River Line

lensovet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 05, 2024 8:21 pm I don't think the line could be profitable. The density is simply not there. The clientele is not exactly rich either.

The River LINE does get better usage than some of NJT's heavy rail lines. IIRC it gets just about 3 million, more or less, riders a year. That's not terrible...

As for the clientele not being rich, I'm sure raising the fares from two dollars to say five won't chase a ton of people away. Still cheaper than driving.

lensovet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 05, 2024 8:21 pm It's a POP system (join us over in the other thread to argue that to death), so there is no ticket checking, only sporadic enforcement. The fine is "up to" $100. I'm not entirely clear how the revenue sharing works, because NJT (not Alstom) sells the ticket, NJT hires and pays salaries for the fare enforcement, and presumably NJT collects the fines (if they are ever able to collect them). That said, I've seen people clearly commuting to work in suits not bothering to activate their tickets until the fare inspectors show up. It's 2024 and people feel entitled to get things for free for some reason.

Ah, that makes sense why this line makes no money then. That's pretty bad.

I've seen a lot of people unironically say that all public transit should be free simply because it's "public." People just want free stuff

In FY23, River line had 5,453 average weekday passengers spread over 91 trains and ~70 route miles (35 each way). The only rail line with fewer riders is the ACL, which exists for the same reason the River Line does – to throw South Jersey a bone and claim that NJT cares about the residents there too. But the reality is that the density is nonexistent for any kind of real transit service here. I know, because I live here.

The preliminary NTSB report is out: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pag ... FR001.aspx

One thing of note is that the report confirms the train was not speeding (speed was 64 in a 65 mph max region).

pumpers wrote: ↑Fri Nov 08, 2024 12:19 pm The preliminary NTSB report is out: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pag ... FR001.aspx

One thing of note is that the report confirms the train was not speeding (speed was 64 in a 65 mph max region).

The LRV was travelling at 64 mph through a curve in a wooded area of the River Line from Trenton to Camden when it encountered the fallen tree. The operator activated the track brakes and the emergency brakes, causing the LRV to decelerate for about 430 feet before striking the tree.

430 feet / 64mph = 4.6 seconds

There was simply no time to do anything.

Over 1300 feet to come to stop from 64 mph in a light LRV – is that normal? With over half that distance after striking the tree? https://www.minnesotasafetycouncil.org/ ... l%20fields. claims 600 feet.

JuniusLivonius wrote: ↑Fri Nov 08, 2024 7:06 pm

The LRV was travelling at 64 mph through a curve in a wooded area of the River Line from Trenton to Camden when it encountered the fallen tree. The operator activated the track brakes and the emergency brakes, causing the LRV to decelerate for about 430 feet before striking the tree.

430 feet / 64mph = 4.6 seconds

There was simply no time to do anything.

I don't entirely follow. The 4.6 seconds was from the emergency application. The preliminary report does not state when the operator saw the tree, but presumably it was some time before that?

I don't understand how the vehicle traveled for such a long distance after emergency brakes were applied. Unless this statement is ambiguous and she applied the emergency brake later?

Although the current weather may have been clear if earlier weather had caused leaves to be deposited on the line, that would have extended the distance required to stop the train (the preliminary report does not discuss the condition of the track).

Leave fall is known to adversely affect braking control on trains to the extent that British railways run special trains to clear leaves and leaf residue from tracks and institute slow orders when those trains can't keep up.

Philly Inquirer: "The NTSB said its investigation into the crash remains ongoing, and would focus on NJ Transit’s right-of-way maintenance and the crashworthiness of its trains’ design."

RandallW wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2024 4:41 am Although the current weather may have been clear if earlier weather had caused leaves to be deposited on the line, that would have extended the distance required to stop the train (the preliminary report does not discuss the condition of the track).

Leave fall is known to adversely affect braking control on trains to the extent that British railways run special trains to clear leaves and leaf residue from tracks and institute slow orders when those trains can't keep up.

This is an excellent point. Having operated trains during fall leaf conditions, the stopping distance required to halt a train at 65MPH can be 3 to 4 times longer than normal.

There is a report somewhere that the train was just coming out of a curve before the tree branch would have been visible; and at that time of day it would have been pitch dark. Also, as the train was just coming out of a curve the headlights would have been aimed straight ahead while the track wasn't.

That wasn't a report; it was speculation after the accident happened before any factual information was released. The preliminary report makes it clear that braking of some sort was applied for over 5 seconds before impact and the vehicle traveled nearly 500 feet with a braking application of some sort (track and/or emergency) before colliding with the tree.

You can also see that a curve preceding the point of impact is over 1k feet away from the satellite image attached to the preliminary report. Did you open it?

RandallW wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2024 4:41 am Leave fall is known to adversely affect braking control on trains to the extent that British railways run special trains to clear leaves and leaf residue from tracks.

NYCT, SIRT, MNCR, LIRR, SEPTA and NJT (AquaTrack) in fact all do.

R36 Combine Coach wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2024 10:34 pm

RandallW wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2024 4:41 am Leave fall is known to adversely affect braking control on trains to the extent that British railways run special trains to clear leaves and leaf residue from tracks.

NYCT, SIRT, MNCR, LIRR, SEPTA and NJT (AquaTrack) in fact all do.

Though I don't think I've ever heard NJT running it on the River Line or any of the other LR lines.

lensovet wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2024 10:08 pm ...The preliminary report makes it clear that braking of some sort was applied for over 5 seconds before impact and the vehicle traveled nearly 500 feet with a braking application of some sort (track and/or emergency) before colliding with the tree.
You can also see that a curve preceding the point of impact is over 1k feet away from the satellite image attached to the preliminary report. Did you open it?

If you do the math, assuming a constant rate of deceleration (meaning how many miles per hour the speed went down each second, starting at 64 mph) from when the brakes were applied, to go the stated distance before stopping, it works out that the train travelled ~28 seconds after the brakes were applied before it stopped. I am not a train professional, but watching 28 seconds go by on my wristwatch, that seems like a long time, even starting at 64 mph. So maybe the leaves did have something to do with it. Maybe the tree trunk the train was pushing (from what I see in one of the pictures somewhere) had something to do with it, but I don't know how that would make the train stop slower (unless it damaged the braking system).
JS
If you assume a different deceleration rate before and after hitting the tree, it doesn't make a lot of difference, as the time after applying the brakes until hitting the tree was so short (as stated earlier).
I guess we will have to wait for the final report.

lensovet wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2024 10:52 pm

R36 Combine Coach wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2024 10:34 pm

RandallW wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2024 4:41 am Leave fall is known to adversely affect braking control on trains to the extent that British railways run special trains to clear leaves and leaf residue from tracks.

NYCT, SIRT, MNCR, LIRR, SEPTA and NJT (AquaTrack) in fact all do.

Though I don't think I've ever heard NJT running it on the River Line or any of the other LR lines.

Maybe they should start doing that