.CLIFF interlocking east of HUNTER allows NJT RVL trains to acess 1,2 and 3 track on the NEC. It has been proposed to knock off a morning LB-NYP train and one TRenton-NYP afternoon schedule in order to free up one slot into and out of NYP for an RVL weekday express. The Sandy debacle has pushed all of this to the back burner but in about a year or so this is the most likely scenario for a one seat ride into NYP.

[michaelk]

as far as under the current 'emergency' situation- and hunter negating any ability to run to NYP- there's a number of trains now and in the past (well with the normal schedules) that do the dance to get over to A or 1 on a regular basis. Either to go to hoboken or to yard someplace beyond Newark Penn. Those particular trains could just continue to NYP if that were the only issue.

Agreed. Hunter has little to do with this. I don't think you'll see this happen, By the time they work out the logistics, parts of the NJCL will be in service, eliminating some of the slots.

yep- just read the hurricane sandy thread and seems they are going to get NYP to Long Branch service of some sort as early as next week. AMAZING.

[Kaback9]

Posts Merged from Will The Raritan Valley Line go in to NY thread. Let's try to keep Raritan Valley Line questions to this thread.

-Brandon

[amtrakowitz]

Unfortunately, the answer is likely no.

1. HUNTER interlocking still needs the flyover, as Mr. Hawaiitiki said. Yeah, there are less trains running, but a move like that is still too clumsy without a proper flyover.
2. To my knowledge, the ALP45-DPs have never operated into NYP on a revenue move into Penn as a straight electric engine, so it would lead me to believe NJT is not ready/willing/able to send them under the river just yet.
3. Amtrak probably won't be too warm to the idea right now. After just going through loads of work drying off their tunnels (one of them still water logged) I'm fairly certain they wouldn't want these new fuel-loaded contraptions going through there just yet. And if this goes ahead and these things mess something up--forget it. Amtrak might never let them into NYP on a regular basis.
4. Plus, we don't even know the status of the ALP45-DPs. Have any been spotted lately (on the Main Line/ST)? Additionally, I haven't seen the engines running with MLVs (what the RVL normally uses) just yet, so that's a further complicating factor.
5. NJT has got their hands full now with recovering track-wise, signal-wise, and equipment-wise. Orchestrating a whole new type of service is probably not very high on their list of priorities.
6. The customers themselves might be thrown off a bit by something like this. We're adjusting the schedule on them on a bi-weekly basis and now we're going to throw a whole new service pattern at them. And just when they're warming up to the whole one-seat-ride thing the NJCL comes back online and they're bumped back to transferring at Newark Penn.

Funny thing is that the Lehigh Valley Railroad was able to use Hunter for its New York service, and in the older configuration (shorter-radius curve, no "flyover" as today). The Hunter improvements were touted as the biggest improvement since that connection came into being, especially being able to traverse the new connection at 40 mph. And where did this talk of a "flyover" suddenly originate?

[mlc482]

Why is the RVL still running on a special schedule while the other rail lines return to regular weekday service? Is this the lack of equipment manifesting? Or issue with the Lehigh Line?

[Ken W2KB]

Why is the RVL still running on a special schedule while the other rail lines return to regular weekday service? Is this the lack of equipment manifesting? Or issue with the Lehigh Line?

My observation riding it from/to High Bridge/Newark the last few days is that it likely the equipment shortage rather than any other problems. 8 car multilevel train rather than the usual 6 or 7.

[michaelk]

Unfortunately, the answer is likely no.

1. HUNTER interlocking still needs the flyover, as Mr. Hawaiitiki said. Yeah, there are less trains running, but a move like that is still too clumsy without a proper flyover.
2. To my knowledge, the ALP45-DPs have never operated into NYP on a revenue move into Penn as a straight electric engine, so it would lead me to believe NJT is not ready/willing/able to send them under the river just yet.
3. Amtrak probably won't be too warm to the idea right now. After just going through loads of work drying off their tunnels (one of them still water logged) I'm fairly certain they wouldn't want these new fuel-loaded contraptions going through there just yet. And if this goes ahead and these things mess something up--forget it. Amtrak might never let them into NYP on a regular basis.
4. Plus, we don't even know the status of the ALP45-DPs. Have any been spotted lately (on the Main Line/ST)? Additionally, I haven't seen the engines running with MLVs (what the RVL normally uses) just yet, so that's a further complicating factor.
5. NJT has got their hands full now with recovering track-wise, signal-wise, and equipment-wise. Orchestrating a whole new type of service is probably not very high on their list of priorities.
6. The customers themselves might be thrown off a bit by something like this. We're adjusting the schedule on them on a bi-weekly basis and now we're going to throw a whole new service pattern at them. And just when they're warming up to the whole one-seat-ride thing the NJCL comes back online and they're bumped back to transferring at Newark Penn.

Funny thing is that the Lehigh Valley Railroad was able to use Hunter for its New York service, and in the older configuration (shorter-radius curve, no "flyover" as today). The Hunter improvements were touted as the biggest improvement since that connection came into being, especially being able to traverse the new connection at 40 mph. And where did this talk of a "flyover" suddenly originate?

i don't think it suddenly popped up-

its in the current (DRAFT) stat erail plan and if i remember correctly it was in the one before that too at a minimum
http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 9&t=109973

Most here know way more than I- but when LVR ran service to NY I think the NEC was much less used? So perhaps the "bigger" problem with Hunter seems not to be getting RVL trains onto the NEC but the fact that RVL trains have to foul a pile of NEC tracks to move accross to Track 1 or A in newark.

[Don31]

The idea for a flyover has been around for a while. I saw plans for it a few years ago.

[keyboardkat]

Bring back Jersey City terminal, rebuild the Newark Bay Bridge, and service to all the stations (including Elizabeth) east of Cranford on the old JCL.
(Now, where did I put my meds...)

[amtrakowitz]

Unfortunately, the answer is likely no.

1. HUNTER interlocking still needs the flyover, as Mr. Hawaiitiki said. Yeah, there are less trains running, but a move like that is still too clumsy without a proper flyover.
2. To my knowledge, the ALP45-DPs have never operated into NYP on a revenue move into Penn as a straight electric engine, so it would lead me to believe NJT is not ready/willing/able to send them under the river just yet.
3. Amtrak probably won't be too warm to the idea right now. After just going through loads of work drying off their tunnels (one of them still water logged) I'm fairly certain they wouldn't want these new fuel-loaded contraptions going through there just yet. And if this goes ahead and these things mess something up--forget it. Amtrak might never let them into NYP on a regular basis.
4. Plus, we don't even know the status of the ALP45-DPs. Have any been spotted lately (on the Main Line/ST)? Additionally, I haven't seen the engines running with MLVs (what the RVL normally uses) just yet, so that's a further complicating factor.
5. NJT has got their hands full now with recovering track-wise, signal-wise, and equipment-wise. Orchestrating a whole new type of service is probably not very high on their list of priorities.
6. The customers themselves might be thrown off a bit by something like this. We're adjusting the schedule on them on a bi-weekly basis and now we're going to throw a whole new service pattern at them. And just when they're warming up to the whole one-seat-ride thing the NJCL comes back online and they're bumped back to transferring at Newark Penn.

Funny thing is that the Lehigh Valley Railroad was able to use Hunter for its New York service, and in the older configuration (shorter-radius curve, no "flyover" as today). The Hunter improvements were touted as the biggest improvement since that connection came into being, especially being able to traverse the new connection at 40 mph. And where did this talk of a "flyover" suddenly originate?

i don't think it suddenly popped up-

its in the current (DRAFT) stat erail plan and if i remember correctly it was in the one before that too at a minimum
http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 9&t=109973

Most here know way more than I- but when LVR ran service to NY I think the NEC was much less used? So perhaps the "bigger" problem with Hunter seems not to be getting RVL trains onto the NEC but the fact that RVL trains have to foul a pile of NEC tracks to move accross to Track 1 or A in newark.

A month ago is pretty sudden. And presuming that NEC traffic was lower during rail's heyday is presuming too far, especially with the high volume of 20-car long-distance passenger trains that served in place of today's air traffic. It was most likely lower on the High Line (due to the split in Kearny and trains still going to Exchange Place), but west of Newark Penn, most likely not. (And average speeds of locals were higher, even with MP54s.)

Bring back Jersey City terminal, rebuild the Newark Bay Bridge, and service to all the stations (including Elizabeth) east of Cranford on the old JCL

For perhaps close to the full amount of was spent on HBLR, that service could have been restored with at least two tracks, including tunneling under Newark Bay to placate the Port Authority (plus ventilation) and even a PATH connection at the old terminus. Maybe even less. But NJ is still pay to play, and nobody can present a coherent argument as to how the state's corruption is not a factor in blowing project costs out of proportion (at least not yet that I can see).

(And I shudder to think how much all the regulation et cetera would expand the cost to build something like this today, excluding the new land reclamation between the Battery and Governor's Island.)

[ThirdRail7]

Funny thing is that the Lehigh Valley Railroad was able to use Hunter for its New York service, and in the older configuration (shorter-radius curve, no "flyover" as today). The Hunter improvements were touted as the biggest improvement since that connection came into being, especially being able to traverse the new connection at 40 mph. And where did this talk of a "flyover" suddenly originate?

i don't think it suddenly popped up-

its in the current (DRAFT) stat erail plan and if i remember correctly it was in the one before that too at a minimum
http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 9&t=109973

A month ago is pretty sudden.

Even though I didn't specifically mention it, the NEC Transportation Plan-Proposed Track Configuration (1998) notes the possibility of a future flyover connection to the RVL along with a 5th main from Dock to Elmora. Absent a flyover, it called for the elimination of Hunter and the expansion of Cliff and Haynes to compensate.

[rvlch]

Observed and noted that this season's track work on the RVL includes the significant refurbishing of the extant but much deteriorated 3rd track (old east bound local track?) from just east of Westfield station where it attaches to the eastbound main track, through Cranford Junction and on east a half mile or so to just a few feet before the Lehigh Line crosses overhead. Something over 3 miles of track I would say.

I'm wondering if maybe this is a storm storage preparedness project, especially since it includes that eastern most stretch to a dead end in the weeds. Or is there something else going on here?