Metro-North New Haven Line Penn Station Access

[Jishnu]

Yes but I was referring to the M8s :/


Then again, the Arrow IVs will be able to go the entire NEC too..

That is exactly the point I was making. And unlike the M8s, Arrow IVs will be low platform capable.

[Jeff Smith]

New service, or at least, reconstituted service, seems to be a topic du jour here. I know it's been discussed on a lot of the different threads. Although not my only preference, I would start service from MNRR into Penn.

Yeah, I know, Penn has no slots. Still, when ESA opens, and if the PA and NJ are serious about a new tunnel under the Hudson into a new terminal under 34th St north of Penn, that's a lot of slots getting freed up. And there are the tech issues of power supply (over-under shoes would add a lot of flexibility).

Still, with a new station going in at Sunnyside (not looking for a transfer there or at Jamaica into Penn - same issue with slots and if the trains are full, it doesn't work), storage there and at Highbridge, it would be nice to have that flexibility. Imagine being able to get from Stamford to Montauk, Oyster Bay, or the Hamptons with a transfer at Sunnyside. Or even a one-seat ride with an over/under-shoe. Not to mention a connection to JFK.

With new stations in Co-op City, Parkchester, Queens, etc., this provides a great upside. You could add stations on the West-Side line, too, and the Harlem could access Hells Gate over a rebuilt Port Morris (yeah, tech issues ). Maybe even stop short of Penn in a terminal like the proposed 34th St. terminal.

Any other thoughts? New service in CDOT territory? Over the TZB?

[Terminal Proceed]

You are beating a dead horse about this issue - look through the threads - it's already been discussed.

[Jeff Smith]

If you read my post, I mention I've read the other threads. I thought I could and did add something new, but maybe I am beating a dead horse.

Anyway, I thought it could spur some discussion about other service expansion ideas, like in CDOT territory (although New Milford discussion is probably another dead horse).

[RedSoxSuck]

The whole purpose for ESA is to RELIEVE overcrowding conditions at NYP. It is NOT for the purpose of giving immature Long Islanders the option of arriving on the East side. Given that GCT is operating UNDER capacity, there is NO reason to send some MNR trains there. Also, given MNR's lack of a Jamaica-like transfer point, there is no logical way to implement this service without either buying a LOT of new equipment to run redundant (and, therefore, unneeded) service (without a significant amount of new customers as a result), or diverting existing service from GCT.

If existing service was to be diverted to NYP, the ONLY thing that would be gained would be giving people the option to arrive at NYP. In exchange, it would add significant operating constraints and CUT service to GCT, and, I don't know about you, given the choice, I would certainly prefer to use GCT.

Also, MNR would be Amtrak's b***h. Right now, with the sole exception of the Beacon/Maybrook line between Danbury and the state line, MNR (or CDOT) ownes ALL of the trackage that it uses. This gives them a significant advantage over, as far as I know, every other commuter railroad in the country. As it is, MNR does not have to deal with the crap associated with running on another RR's tracks.

My ultimate point is that nothing significant would be gained by running MNR trains to NYP; it would only significantly degrade the quality of MNR service. Just because something COULD be done, it doesn't necessarially mean it SHOULD be done.

[Jeff Smith]

The whole purpose for ESA is to RELIEVE overcrowding conditions at NYP. It is NOT for the purpose of giving immature Long Islanders the option of arriving on the East side. Given that GCT is operating UNDER capacity, there is NO reason to send some MNR trains there. Also, given MNR's lack of a Jamaica-like transfer point, there is no logical way to implement this service without either buying a LOT of new equipment to run redundant (and, therefore, unneeded) service (without a significant amount of new customers as a result), or diverting existing service from GCT.

If existing service was to be diverted to NYP, the ONLY thing that would be gained would be giving people the option to arrive at NYP. In exchange, it would add significant operating constraints and CUT service to GCT, and, I don't know about you, given the choice, I would certainly prefer to use GCT.

Also, MNR would be Amtrak's b***h. Right now, with the sole exception of the Beacon/Maybrook line between Danbury and the state line, MNR (or CDOT) ownes ALL of the trackage that it uses. This gives them a significant advantage over, as far as I know, every other commuter railroad in the country. As it is, MNR does not have to deal with the crap associated with running on another RR's tracks.

My ultimate point is that nothing significant would be gained by running MNR trains to NYP; it would only significantly degrade the quality of MNR service. Just because something COULD be done, it doesn't necessarially mean it SHOULD be done.

Love that alias - I miss my Yankees down here - fans down here have no clue about baseball, and no loyalties.

Those are awesome points, especially about running over Amtrak's road. and diverting service, not attracting new passengers. On that, I probably should concede the argument to you. Penn service doesn't really add anything by your argument, and the benefit gained by relieving Penn of ESA would be negated (and in retrospect, ARC and the new tunnel from Jersey would add passengers, not just relieve Penn). Plus, Penn is a toilet. I hope the Dolans are happy.

Still, commuters are the customers MNRR are supposed to serve. With the Lex line overcrowded, and the 2nd Ave line still a long way off, wouldn't Penn service offer some relief for those conditions? Maybe this service could use the ARC terminal on 34th. Plus, provide a direct connection between "immature" (I love that!) Long Island and Metro-North at Sunnyside - that might take some cars off the road and add runs on an under-utilized road.

On equipment, MNRR is already purchasing a ton of M-8's. I guess there is the incremental cost of the additional power equipment and inherent design costs for that. Let me ask you this: why not order some Genesis locomotive with LIRR type shoes (complying with Manhattan req'mts against diesel), which could be used on all MNRR divisions, and some off the shelf Bombardier coaches, which I would think are less expensive than customized M-8's.

Still, your points are well taken on Penn, thanks. But there is some benefit to the idea of Hell's Gate and West-Side service into Manhattan. Now, to throw some gas on the fire, if only the High-Line were active and not rail-banked (was it rail-banked?), we could run service down to Chelsea and Wall St, too.

[mkm4]

why not order some Genesis locomotive with LIRR type shoes, which could be used on all MNRR divisions

Unless they get retractable/adjustable shoes, they won't work on MN trackage and from what I've heard the retractable/adjustable shoes on the Amtrak Gennies, are nothing but problems.

[RearOfSignal]

Still, commuters are the customers MNRR are supposed to serve. With the Lex line overcrowded, and the 2nd Ave line still a long way off, wouldn't Penn service offer some relief for those conditions? Maybe this service could use the ARC terminal on 34th. Plus, provide a direct connection between "immature" (I love that!) Long Island and Metro-North at Sunnyside - that might take some cars off the road and add runs on an under-utilized road.

The primary purpose of the ESA is to relieve congestion at NYP. Once ESA is up and running yes there will be more room than before, but that does mean that MN should run trains there because then the situation would just be the same as before -overcrowded.

If a MN customer wants to get to NYP, then spend $2.00 and take the 42nd street shuttle or the 7 into TSQ, and then take the 1,2,3,A,C,E to Penn, or take a Bus, or walk; there are plenty of options already existing without having to add extra rail service into Penn. Plenty of people including myself, do this everyday.

[DutchRailnut]

There will NOT be more room at Penn untill new 34street terminal is built and that probably will not be in my lifetime.
The ESA service will add LIRR trains to New york it will not move them from Penn to GCT.
LIRR will keep same amount of slots in Penn station.
IF LIRR were to vacate slots they would go to NJT before MNCR, or could be by Amtrak themself.

[Nester]

On equipment, MNRR is already purchasing a ton of M-8's. I guess there is the incremental cost of the additional power equipment and inherent design costs for that. Let me ask you this: why not order some Genesis locomotive with LIRR type shoes (complying with Manhattan req'mts against diesel), which could be used on all MNRR divisions, and some off the shelf Bombardier coaches, which I would think are less expensive than customized M-8's.

Even if we "gloss over" the acceleration issues that go along with substituting diesel locomotive service for Electric MU service, there are also the logistics of acquiring, storing and distributing the fuel for these locomotives. Besides, if the shoes are configured for LIRR territory, they aren't configured for MNR territory, which means that those locomotives could not enter GCT in electric mode.

There are also matters of crew, ticketing, and passenger facilities at NYP that no one has addressed yet.

Even if you could get some freed, usable slots at NYP, there are still at lot of trains moving in and out of the station at all times, so turning MNR trains in the station is only going to quickly re-create the current NYP situation with 4 railroads instead of 3. At least Amtrak and NJT can blow a pair of tunnel slots with yard moves to Sunnyside. MNR doesn't have that option since their nearest yard would be beyond HellGate or require a trip of the west side and a reverse move at Spuyten Duyvil (assuming that the old wye isn't restored).

I can't see the LIRR sharing West Side Yard since they don't have enough room to store their trains for the evening rush.

I don't deny that there are benefits to having MNR serve New York Penn Station, but the work necessary to reliably provide service isn't worth the money that would need to be spent. It would cheaper, quicker and easier to implement a shuttle bus that connected the GCT and NYP for those passengers who need it.

For those passengers who truly desire a rail-based solution, it would be easier to extend the 7 from it's proposed terminal at the Convention Center _back around_ to a new terminal at Penn, but then you're still left with that pesky problem of where to (vertically) stick the ROW and the the terminal. Perhaps a new terminal underneath the existing Penn Station? A guy can dream, can't he?

[Jeff Smith]

The primary purpose of the ESA is to relieve congestion at NYP. Once ESA is up and running yes there will be more room than before, but that does mean that MN should run trains there because then the situation would just be the same as before -overcrowded.

If a MN customer wants to get to NYP, then spend $2.00 and take the 42nd street shuttle or the 7 into TSQ, and then take the 1,2,3,A,C,E to Penn, or take a Bus, or walk; there are plenty of options already existing without having to add extra rail service into Penn. Plenty of people including myself, do this everyday.

On crappy weather days, I used to take the 7 from GCT over to the 6th Ave Line, then head up to Rock Ctr. I don't think people necessarily want to get from GCT to Penn, but to West-Side subway lines. No objection to doing that certainly, but wouldn't it be nice if the capacity were there? Like everyone else, I like to dream.

I hated the shuttle, even though it's easier to access - seems like a big waste. Better to restore the original IRT connection from Park to Broadway. 7 extension is long overdue.

Interestingly, my first subway ride (I was almost 4) was on the 7 for the 64 World's Fair. Love that station under GCT - so far underground, and it seemed so futuristic back then.

[RearOfSignal]

I don't think people necessarily want to get from GCT to Penn, but to West-Side subway lines. No objection to doing that certainly, but wouldn't it be nice if the capacity were there? Like everyone else, I like to dream.

I've noticed in the past that there seems to be more people heading towards west-side lines from Penn, then towards the east side lines from GCT, but perhaps thats because of the physical set up of each terminal and the large crowds can be misleading.

Still, there are people who arrive on the west side and travel to the east side and vice-versa, thats only cross-town service. Bringing LIRR into GCT and MNRR into NYP, might alieviate that situation somewhat. But the subway lines that are overcrowded (like the Lex) are North-South services. Even if someone takes the LIRR ESA into GCT and has to go to 86St or 14St, they would have to take the LEX or 2nd Ave line(when finished). So the extra rail service would do little to fix that problem, it would only lessen the amount of commuters going cross-town. The ESA would help the Flushing Line in to NY and perhaps the Carnasie line.

But IMHO I don't see how MNRR into NYP would do much help. It would only benefit New Haven line customers, and how much of a demand is there for that service? Taking into mind that modifications that would have to be made to equipment, the training that crews would have to go through, and the cooperation of at least four agencies, it seems to me more trouble that its really worth.

[Jeff Smith]

http://www.trainweb.org/ct/minutes10-06.htm

More studies, one I haven't heard of before - Old Saybrook to Hartford. Any thoughts? The infrastructure cost seems very high for the Springfield-Hartford-NH implementation. I'm guessing that's max build.

According to CDOT's rail map, that line is owned by Amtrak.

[playdough]

The (infamous?) Caren Halbfinger has written an article about the recent approval of $2.6 billion in federal funding for the East Side Access project:

http://www.lohud.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti ... 90338/1276

One interesting tidbit that I was unaware of:

... East Side Access is expected to clear the way for a reciprocal arrangement, whereby some Metro-North trains would go directly to Penn Station. Westchester and Putnam residents who summer in the Hamptons then could take a train from their home stations and easily connect to the train to the Hamptons.

But West Side Access, as the proposal for bringing Metro-North trains to Penn Station is called, is still in the planning stages, even though most of the infrastructure exists and it would be much less costly, Wheeler said.

How exactly would "West Side Access" work? Dedicated track from GCT to Penn, so that trains can stop at GCT and then proceed to Penn Station (or the reverse)? Or would certain MN trains terminate/originate at Penn Station and skip GCT entirely?

[Jeff Smith]

http://www.trainweb.org/ct/mnpenn.htm

This is all I could find - the MTA site had something on it, but the link off the cap constr page is gone now. I'm not sure what the URL was, I may have it stored somewhere, if so, I'll post.

Penn access would run over the Hell's Gate or West Side Lines, and not through GCT. The Harlem would, if MNRR gets access to Penn, run over a wye at Port Morris to Hell's Gate or a reverse move to Spuyten Duyvil.

Apparently, ESA is all new capacity, and does not diminish any MNRR capacity into GCT, so there might not be any requirement for the LIRR to reciprocate.

As I've been admonished on these threads, there are a lot of hurdles to overcome for Penn access:

- technology: two different types of catenary, and two different types of third rail, or, third rail shoes.
- capacity: Penn is busting - any service to GCT would likely supplement LIRR capacity into midtown, not divert any. NJT is already exploring new rail tunnels and a new terminal.

Penn service for MNRR would be great, but it might have to go somewhere else on the West Side, such as an alternate terminus on the West Side line, or into a new proposed ARC terminal (the new rail tunnel proposed under the Hudson would go into a new terminal on the west side).

As much as I think this would be a great service, I've been convinced on here Penn won't happen, and the No. suburbs would probably have to settle for a transfer at Sunnyside or a small terminal around 42nd.