Railroad Forums 

Discussion relating to the past and present operations of the NYC Subway, PATH, and Staten Island Railway (SIRT).

Moderator: GirlOnTheTrain

 #39574  by GP38
 
That's not a law. There CAN be physical connections to transfer rolling stock between the two different modes.

The law is that something like "subway" rapid transit service can not run with heavy rail such as the LIRR on the same tracks.
AFAIK, there is no law that there can't be a connection, just that there can't be both modes of service running together on shared trackage in revenue service.

 #39641  by JayMan
 
Ok, why is this?

 #40360  by R142A
 
JayMan wrote:Ok, why is this?
One reason is that subway cars do not have to meet FRA requirements for crash-proofness (is that even a word?)
 #41012  by BMT
 
Also, railroads can carry frieght and rapid transit lines CAN NOT carry frieght (with rare exceptions like SBK).

I believe the ruling of no sharing of trackage between rapid transit and common-carrier railroads came down sometime in the 1920's. At that time it was the ICC (Interstate Commerce Commission), as the FRA was created much later. This is the reason that the IRT/LIRR connection at Atlantic Avenue Terminal was abandoned. Some of you are aware of the remnant of the turnout at Atlantic.

 #41310  by chuchubob
 
R142A wrote:
JayMan wrote:Ok, why is this?
One reason is that subway cars do not have to meet FRA requirements for crash-proofness (is that even a word?)
That's the major reason. Running relatively light weight transit vehicles on the same railroad at the same time as heavy freight trains or passenger trains would be potentially as dangerous as allowing cars and tractor trailers to use the same highways at the same time.

 #41341  by Railsfuture1
 
Maybe I'm pointing out the obvious here, but don't Tractor-Trailers and cars use the same highways?

 #41659  by GP38
 
Passenger rail and freight rail have higher standards than the subway that must be followed. For example, if the LIRR and subway were to run on the same tracks, they would have to bring the subway equipment up to the more strict passenger rail standards. The trains would have to have things like ditch lights, and other requirements that non-rapid transit rail needs.

 #41664  by Chris R16
 
GP38 wrote:Passenger rail and freight rail have higher standards than the subway that must be followed. For example, if the LIRR and subway were to run on the same tracks, they would have to bring the subway equipment up to the more strict passenger rail standards. The trains would have to have things like ditch lights, and other requirements that non-rapid transit rail needs.
This is why the SIR R44's have been modified to meet FRA regulations.

 #55933  by KMA
 
It all depends on whether the property in question is a "Railroad" as defined by federal law or not. If the answer is yes, the property is regulated by the FRA; if it's no, the FRA doesn't regulate the property.

IIRC (which you can check by going to the FRA website), the legal definition depends mostly on whether the property in question is part of the national railroad system, not on the type of rolling stock.

For example, the H&M was and, because of history and inertia (not to mention politics), its successor PATH is regarded as a part of the national railroad system and thus a Railroad while the NYC subway has always (at least since the current laws have been in force) been outside the national system of railroads and thus not a Railroad as defined by federal law even though the two properties use essentially the same kind of rolling stock to provide essentially the same kind of service.

It should be noted that each property has at least one connection to another rail property, one that constitutes a Railroad. So long as the connection is used only for deliveries by a Railroad to the property in question, it should have no more effect on the status of the property than any industrial siding owned by any other Railroad customer. OTOH, start running regularly scheduled pax service over that connection and you've made a really good argument that each property is a Railroad.

SIR, BTW, is just more proof that once trackage is owned by a Railroad (the B&O), the Govt. is loath to admit that the trackage is no longer part of the national system, even years after the only connection to the rest of the system has been obliterated.

 #60128  by Otto Vondrak
 
But... but... SIRT operated lightweight BMT-standard type cars in rapid transit service on the same tracks they offered regular freight service... up until 1970?? How did they get away with that?

-otto-

 #62168  by Eltingville SINY
 
Otto Vondrak wrote:But... but... SIRT operated lightweight BMT-standard type cars in rapid transit service on the same tracks they offered regular freight service... up until 1970?? How did they get away with that?

-otto-
The old SIRT rolling stock was modified to FRA standards.

As long as the potential exists for SIR to be reconnected to the North Shore line, it will probably remain FRA-compliant.

 #62222  by 7 Train
 
The SI R44's, up until GOH were FRA-modified as well.

 #63686  by Otto Vondrak
 
How do the current SIR cars meet FRA requirements? How did the old SIR cars meet FRA requirements?

I remember for a period of time the SIR operated with some borrowed LIRR MU's... why didnt the SIR stick with standard MU cars instead of reverting back to rapid transit equipment? Seems like 1100's or M-1's would have been a good fit for the SIR? Or will the line always be rapid transit by nature?

-otto-
 #64288  by fordhamroad
 
When were the connections between LIRR and BRT/BMT under Atlantic Avenue in use, and what was done with them?
Roger