Beacon Line Maintenance / Current Status / Background

Interesting presentation, but what solution does it offer? You have a bus that currently runs from Beacon's train station up to Main Street, and on to Route 9/Walmart/Westage Center. It's not full. Competing with that using a diesel MU or something similar is going to be more expensive and also run empty. It also fails to serve the two destinations that fill the bus (Main St. Beacon traffic and Westage/Walmart)

Also, the idea of placing the Fishkill station in the village behind the shopping plaza with CVS is likely to be a non-starter without additional traffic improvements on Main St/Route 52. It's a two-lane road that is a mess during "rush hours". That says nothing for the people on Blodgett or the folks who use the businesses in the CVS plaza. It also doesn't serve the Route 9 corridor (the same person using the bus isn't going to walk to Route 9 and then south to get to Westage or Walmart).

The population growth does not (nor does the original population number) take into account the number of residents who work in New York City or other communities served by the MNR Hudson line. How many of these new residents work in Manhattan? How many work at other businesses on Route 9? Or in Brewster? Or White Plains?

A DMU could be a nice feeder to Beacon from Hopewell if you could get enough cars off the road to make difference or attract new riders to use the system. As you have half-empty buses already running a portion of the route, experimenting with service that would cannibalize it seems like a waste.

If MNR had a spare $400MM (ha!) you could upgrade the line and eliminate some killer grade crossings (like Route 9) and provide service from Beacon to Brewster. But how many people live up here to take advantage of it? Unless White Plains becomes the new Manhattan and generates a job boom and related population growth, this seems like a railfan/policy wonk fantasy for our lifetimes.

everybody already knows this but here's the actual data:

re: Moving Dutchess FIRST DRAFT chap. 5


The Council collects traffic count data for County and some local roads and also receives count data from NYSDOT for State highways. Based on a review of data from 2009-2014, the following roads have consistently had the highest
ranges of Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) volumes in the County:

1. I-84: 50,000-68,000
2. Route 9 (south of Poughkeepsie): 18,000-64,000
3. Route 44 (east of Pleasant Valley): 14,000-38,000
4. Taconic State Parkway (south of LaGrange): 18,000-35,000
5. Route 55 (west of Pawling): 7,000-31,000
6. Route 376: 6,000-27,000
7. Route 9 (north of Poughkeepsie): 9,000-23,000
8. Route 82 (south of LaGrange): 6,000-21,000
9. Route 44 (west of Pleasant Valley): 3,000-21,000
10. CR 77 (Vassar Rd): 10,000-17,000
11. CR 44 (Red Oaks Mill Rd): 12,000-16,000
12. CR 93 (Myers Corners Rd): 7,000-15,000

1. Congested: >1.30
2. Approaching Congestion: 1.15-1.30
3. Not congested: <1.15

Based on the congestion analysis, the following roadways in Dutchess County experienced congestion during one or more peak periods in 2011:
1. Route 52 (westbound) from I-84 to the Taconic State Parkway: Weekday evening (TTI = 1.58).
2. Route 9 (northbound) from I-84 to Route 44/55: Weekday evening (TTI = 1.54).
3. Route 9 (southbound) from Route 9G to Route 44/55: Saturday (TTI =1.53).
4. Route 9 (southbound) from Route 44/55 to I-84: Saturday (TTI = 1.52) and Weekday evening (TTI = 1.51).

take note of the figures for SR52

The population or traffic numbers are moot. Unless a Fishkill - Beacon train has frequent service, commuters will find alternatives as proven on the Harlem and New Haven Lines. Logistically, the current lay out of both the Beacon Line and Hudson Line from CP58 to the station does not support it.

Back to the Harlem and New Haven Lines: even though there are statons in Paterson, Pawling, etc, some commuters choose to drive to Southeast where the service is more frequent. The same hold true for commuters that live along the Danbury Branch. There are some that live in Danbury that will drive to Southeast and some that live farther south that will drive to Norwalk. Why? Quicker travel times with no connections. People want to get off the train, get in their car and go home. Not wait for a connection. Expecially when their drive would be quicker than waiting for another train.

This isn't a if you build it, they will come situation. The cost would be astronomical with little benifit, expecially to those that would foot the bill, the taxpayers. It's bad enough everyone in Dutchess ounty has to pay MTA tax every time they register there car or renew their drivers license, regardless if they ever see a train in their lifetime. Let's not add insult to injury.

a operation between Hopewell and Beacon would mimic the New Canaan line, with a max of one train per hour over the 11.6 miles of single track and no room for passing tracks.
a bus operation would be capable of moving 3 times passengers with two buses (2 operators ) at way below cost .

I have mad foamer love for the Beacon Line. There are lots of interesting possibilities, but no money, and right now, no market.

Jeff Smith wrote:I have mad foamer love for the Beacon Line. There are lots of interesting possibilities, but no money, and right now, no market.

I can understand where you are coming from. For a rather short branch line it was very interesting to run a long freight train over it. It was a real challenge to run with a long train in either direction. The most difficult was from Hopewell to Beacon, mostly downgrade and a real challenge with a long train and poor dynamic brake or in some cases no dynamic brake. I guess I had the good lord upstairs watching over me because I had good luck running that line. From Beacon to Hopewell the trains were not as long but all loads and heavy, we needed all five units on that one. As I have said many times it was my weekend ride in the country. Unfortunately it is a memory today and not very likely to ever return either.
Noel Weaver

like Noel said, chance of it to ever to operate trains are nill..

Noel - interesting noting the challenging portions on the NY side. In your opinion on the CT side (technically Maybrook line) were the challenging parts being near Stevenson Dam and what looks like a steady uphill grade when going north going through Webb Mountain/Indian Well State park? I am always curious of that area whenever I take Rte34 to New Haven for work. Probably the most scenic part in CT.

We need to remember that at least during the New Haven days which is before I ever ran trains on that line no train had locomotives with dynamic brake at least in service. You always had to drag them down the hill and the trick was to use as little air as possible to accomplish that. I didn't have that section down to a science as I ran many more WB trains than EB trains. Much of my work was one way out of Oak Point as a pilot to Beacon and then deadhead back to New York on the next local on the Hudson Division, generally an RDC to Croton-Harmon and MU beyond to NYC. Approaching Stevenson as best I can recall was 20 or so MPH down to a 10 MPH section and pulling them down the grade it was relatively simple to just shut off at the right spot to get down to 10 MPH for the section where that was the top speed. I tried to use as little air as possible for that operation and that gave me some air still available for a later slow down if it became necessary.
It was a very scenic stretch but it was also a challenge at least EB.
Noel Weaver

For me the toughest part of the Maybrook coming east was in the Towners area, where you're coming off the grade, but then have to go up a little to cross over the Harlem line, then down again by the ice pond to Dykemans.

Going west, it was from Holmes to the point past the lake where you started down again.

By the time I came around (end of the 70's), CR had enough engines with reliable dynamic brakes. I preferred that to "the air", when possible.

Noel - was it regular practice to have crew swaps done at Danbury for SENH? I saw a video on YouTube of a westbound being re-crewed on the fly (literally.) I would imagine one crew would not run the entire trip from Beacon to Derby.

SENH and NHSE were crewed from Danbury, one crew would take train from Danbury to Selkirk and back, other crew would take train from Danbury to Cedar Hill and back to Danbury etc etc.

Back in my time working the Maybrook territory the crews between Cedar Hill and Selkirk ran through with home terminal for both sides in Cedar Hill. I suppose occasionally they would have trouble and not make it but overall most of the time the crews were able to make the run within 12 hours. It was harder and farther from Oak Point to Selkirk but even then they made it through most of the time.
Noel Weaver

Housekeeping; pardon the dust (Nomis and Naugatroll go "uh-oh" since it's my favorite MNRR line ) I tend to do this when something's in the news. Don't mind me.

For service restoration discussion: Beacon Line Service Proposals or Ideas

For the K9 facility in Stormville: MTA Police K9 Training Facility in Stormville (Beacon Line)

Dusting off some threads; this will be the pie-in-the-sky one for possible service resurrection.

For current status, history etc.: Beacon Line Maintenance / Current Status / Background

For the K9 training facility in Stormville: MTA Police K9 Training Facility in Stormville (Beacon Line)