Extending Empire Service to Newark

Is there any reason it can't be? Is there any reason not to have everything that goes through NYP start\end at Newark?

asyouare405 wrote:Is there any reason it can't be? Is there any reason not to have everything that goes through NYP start\end at Newark?

Empire Service trains don't go through NYP; for them to "continue" to Newark would require an engine change and reversal of direction.

There would need to be third rail electrification in the Hudson river tunnel, and that tunnel is already somewhat congested.

gprimr1 wrote:There would need to be third rail electrification in the Hudson river tunnel, and that tunnel is already somewhat congested.

Well, there already is third rail electrification in the North River tunnels. But like was posted above, it would require a reversal in direction.

With all due respect to New Jersey's largest city, how many Amtrak riders from upstate New York actually want to go there? Is there a market that would be significantly boosted by through service? There is extremely frequency service already in place between Penn Station and Newark (both Amtrak and NJT) that can accomodate Empire Service riders headed to the latter point, as well as the PATH connections. Plus, aside from the congestion issue already mentioned and the need to reverse direction at Penn Station, you'd also have to reverse or turn the consist at Newark.

Those would all be good reasons. Sorry for the wrong use of terminology

I didn't know there was a third rail in the Hudson river tunnels, I thought it was all overhead and in the East River tunnels was the third rail.

jersey_emt wrote:

gprimr1 wrote:There would need to be third rail electrification in the Hudson river tunnel, and that tunnel is already somewhat congested.

Well, there already is third rail electrification in the North River tunnels. But like was posted above, it would require a reversal in direction.

What type of third rail is it? Is it LIRR type or Hudson valley?

I might actually have occasion to use such service. I live in Jersey City and my wife and I have a weekend house upstate in Olive. Usually we drive there. But on occasion, I or we will take the train to Rhinecliff if my wife or her father is already up there.

I work near NYC Penn Station and sometimes (including tonight, as it happens) I'll take the train up from there. But if I were leaving from home it would be more convenient, if only slightly, to travel to Newark by PATH rather than 33rd Street.

Still, it's just very, very small amount of time saved, which is probably lost by the extra distance of the ride on Amtrak and the time it would take to go in and out of Penn Station. And I can't think of any other people in the same situation.

Adding and extending lines can always find some people who would benefit. But honestly, I don't see this service adding very much.

Now what I'd REALLY like to see is restoration of the line from Hudson County to Kingston. And while I'm at it, a restoration of the Delaware and Ulster railroad that would drop me off a few minutes from our house. But those lines are, for the most part, long gone.

Additionally, what would you do with the equipment once it gets to Newark? The station is too busy to leave it there, and there's really no place south of the station to store it. You could back it to the NJT yards at Harrison (a somewhat dangerous move). Or, continue to Philadelphia? (See above ... is there really a market for this?)

The only other viable destination for trains arriving from the Empire Corridor might be Boston (or Springfield), since the train would be pointed in the proper direction. But, you would still require a change of engine (unless you want to go all the way to Boston under diesel power). And, the train would probably require about an hour more to get to Boston, since you have the alternative of changing to the AE at NYP. Again, not worth the trouble.

george matthews wrote:

jersey_emt wrote:

gprimr1 wrote:There would need to be third rail electrification in the Hudson river tunnel, and that tunnel is already somewhat congested.

Well, there already is third rail electrification in the North River tunnels. But like was posted above, it would require a reversal in direction.

What type of third rail is it? Is it LIRR type or Hudson valley?

LIRR-type (contact shoe over-running). There would be no use for New York Central under-running third-rail within the North River Tunnels. (The original electrification in those tunnels was the LIRR-compatible third rail, FTR.) For dual-mode operation to be initiated, however, the third rail would have to extend some distance beyond the tunnels on the NJ side (originally, the third rail went all the way to Manhattan Transfer in Harrison NJ).

Newark is not a terminus for westbound trains on the NEC; only for westbound PATH trains. The point of Empire Corridor service terminating at NYP is to facilitate connections to Northeast Corridor service, not through-running with reverse moves and necessary engine changes—this is, of course, versus GCT. Besides, Newark is a mere fifteen to twenty minutes away from NYP by rail (perhaps twenty-five minutes nowadays what with the congestion at Secaucus Junction); not worth the trouble, nor with sufficiently high passenger demand, for a one-seat ride from the Empire Corridor.

(Of course, one possibility of through-running would be the Empire Corridor onto Long Island; but funding for "trial balloons" would most likely be dependent on the MTA, who would prefer a great deal of control thereof, I suspect.)

This proposal or idea is not only ridiculous but virtually impossible as well.
First off, it would tie up a station track at Penn Station while an engine is
put on the west end of the train to pull it through to Newark and station
tracks at Penn Station are not exactaly plentiful these days, there is no
excess track capacity between New York and Newark either, there is no
really decent place to turn the equipment nor service it either at Newark
and finally there is no need for those trains to go there. There is ample
service by NJT between New York and Newark and Amtrak and Path also
both serve that route.
For a time Amtrak tried running the Adirondack as a through train between
Washington and Montreal via Albany and that did not really work out either
because the turn time in New York was excessive and again, it tied up a
vital station track.
The Empire Service trains have excellent connections to the east and
south at Penn Station but it is still necessary to change trains there and I
do not see that changing anytime soon if ever.
Noel Weaver

Extending Empire Service to Newark: Is there any reason it can't be? Is there any reason not to have everything that goes through NYP start/end at Newark?

Amtrak's Newark Corridor will connect two of the world's great cities, Newark NY and Newark NJ, in effect extending the Albany-to-NYP corridor at both ends. Any technical problems at the Newark NJ end will be more than worth it.

The Newark NY station will technically be in Lyons. But that needn't get in the way! If the Albany station isn't exactly in Albany, why put the Newark station exactly in Newark?

Nor is the Buffalo station exactly in Buffalo.

And what about Newark DE? We just had a thread about that station on here, complaining about the dearth of Amtrak service stopping there… (of course, a faster and more direct way to connect Newark NJ to Newark NY would be to run trains over the former Lackawanna RR via Scranton and Binghamton, but that's a bigger fish we'd have to fry)

dumpster.penguin wrote:
Amtrak's Newark Corridor will connect two of the world's great cities, Newark NY and Newark NJ, in effect extending the Albany-to-NYP corridor at both ends. Any technical problems at the Newark NJ end will be more than worth it.

That is the most absurd logic I have ever heard. You are entitled to your opinion, as am I. MY opinion is that Newark, NJ is anything from "one of the world's great cities," and I have never even heard of Newark, NY. Your argument is that because you would be connecting two cities with the same name with a one-seat-ride, it is therefore worth it, no matter what technological and operational obstacles are present. Fine. By that logic, they should run a through train from Westport, NY (Adirondack) to Westport, CT (Metro-North). As absurd as that is, it is more operationally feasible as it would not require a reverse move, nor an engine change, and it would be more than worth it no matter how ridiculous it is.

I do not want to start a flame war, so I will not mention any names, but there are other message boards out there that are full of people constantly coming up with crazy stuff like this. I suggest you seek them out, as you will have a receptive audience.