Stupid Idea at Trenton?

So i found this image & it got me thinking....

Would it be possible to put those tracks on the right back in, use them for overnight & mid-day storage, and if you only put 1 back in, have space for a platform? I feel this might help SEPTA and NJT with on time performance and reduce missed connections between the two systems if an additional platform became available.

MODERATOR'S NOTE: Edited the title of this thread.

Looks like there is a 3rd track out of frame, based on the switch visible on the extreme right edge of that photo. I know the one is "low" next to today's track 2 or "high", so maybe you could put a platform on the side of the far right track, and have 2 storage tracks between two platform tracks? This way you get both storage AND an additional track for station stops, and you don't even need to use that new platform all day, you could use its track for equipment layover as well..... This could possibly be a good thing if morrisville ever gets a new station, as it would let NJT from morrisville yard bypass the SEPTA train if one is stopped at a morrisville station, then when the SEPTA train gets to trenton, it has an empty platform track to itself?

Any thoughts from anyone on this?

25Hz wrote:So i found this image & it got me thinking....

Would it be possible to put those tracks on the right back in, use them for overnight & mid-day storage, and if you only put 1 back in, have space for a platform? I feel this might help SEPTA and NJT with on time performance and reduce missed connections between the two systems if an additional platform became available.

As I understand it, the problem was that NJT and SEPTA were terminating trains there and Amtrak was using it as a through station. NJT solved (some/all) of their problems in 2004-2008 with Morrisville Yard. SEPTA has not built a yard in NJ for themselves.

I think the best solution for the problem is to have SEPTA/NJT joint through trains from Temple University to New York Penn Station. Obviously, this would require cooperation from NJT, SEPTA, and Amtrak which is unlikely.

Morris does not seem that busy, even during peak hours, which is the main area of issue for trains to pass through & get to a platform from PA to NJ... Having seen the use of trenton skyrocket from 2001 to present, i was just thinking that it has become a major station along the NEC, and that more capacity might be welcomed by all 3 parties, and please passengers by decreasing missed connections, and allow SEPTA to increase intervals if they ever get the funding to do so.

Having traversed the delaware dozens of times on SEPTA and spent hours at trenton observing while waiting for a ride home on days i went to NYC, this just seems to make sense to me. There have been times when due to amtrak activity, NJT pulled in on track 2 and amtrak on track 1, and as soon as amtrak train cleared the block, the NJT train left too, only to have a SEPTA train pull in on track 2 where on the paper timetable there was a 10 minute window to go from one train to the other. I have been on 3 of those SEPTA trains, and it really was irritating having to wait 45 minutes for the local, having missed the last express. And i was only there 1-2 times a week for leisure, so imagine how frustrating it is to someone trying to get to work...

If my notion of more tracks & platforms at trenton is stupid, then what would a better solution look like? A SEPTA yard does not in my opinion really solve anything, because you are still left with 4 platform tracks which does not enhance capacity.

And to address the idea of through commuter service a la PRR, it's not really an amtrak issue, but a union issue, and a FRA issue. Who is qualified on the route? Which agency has their people on the train? How would a contract for such a service look? Would it cause new problems to implement transit through service? It would have to be NJT equipment or new rolling stock, because you'd need bathrooms on board. Sure, in concept it sounds like a great common sense idea, but in reality i think it may be a bit more complicated. Then you get into the idea of a larger single multi-state transit agency with all the complications of state and local politics and budgets and who owns what etc. Kinda makes you wish that conrail was still doing it all, doesn't it? But those were the bad old days and time has marched on. If we really want to chnge how transit operates on the northeast corridor, you gotta give it room to grow, i think. Room to adapt to changing and increasing demand patterns in the shape of sidings & additional throughput capacity at increasingly important stations such as trenton.

25Hz wrote:And to address the idea of through commuter service a la PRR, it's not really an amtrak issue, but a union issue, and a FRA issue. Who is qualified on the route? Which agency has their people on the train? How would a contract for such a service look? Would it cause new problems to implement transit through service? It would have to be NJT equipment or new rolling stock, because you'd need bathrooms on board. Sure, in concept it sounds like a great common sense idea, but in reality i think it may be a bit more complicated. Then you get into the idea of a larger single multi-state transit agency with all the complications of state and local politics and budgets and who owns what etc. Kinda makes you wish that conrail was still doing it all, doesn't it? But those were the bad old days and time has marched on. If we really want to chnge how transit operates on the northeast corridor, you gotta give it room to grow, i think. Room to adapt to changing and increasing demand patterns in the shape of sidings & additional throughput capacity at increasingly important stations such as trenton.

The answers probably lie in the NJT/MNRR Train to the Game they run from New Haven to Secaucus (for transfer to the Meadowlands). There you have three different territories, MNRR, Amtrak, then NJT. At least at Trenton, you're going from NJT straight to SEPTA and vice versa. An easy solution might be to simply run the equipment through and change crews at Trenton. But I'm far from an expert in crew logistics.

25Hz wrote:And to address the idea of through commuter service a la PRR, it's not really an amtrak issue, but a union issue, and a FRA issue.

Would Amtrak object to a direct competition of their 30th Street to New York Penn Service? I would think that they would.

One of Trenton's problems lie in the waterway on the left hand side of the picture, it has been known to rampage on occasion. The decision to yard NJT at Morrisville rather the old Barracks, was the PRR old timers located the station in a flood plain.

Ok, but what about adding capacity including storage capacity at trenton via additional tracks where they actually had them before & one new platform?

Those other issues can be addressed in their own thread.

I think Amtrak was happy to turn the Clockers over to NJ Transit some years ago. The problem for passengers was that the through trains between New York and Philadelphia were replaced by NJ Transit service between New York and Trenton.

The NEC Future project (http://www.necfuture.com/) proposes a Metropolitan service that I like. It is basically Clockers all up and down the Northeast Corridor, providing a cheaper coach service with more stops. The Amtrak Northeast Corridor service has gotten so expensive that I am always using cheaper alternatives when I can.

I've made the Trenton transfer many times myself, most recently last month. Knowing how tight the transfer can be, I ordered my Septa ticket by mail ahead of time, so I had it in my pocket when I got off NJ Transit at Trenton and didn't have to worry about getting in line at a ticket machine. I had boarded at Bradley Beach and bought a ticket to Trenton, but through tickets to Philadelphia were not available from the machines there, as far as I could tell. The Metropolitan service, if implemented, would stop at Rahway, I guess, and I could board a through train to Philadelphia there. I would like that.

Literalman wrote:I think Amtrak was happy to turn the Clockers over to NJ Transit some years ago. The problem for passengers was that the through trains between New York and Philadelphia were replaced by NJ Transit service between New York and Trenton.

Why did NJT start the Clockers in Trenton instead of Philadelphia? Did they have no desire for travel to Philly, did Amtrak oppose it, or did SEPTA block it?

zerovanity59 wrote:

Literalman wrote:I think Amtrak was happy to turn the Clockers over to NJ Transit some years ago. The problem for passengers was that the through trains between New York and Philadelphia were replaced by NJ Transit service between New York and Trenton.

Why did NJT start the Clockers in Trenton instead of Philadelphia? Did they have no desire for travel to Philly, did Amtrak oppose it, or did SEPTA block it?

From the way I understand it (all of it that follows), the Clockers were an Amtrak service run between Philadelphia and New York Penn Station. They were run with NJT ALP-46s and some Amfleets. Between Philadelphia and Trenton, there was not very much ridership. It mostly carried NJT monthly passholders between Trenton and NYP. Eventually, the trains were full of NJT Passholders, and NJT was offered the chance to purchase the NYP slots that the Clockers utilized. As a result, we have the NJT Super Expresses between Trenton (Hamilton, PJ, some New Brunswick, NWK, SEC) and NYP today.

I think that the same issue holds true today with the ridership. Most of the equipment that would be run between Philadelphia and NYP would be empty. From experience, SEPTA only fills up two Silverliner IVs in the reverse peak between PHL and TRE. NJT, on the other hand, fills up 10 MLs between TRE and NYP. Eight of the 10 multilevels would be empty between PHL and TRE. Why put empty miles on the brand new equipment.

Speaking of empty miles, the only operational benefit that a rail yard in Trenton would serve would be a reduction in deadhead miles for the SEPTA equipment, and possibly more service. I would be ecstatic if and when that terrible Route 78 bus is replaced with a train from Trenton.

zerovanity59 wrote: Why did NJT start the Clockers in Trenton instead of Philadelphia? Did they have no desire for travel to Philly, did Amtrak oppose it, or did SEPTA block it?

I don't think New Jersey tax payers would be too happy to find out their taxes are going towards subsidizing trains that run in Pennsylvania. I'm sure if Pennsylvania wants to foot the bill, something could be arranged between all 3 parties. But I doubt that would ever happen.

mvb119 wrote:

zerovanity59 wrote: Why did NJT start the Clockers in Trenton instead of Philadelphia? Did they have no desire for travel to Philly, did Amtrak oppose it, or did SEPTA block it?

I don't think New Jersey tax payers would be too happy to find out their taxes are going towards subsidizing trains that run in Pennsylvania. I'm sure if Pennsylvania wants to foot the bill, something could be arranged between all 3 parties. But I doubt that would ever happen.

NJT is supposed to serve the people of New Jersey many of which work in New York or Philly. Why do they only have trains that allow for commuting to New York?
I know that the Trenton line has lots of stops in PA and one stop in NJ while NECL has many in NJ and one in NY. Is that the reason?

As R3 noted, ridership was very low on Clockers between Philly and Trenton, the vast majority of the seats were filled with folks in New Jersey. Secondly, the last 1.2 miles of the Northeast Corridor between Trenton and NYC (lets just say halfway under the Hudson River) actually falls in NY, whereas there is 35 miles between Trenton and Philadelphia, a much greater distance, therefore I stand by my point of Pennsylvania paying its fair share. Ultimately Amtrak has the final say, not SEPTA nor NJT, since it is their tracks. We're talking about extending the current NJT expresses to Philly, I assume that the vast majority of people using this service are going to NYC, as that is how the expresses are currently set up for the peak direction. I don't think it would be very feasible to go the opposite direction considering the railroad is already congested enough during rush hour, they'd essentially be going against the grain. I've often seen on the screen here where I work, 3 out of 4 of the tracks being used for the peak direction with the 4th being used for the opposite direction.