pb-bkln

I've followed a little bit of the CSX line discussion and it seems like CSX is adamant about taking the line out of service in order to make the necessary changes.

Poughkeepsie would be too far north for a useful Port Jervis line connection? Although through the Harlem line that could have been a connection to GCT.

BRT is bus rapid transit? Or was that light commuter rail? And when you say designed to carry the weight, that's not true heavy rail like the Port Jervis or Hudson Lines, is it? I know there's plenty of capacity on the PJ Line, I was wondering if the Twitter poster is correct that it is technically feasible to connect it to the Hudson Line via Suffern, Nyack, and the new bridge and running MetroNorth trains. The new bridge climbs from the Nyack side to Tarrytown; I also wasn't sure if MetroNorth trains can handle that.

That's what I thought, too. My recollection is that the "plans" and "proposals" that occasionally appeared online or in letters to the editor never came from anyone with a real background in railroading.

Does anyone recall the arguments over this when the new bridge was being planned? I encountered an angry casual Twitter post. But my recollection is that an east west heavy rail connection, from Suffern to Nyack and following the Thruway, isn't really feasible because of the topography. I would also guess that if someone really wanted to run trains across the Hudson, a separate railroad bridge would be a more efficient way to go about it.

It doesn't sound like much if any of an express service. Perhaps there's no demand for a stop just at Burnside Ave before heading to Woodlawn.

Is there still any 4 train express service during rush hours between 149th Street and Woodlawn Road? I just noticed a story from when there was a test nearly 10 years ago, and the claim was it would save 3.5 minutes vs the trip on the local. I don't see how it can be so little. Eight or nine stops were skipped. Is this really the way the test worked out?