Why are NJ Transit trains so slow?

I agree with Semper. The only trains that aren't painful to ride are the MTA express trains. Fortunately I can walk to Route 17.

NJT is already in the process of re-certifying equipment to run at 125 MPH (in conjunction with the HSR upgrades between HAM and COUNTY). I've personally timed acceleration on the NEC; a 10 car MLV with a 46 as power takes about 4-5 min to get up to 100 MPH. Most stations between NYP and New Brunswick are too close together to make good speed before having to brake for the next station, and additionally, MAS on those sections may not be higher than 60 - 80. Speeds are also dependent on train traffic (you have to factor in Amtrak as well, mind you). If you're on an express that seems to be crawling at 45 or 60 on a section where you know it should be closer to 90 - 100, then it's likely that the train is under some type of signal restriction or is approaching an interlocking where a diverging aspect is in place.

To all the people fuming about train speed: it is the wrong tree to bark at. As it has already been explained here, the station spacing is such that 100mph is unreasonable for commuter trains which need to stop every few miles in order to pick up the passengers. If you make the passengers drive 20 miles before getting on the train, they will just drive all the way to NYC.

If you are willing to talk to your local politicians, here is the right tree to bark at: high level platforms and grade crossing elimination. High level platforms can speed up boarding by about 30-40 seconds per busy station. Lack of grade crossings means no need to slow down. With high level platforms and elimination of grade crossings, you can probably cut 5-6 minutes between NYP and the last station (MSU, Dover, Suffern, Spring Valley, High Bridge). The added benefits (in fact probably the more important benefits) are safety (no cars or trucks on the tracks for the train to slam into) and ADA compliance.

Those 5-6 minutes due to the high level platforms and the grade crossing elimination are a lot more than you would ever get by jacking the maximum speed to 125mph. If you need an example how that works, look across the river at Metro-North: all their stations have high level platforms and due to luck their predecessor railroads had done a lot of grade crossing elimination (some grade crossings still exist especially on the Harlem Line). Even accounting for the somewhat straighter track profile, their trains travel further than NJT trains in the same amount of time due to less time spent at stations and no slow downs at grade crossings.

Well, I ride between Jersey Ave and NYP on a daily basis and it definitely seems Amtrak has a good part in how slow we run many times.

Tonight's commute takes the cake: I'm in the 6:12p Exp which departs 30+ minutes after its departure time. Then we creep along after stopping at Sec Jct. Conductor indicated it was due to waiting in an Amtrak train to pass (which it did). Fine.

We finally get to Nwk with New Brunswick being the next stop. We depart Nwk at a good pace, passing the Regional which had an airport stop. Just short of Elizabeth, our train hits the brakes nearly screeching to a halt. (We're on track 3). Regional whizzes by on track 4. We hang for a few minutes. Then light it up at a pace before then crawling towards metro park....to slot in behind said region which has a metropark stop.

Again, we're express between Newark and New Brunswick. Its out of NJTs hands here in Jersey but I pray that Metro North bangs Amtrak that way regularly just east of Hell Gate.

If you want to see an example of what a snow NJT train is, come to the Mtc-Boonton Line, especially riding a local train that continues west of MSU. Now board that train at Mountain View and take it to NWK Broad and switch to a Midtown Direct there. After riding a local from Mtn View-Wayne, I think that you will probably want to consider, next time, taking the bus from either the Wayne-Rt. 23 Park 'n' Ride Lot or Willowbrook. Even in little traffic, the bus from Wayne is faster and more convenient than the train. I have lived in Montclair all of my life and riding a local train on the electrified portion can take forever, especially when you start or end your trip between Little Falls and Mountain Lakes.

The NEC, in general, is the fastest of the lines. Yes, those Trenton Locals can take time, but at least, you don't have to crawl between stations for the most part. I know that there are people who live along the Coastline, even at the south end of it, who will drive up to Metropark so that way, they can get a faster ride plus more options of trains.

Until a new tunnel is built, don't expect too many new express trains.

EuroStar wrote:To all the people fuming about train speed: it is the wrong tree to bark at. As it has already been explained here, the station spacing is such that 100mph is unreasonable for commuter trains which need to stop every few miles in order to pick up the passengers. If you make the passengers drive 20 miles before getting on the train, they will just drive all the way to NYC.

...you realize there are trains that skip stops right? And so they dont stop every mile?

NB to Newark is about 30 miles. Are you seriously trying to claim that running at 125mph versus 79mph wouldnt make a difference for the train that goes 30 miles without stopping?

It would cut travel time from 24 minutes to 15 minutes.

So the big question is: if a 10-car Multilevel push-pull and 12-car Arrow were to have a drag race on the speedway between NBK and TRE, which would win?

Euro Star wrote:To all the people fuming about train speed: it is the wrong tree to bark at. As it has already been explained here, the station spacing is such that 100mph is unreasonable for commuter trains which need to stop every few miles in order to pick up the passengers. If you make the passengers drive 20 miles before getting on the train, they will just drive all the way to NYC.

If you are willing to talk to your local politicians, here is the right tree to bark at: high level platforms and grade crossing elimination. High level platforms can speed up boarding by about 30-40 seconds per busy station. Lack of grade crossings means no need to slow down. With high level platforms and elimination of grade crossings, you can probably cut 5-6 minutes between NYP and the last station (MSU, Dover, Suffern, Spring Valley, High Bridge). The added benefits (in fact probably the more important benefits) are safety (no cars or trucks on the tracks for the train to slam into) and ADA compliance.

Those 5-6 minutes due to the high level platforms and the grade crossing elimination are a lot more than you would ever get by jacking the maximum speed to 125mph. If you need an example how that works, look across the river at Metro-North: all their stations have high level platforms and due to luck their predecessor railroads had done a lot of grade crossing elimination (some grade crossings still exist especially on the Harlem Line). Even accounting for the somewhat straighter track profile, their trains travel further than NJT trains in the same amount of time due to less time spent at stations and no slow downs at grade crossings.

Grade crossings have no bearing on average speed; trains do not slow down for them. When it comes to the NEC, it is not an applicable concern even with the legitimate concerns regarding them; and with the Morristown Line, they are not a concern east of Chatham.

Also, platform height has no significant bearing. Average speed of local trains on the NEC was faster even when the majority of platforms were low (Arrows loading only at the end doors), and (going back before NJT) even when the predominant type of passenger car was the MP54. Besides, the placement of doors on MLVs slows down loading even at high platforms; if NJT had gone forth with their plans for MLV power cars (thus making them new MUs), then perhaps some of the problems with respect to train acceleration might have been mitigated.

Station spacing is remarkably generous on the NEC in particular, furthermore. And on lines where stations are closer together, not all stations are full-time.

jamesinclair wrote: ...you realize there are trains that skip stops right? And so they dont stop every mile?
NB to Newark is about 30 miles. Are you seriously trying to claim that running at 125mph versus 79mph wouldnt make a difference for the train that goes 30 miles without stopping?
It would cut travel time from 24 minutes to 15 minutes.

Only if it were that simple. You are right. It would be that much shorter on an empty track with clear signals. I have not checked your numbers, but they seem about right. You might get that with the first inbound express of the day and maybe the last outbound too. There are two issues which will prevent this from being achieved on most expresses for the foreseeable future, and possibly during all of mine and your commuting years. First, between NB and Newark there is one important merge/diverge point -- the Coast Line. Even though it is grade separated you are guaranteed to get restricted signals around it even for the express tracks during the busy am and pm peak hours. Additionally you are guaranteed switching local track to express track and back for at least some trains -- think of the Amtraks that stop at Metropark. So even without stopping at stations, the expresses are not really running "express" in that section. Compare that to the MetroNorth Hudson Line which has no diverging lines and none of Amtrak's trains need to get to the local platforms. (By the way, I am not implying that only Amtrak's trains need switching local to express track and back.) You would also be amazed if you knew how much the schedule between NYP and Newark where there are just two tracks influences the bunching of trains beyond that segment. Once you have bunching at Newark your train is bound to be crawling unless it is the very first one of the bunch regardless of whether it is express or not. On top of that Amtrak's dispatching giving priority to the Acelas and their other trains does not help. Second, to get your express to run at 125mph we need to get the rolling stock up to those standards. That as you know costs quite a lot of money. Problem is that we are not going to be getting good return on our investment. Your NB to Newark express, after reaching NYP gets turned around and send to Montclair (or somewhere else) as a local, spends most of its day in local service in and out of NYP before making another express outbound run on the Newark to NB segment (some sets due to scheduling might get an extra express run on a weekday). Basically that 125mph train set makes only two express runs where the maximum speed can be utilized. The rest of the time you cannot get even close to it because the set is either running local on the Northeast corridor or is running on the Lackawanna lines which as you probably know are curvy enough that even fancy tilting equipment will not get you anywhere close to 125mph even for the expresses between Summit and Broad Street.

Edit: Another reason for "slow" expresses relevant for the Princeton Junction expresses it that trains starting at Jersey Ave need to cross the express tracks causing restricted and stop signals on the express tracks.

amtrakowitz wrote: Grade crossings have no bearing on average speed; trains do not slow down for them. When it comes to the NEC, it is not an applicable concern even with the legitimate concerns regarding them; and with the Morristown Line, they are not a concern east of Chatham.
Also, platform height has no significant bearing. Average speed of local trains on the NEC was faster even when the majority of platforms were low (Arrows loading only at the end doors), and (going back before NJT) even when the predominant type of passenger car was the MP54. Besides, the placement of doors on MLVs slows down loading even at high platforms; if NJT had gone forth with their plans for MLV power cars (thus making them new MUs), then perhaps some of the problems with respect to train acceleration might have been mitigated.
Station spacing is remarkably generous on the NEC in particular, furthermore. And on lines where stations are closer together, not all stations are full-time.

If it was not clear, let me clarify: I was making a general statement about the way to speed the trains on NJTransit lines. I was not focusing on the NEC or the Morristown line east of Chatam. Those are sections where the "easy" speed-ups have already been had due to the foresight of the predecessor railroads.

There is no mandated slowdown for grade crossings. I was not arguing that. Grade crossings do matter when the MAS is determined and the higher the MAS the more they matter. In the extreme (not relevant here), you cannot have high speed rail with grade crossings. Local political interference matters too (good luck getting MAS of 100 mph through a grade crossing in a suburban town -- every voter would be up in arms about kids crossing and getting hit at such a public crossing). As an example, I believe that recently the MAS came down at section with the Midland Ave crossing on the Bergen Line primarily because of the crossing and the behind doors political interference related to it.

I think that it is clear and that we agree that a person takes less time to walk on or off the train at a high level platform than at a low level platform where one has to climb stairs. Today there are more passengers than there were 20-30 years ago. Just by the fact that there are more passengers that need to get into each car (today's cars have higher capacity, especially the MLs) meaning that the train needs more time to load them through the same two end doors. There is no way to get around the fact that there are more passengers now, but we do have the option of speeding their boarding by having high level platforms. That is why platform height matters. Yes, the NEC already has the high level platforms, so that is not benefit to be had there, but once again I was talking about the whole railroad, not just the NEC.

Because fast trains make more noise and we don't want to wake the sleeping passengers.

EuroStar wrote:

jamesinclair wrote:NB to Newark is about 30 miles. Are you seriously trying to claim that running at 125mph versus 79mph wouldnt make a difference for the train that goes 30 miles without stopping?
It would cut travel time from 24 minutes to 15 minutes.

I have not checked your numbers, but they seem about right.

Better check them.

amtrakowitz wrote:Grade crossings have no bearing on average speed; trains do not slow down for them. When it comes to the NEC, it is not an applicable concern even with the legitimate concerns regarding them; and with the Morristown Line, they are not a concern east of Chatham.

Well according to this NYT article your statement is incorrect:
"New Jersey Transit last year reduced the speed limit for trains at the crossing to 50 m.p.h., from 70, and is reviewing plans to install more advanced warning lights there, a spokeswoman said."
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/13/nyreg ... anger.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I take BC line everyday and see that the train positively crawls as it navigates so many grade crossings. Really, something need to be done to eliminate as many of them as possible.

amtrakowitz wrote: Also, platform height has no significant bearing.

It has no bearing on average speeds but it takes longer for people to get off and on the train. Low platforms make it harder for unfit people to even get on the train. Overall, low platforms make the trip longer for passengers.

looks like it dropped speed on one crossing.

DutchRailnut wrote:looks like it dropped speed on one crossing.

It is only one crossing, but it does illustrate the point that grade crossing matter for the MAS even for commuter rail.

They redid that crossing recently, but I see no quad gates or curbed lane divider, so they spent the money and did not even make it a quiet zone. That specific crossing is a good candidate for grade separation as the road can just be sunken down and most of the properties around are commercial/light industrial (so the resulting displacement is less of an issue than it would be in a residential area). Unfortunately there is another crossing just next to it that would be much more expensive and difficult to deal with which is probably why both of these would never be dealt with.

Furthermore, that speed reduction coupled with some other issue that I do not recall added extra 2 minutes to the Metro-North expresses. Some West of Hudson passengers were not happy about it.

Defiant wrote:I take BC line everyday and see that the train positively crawls as it navigates so many grade crossings. Really, something need to be done to eliminate as many of them as possible.

I am not sure when was the last time NJT or NJDOT eliminated a grade crossing, but it must have been decades since then. The same is probably true for the whole New York Metropolitan area. I am amazed that even after the Metro-North Harlem Line crash when multiple people died nobody talks about crossing closings or grade separation. Same appears to be true for the LIRR third mainline project -- there I am really puzzled why anyone thinks that a crossing of three busy tracks will leave any time for the auto traffic, especially during rush hour.

The only serious grade separation effort I am aware of is Alameda East in California. There are also couple of single street projects in the midwest, but that is about it. Nothing that I know of is going on in any of the big East Coast metropolitan areas.