R6 Norristown Line Service Extension Study

As service is now, no. But it could be an option to route diesel service to 30th Street, avoiding the CCCT. It would also avoid the bottleneck on the western side of the river where the Norfolk Southern line is single tracked through the tunnels.

The flexibility of 2 routes connected at common endpoints could be very useful - for instance, routing a potential future Quakertown extension (assuming it's all-SEPTA, a big assumption) down an upgraded Stony Creek Branch to Norristown, follow the current Norristown line to the proposed new connection to the ex-PRR alignment, then down over the bridge and to 30th St. via Cynwyd. If the electrification or some dual-mode thing does come to pass for the Reading extension, that could stay on the Rdg route so you'd have roughly an "X" of routes with some overlap in the middle. Closing the Norristown-Lansdale gap would help get to more of a network than a just a hub-and-spoke setup, while also connecting town centers that are closer to the railroad than any along a Cross-County Metro would be. Scheduling around coordinated train times in Lansdale and/or Norristown would also make this work for those looking to change direction at either point - those who want to go to an intermediate point along either route. For a "regular" commuter, the routing doesn't matter so much as long as the endpoint is in Center City, but the added potential for transfers and the ability to detour around a service disruption on another line would be good reasons to reactivate the section from Cynwyd over to Manayunk. (SEPTA towed Silverliners from Doylestown down the Stony Creek line at 10mph for servicing when the Ft. Washington bridge washed out - surely they would be better off to be able to do that as a revenue run if something drastic should happen along the R5 again.)

What's the Stony Creek branch service supposed to be? Are they proposing any stations between Lansdale and Norristown? And are we getting off topic because we're discussing rail making a right turn at Norristown, instead of what I think was the original post, rail going straight at Norristown headed towards Reading?

Couldn't we solve the dual-mode/diesel vs. electrification problem by doing what NJT does with the ACES Train? That is, use an electric locomotive on one end and a diesel on the other? This allows them to get through the Hudson tunnels and also down the Atlantic City Line.

gardendance wrote:What's the Stony Creek branch service supposed to be? Are they proposing any stations between Lansdale and Norristown? And are we getting off topic because we're discussing rail making a right turn at Norristown, instead of what I think was the original post, rail going straight at Norristown headed towards Reading?

Yes, we are going off topic but technically the Stony Creek Branch is a continuation of the present day R6 (at least Elm street in Norristown is just off the Stoney Creek branch)

The plans are still in major flux I'm sure, but I would suspect there would be a station at Merck's West Point complex and possibly one around Rt 73 and Morris Road. Beyond that, it is anyone's guess. I believe the Stony Creek Branch is Phase two of the Quakertown reactivation service, so we're still well off seeing any definitive action (or plans).

As for the original poster's intent, I would only think that potential tolls along 422 and improvement of the rail coridor between Pottstown and Norristown would benefit SEPTA service from Norristown along the R6 to points south and east. Everyone obviously has their own view of the ideal situation to reactivate service, but the key is to get something up and running that can be done within a "reasonable" investment. More gold plated schemes will only result in disappointment when funding dries up (as I personally believe will happen if I-80 is further denied tolls and the turnpike authority backs out of its obligations.) I'd love to see the viaduct service back up and running as much as anyone else, but it could cost a lot of money over the present routing... Would restoration of the viaduct be worth killing the entire system expansion/restoration to Reading?

capuzfu wrote:Couldn't we solve the dual-mode/diesel vs. electrification problem by doing what NJT does with the ACES Train? That is, use an electric locomotive on one end and a diesel on the other? This allows them to get through the Hudson tunnels and also down the Atlantic City Line.

I was under the impression that was a very expensive undertaking, underwritten partially by ticket prices for the service. I don't know that demand along this corridor would justify the expense, although no service should not be tolerated either.

ChrisinAbington wrote:

capuzfu wrote:Couldn't we solve the dual-mode/diesel vs. electrification problem by doing what NJT does with the ACES Train? That is, use an electric locomotive on one end and a diesel on the other? This allows them to get through the Hudson tunnels and also down the Atlantic City Line.

I was under the impression that was a very expensive undertaking, underwritten partially by ticket prices for the service. I don't know that demand along this corridor would justify the expense, although no service should not be tolerated either.

It's a trade-off. If you're running only a few trains, it may be the most cost-effective choice. For more trains, extending electrification or acquiring dual-mode equipment may be better. Decisions like this are based on other considerations too, like availability of capital.

Got this email today:

Hello,
You are receiving this email as someone who wanted to be on the R6 Extension Study web site contact list.
I want to let you know that the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission is holding two public open houses on the US422 Corridor Master Plan next week. Check the new www.422corridor.com web site for meeting information. We will be also posting the powerpoint presentation that will be given at the meetings.
Currently we are drafting the scope of services for consultant response for the tolling feasibility study. We should have the study underway by the fall and be completed by next fall.
We have received many comments on the web site and we will be sending out soon additional information to clarify the tolling study and the concept.
Thank you for all your comments.
Leo D. Bagley
Assistant Director
Montgomery County Planning Commission
PO Box 311
Norristown, Pa 19404
610-278-3746
610-278-3941 (fax)
[email protected]

Saw this earlier today...

http://www.kyw1060.com/Reading-to-Phila ... va/5067751

Does that mean the majority of funding for this project is coming from Federal funds?

jfrey40535 wrote:Does that mean the majority of funding for this project is coming from Federal funds?

Not New Starts funds. Last I talked to Bagley about it, it appeared that they did not expect the project to compete well, and even if it did, it would add years to the project.

I heard about this on NPR today. They had mentioned a 'gold-plated' project that was to run up the middle of Rt. 422. I had never heard of that proposal - the SVM I knew of was an electrified high speed line sharing NS' tracks to Reading.
They basically said that much cheaper alternatives were possibly in the works.
Seems to me Specter could've saved a lot of time reading these posts for the last 5+ years...

Nacho66 wrote:I heard about this on NPR today. They had mentioned a 'gold-plated' project that was to run up the middle of Rt. 422. I had never heard of that proposal - the SVM I knew of was an electrified high speed line sharing NS' tracks to Reading.

I think you may have heard me using the words "gold-plated" (McDonald called DVARP for quotes and background). SVM was not shared track, and that was the main problem from a cost and technical feasibility standpoint. The current plan from Montco is shared track and has a much better chance of becoming reality.

Seems to me Specter could've saved a lot of time reading these posts for the last 5+ years...

Or reading the DVARP newsletter (and it's closer to ten years that SEPTA fumbled around with the project, including four or five after we thoroughly discredited the plan).