Railroad Forums 

  • Connection between ESA and diesel country

  • Discussion of the past and present operations of the Long Island Rail Road.
Discussion of the past and present operations of the Long Island Rail Road.

Moderator: Liquidcamphor

 #1563236  by photobug56
 
Back in 1996, LIRR officials told me that Port Jeff (and presumably other diesel country trains) would connect to ESA trains to/from GCT by a quick over the platform transfer at a new Sunnyside station. Of course, there will be no Sunnyside station. And LIRR likes to 'punish' diesel country passengers by making the transfer to Penn, for instance, as slow, difficult, strenuous and painful as possible, even where it seems easy. Over the years, I would have to, for instance, shove my way off a train from Penn, try to get to the hopefully working escalator, run a few platforms over, and run down the steps before the Port Jeff train departed - if indeed, they even told us what platform the PJ train would be on, let alone what platform we'd come into Jamaica on.

So I've been asking LIRR officials and reps now, numerous times, how an inbound passenger from PJ line will switch to GCT, and vice versa. Everyone I've encountered from Mr. Eng on down. And even via LIRRCC. And after years of asking, I still don't have an answer even though they claim that ESA will open in Dec 2022 (which I truly doubt).

I have heard some guesses, but does anyone have any real answers?
 #1563254  by FrankAndCindy
 
Hello Photobucket, You seem to like criticizing the LIRR, at every aspect. I'm sure the lirr will come up with a comprehensive solution. I wonder if you have a solution or you just like to complain. Thank You Frank and Cindy
 #1563259  by NYR99
 
Who is forcing you to take diesel service? You have options. You can go to Ronkonkoma for direct electric service into Penn and eventually GCT. Or you can take a diesel train from Port Jefferson and transfer at Jamaica. The choice is yours, why are you choosing to transfer at Jamaica if you dislike it so much?
 #1563271  by Pensyfan19
 
I was about to say, did anyone ever consider the famous change at Jamaica? :wink:

In terms of the Sunnyside station, I'm not sure how that project is coming along. It might open a few years after EAS opens. It would be great for railfanning though.
 #1563288  by Head-end View
 
Just a guess how it will work at Jamaica. Similar to what currently exists. Something like Diesel-Track 1. GCT train-Track 2. Penn Sta-Track 3. All cross platform transfers.

Eastbound might be Diesel-Track 8. Penn Sta.-Track 7, GCT-Track 6. Still cross-platform transfers except that as we all know the Brooklyn Service will be up and over to the new Platform-F, a slap in the face to the Brooklyn riders.
 #1563289  by photobug56
 
njtmnrrbuff wrote: Sun Feb 14, 2021 8:27 am Unfortunately, the LIRR dual mode and straight diesel C3 bilevel trains won't be allowed to run into GCT. It will be all electric trains.
The C3 cars were designed to be about 3 inches too high for the original 63rd street tunnels as built decades ago, and POSSIBLY too long to make the turns.
 #1563291  by Head-end View
 
The only problem should be the height. Most if not all standard railroad passenger cars are eighty-five feet long, so the M-series cars and the bi-levels should be the same length.
 #1563293  by photobug56
 
Head-end View wrote: Sun Feb 14, 2021 8:33 pm The only problem should be the height. Most if not all standard railroad passenger cars are eighty-five feet long, so the M-series cars and the bi-levels should be the same length.
Makes sense. What got me that day standing in the tunnel talking to LIRR officials (I was a member of the LIRR ESA Citizens Task Force on a tour of the Queens end of the existing tunnels in 1996) was that they saw nothing strange about choosing to design double decker cars that were barely 3 or so inches too tall to fit into the tunnels already built. It would have been a challenge, but they hadn't had a single C3 built yet. I tend to believe it would have been doable.
 #1563294  by Head-end View
 
I'm sure the bi-level cars are more than three inches higher than the M-series cars. They may be only three inches higher than the tunnel ceiling but you need additional clearance between the train's roof and the tunnel ceiling.

Maybe someone on here can tell us the exact heights of both series of cars?
 #1563295  by Head-end View
 
Okay, I can answer my own question.

The M7 cars are 12ft, 10 1/2 inches high.

The C-3 cars are 14ft, 5 inches high.

There you go photobug56. Nothing like having the facts in front of you.
 #1563297  by photobug56
 
Not even close to what I said. The LIRR officials told me, 25 years ago, that the C3 cars were about 2 or 3 inches too tall to fit into the tunnel. They did not compare them to the M7's which came out after the C3's or the M9's which were not even yet a nightmare or dream of LIRR officials. The height comparison was between the double decker cars and the already built LIRR level of the 63rd street tunnel, which as explained to me was built to meet SUBWAY car sizing even though that level was for the commuter railroad. IOTW - the designers of the tunnel didn't think through what they were designing for LIRR. Decades later, LIRR officials, well aware of that mistake, chose to go with a design for the C3 cars that would not allow them to use that tunnel, a decision that haunts us today a quarter century later. Double decker commuter cars have been built for tighter clearances than the C3's - LIRR, IMHO, has never taken diesel country passengers very seriously (except the weekend summer drunks).

As to the facts, helps if they are relevant.
 #1563298  by photobug56
 
Head-end View wrote: Sun Feb 14, 2021 8:11 pm Just a guess how it will work at Jamaica. Similar to what currently exists. Something like Diesel-Track 1. GCT train-Track 2. Penn Sta-Track 3. All cross platform transfers.

Eastbound might be Diesel-Track 8. Penn Sta.-Track 7, GCT-Track 6. Still cross-platform transfers except that as we all know the Brooklyn Service will be up and over to the new Platform-F, a slap in the face to the Brooklyn riders.
That does seem likely, leaving me baffled as to why they won't say that they are at least thinking to do it that way. But Port Jeff riders (and presumably other diesel riders) have frequently been screwed. As it is, peak service (pre pandemic) has never been frequent enough, and east bound has been super slow - to my station it can easily take 90 minutes for about 40 miles. And off peak is a joke, sometimes multi hour waits between trains. So I don't assume that LIRR will make any attempt to make it smooth, quick or easy. LIRR estimates that passengers to GCT should save about 40 minutes per day when ESA opens, but I'm guessing that only applies to electric passengers who don't have to change trains. And no estimate has been provided for diesel country passengers.
 #1563311  by njtmnrrbuff
 
Don't get your hopes of of more through trains coming from the diesel lines into NYP in the short term. It seems that there will be a lot of maintenance work that needs to get done in the East River Tunnels. Plus, I'm not sure how strong enough ridership is east of Huntington to justify more through trains to NYP. The Port Jefferson Line east of Huntington isn't really that fast anyway. Change of Jamaica will always exist. If you don't like changing at Jamaica and you live along a diesel section of the branch, then drive to a station with electric service and take an electric train in. Plenty of people do that.