Tom wrote:Actually the Port Authority is aggresively planning to extend PATH service to the Newark Airport Rail Link StationPerhaps I should have said "no plans to expand within Hudson County". Either way, no effect on the RVL in general.
Mark wrote:I have had just a great time on a number of occasions lugging all my stuff across Paris or London just because I needed to get from one train station to another! That just further illustrates my pointNo it does not. You're not supposed to treat railroads like airports. What's the purpose of going around major endpoints when it comes to business travel, especially with high-speed rail? I think you just described a very uncommon travel pattern right there.
As you show, we do not need to build a super terminal, we already have one in GCT. If NYP was in part through station to GCT some of the capacity issues there would be mitigatedOnly some? I believe that this particular Access to the Region's Core project (unsupported by NY, which led to its abandonment) had in mind the complete elimination of Hoboken Terminal eventually. I further suspect that the RVL would yet be a loser in that deal and not be extended to Manhattan.
Also worth mentioning yet again that GCT is unique in size—no other single rail terminal on the entire planet is as large. Quite the irony that this terminal, designed for long-distance travel, is now strictly a commuter endpoint.
Also, Hoboken had and has sufficient capacity so there is no need for a Jersey City terminalThere are some people who work the Hoboken Division that would be willing to debate the point. Either way, Hoboken is not currently the permanent RVL terminal.