upperharlemline4ever Posted December 2, 2011 Share #26 Posted December 2, 2011 Re the folks talking about the swing bridge at Sputen Duyvil, if my memory serves me correctly, that bridge was originally a double tracked bridge and believe in the 1960's one track was removed. This was originally a freight and passenger bridge (passenger service terminated sometime in the 1930's). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upperharlemline4ever Posted December 3, 2011 Share #27 Posted December 3, 2011 Just checked many photos of the bridge and indeed it's a double tracked bridge with one track removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upperharlemline4ever Posted December 3, 2011 Share #28 Posted December 3, 2011 delete, duplicate posting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted December 3, 2011 Share #29 Posted December 3, 2011 Just checked many photos of the bridge and indeed it's a double tracked bridge with one track removed. Then it should not cost an arm and an leg to put an extra track back on that bridge. The biggest expensive will be adding a track between Riverdale down to Penn Station. Amtrak and the feds should be paying for at least 1/2 of the costs of bringing MNRR Hudson Line service to Penn since they also benefit and could expand service to Albany as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theaveragejoe Posted December 4, 2011 Share #30 Posted December 4, 2011 Then it should not cost an arm and an leg to put an extra track back on that bridge. The biggest expensive will be adding a track between Riverdale down to Penn Station. Amtrak and the feds should be paying for at least 1/2 of the costs of bringing MNRR Hudson Line service to Penn since they also benefit and could expand service to Albany as well. MNRR will never go to Albany unless you mean more Amtrak service to the Albany area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted December 5, 2011 Share #31 Posted December 5, 2011 MNRR will never go to Albany unless you mean more Amtrak service to the Albany area Yup. I did mean Amtrak 'expanding service' to Albany as i am fully aware that a 99.9% lol chance there will never be MNRR service to NYS captial city. At best if economy improves is in next 20 years, electric service is expanded further *north* from Croton-Harmon-Poughkeepsie and thus more train service to Upper Hudson line stations away from current Disel service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted December 5, 2011 Share #32 Posted December 5, 2011 MNRR will never go to Albany unless you mean more Amtrak service to the Albany area I think that is what he meant more amtrak service to albany was what he meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
traildriver Posted February 1, 2012 Share #33 Posted February 1, 2012 I am for the expansion of a few long-distance MN Hudson and New Haven line trains into NYP. That is, as long as they will reciprocate, and allow Amtrak to run a couple of peak hour trains from Albany and Boston into NYG. Doing so will benefit riders of both railroads. And it will mean that in the event of service disruptions, a few extra trains could be so diverted, as there should be a pool of qualified crews on each road, as well as terminal facilities serving each road. As for adding additional stations on these routes, I am leaning against the idea. First, because I believe these will slow down all service somewhat as a result, and second, I do not like the idea of diverting subway passengers onto commuter rail. If the subway capacity is insufficient for the market, then address that by improving it, not degrading the ride for commuter train riders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted February 2, 2012 Share #34 Posted February 2, 2012 I am for the expansion of a few long-distance MN Hudson and New Haven line trains into NYP.That is, as long as they will reciprocate, and allow Amtrak to run a couple of peak hour trains from Albany and Boston into NYG. Doing so will benefit riders of both railroads. And it will mean that in the event of service disruptions, a few extra trains could be so diverted, as there should be a pool of qualified crews on each road, as well as terminal facilities serving each road. As for adding additional stations on these routes, I am leaning against the idea. First, because I believe these will slow down all service somewhat as a result, and second, I do not like the idea of diverting subway passengers onto commuter rail. If the subway capacity is insufficient for the market, then address that by improving it, not degrading the ride for commuter train riders. The additional stations will NOT be served by peak direction trains only reverse trains!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterious2train Posted February 6, 2012 Share #35 Posted February 6, 2012 As for adding additional stations on these routes, I am leaning against the idea. First, because I believe these will slow down all service somewhat as a result, and second, I do not like the idea of diverting subway passengers onto commuter rail. If the subway capacity is insufficient for the market, then address that by improving it, not degrading the ride for commuter train riders. Much easier said then done. Phase I of the Second Avenue Subway is a long time coming, to say nothing of the other three phases. And that's just in Manhattan. It's probably safe to say a new subway line in the outer boroughs is decades away. Having the Metro-North serve Manhattan-bound people in the East Bronx is not an ideal solution, but the subway as is isn't cutting it, and there's not much that can be done to improve it. Metro-North service on that line is still a little far off, but at least something can be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntExp Posted February 11, 2012 Share #36 Posted February 11, 2012 There is a roadblock in the way of MNRR service to Penn, and that is LI politicians who really need to study up on transit. NewsLI has more..... (Long Island, NY) Senator Kemp Hannon (R-Nassau) joins his Long Island Senate colleagues in urging the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to reject a proposal which could reduce Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) service into Penn Station. In a letter to Chairman Joseph Lhota, Hannon and his Senate colleagues noted the is currently considering a proposal to allow Metro-North Railroad to operate trains into Penn Station using the existing tracks currently shared by the (LIRR), Amtrak and NJ Transit. Recent media reports stated Metro-North plans on building six new stations as part of its new access plan, yet there has been no information released on how this plan will be financed nor whether an environmental impact study has been conducted. “To make room for the new Metro-North Trains, the (LIRR) could be forced to cut the number of trains it runs into Penn Station,” said Hannon. “The (LIRR) is already sharing ingress into Penn Station, and any reduction of service could have a devastating impact on commuters and other travelers. With only seven of Penn Station’s existing 21 tracks being allotted to the (LIRR), any reductions would seriously impair (LIRR) operations and affect all (LIRR) riders.” In order to ease (LIRR) congestion into Penn Station, the East Side Access Project is underway, which will bring (LIRR) trains into Grand Central Station. That project is far from complete, however, and congestion at Penn Station is a major concern. Even when the East Side Access Project is finally finished, the (LIRR) will still need to operate at Penn Station to meet a project significant increase in ridership over the next several years. “I appreciate and support the ’s desire to expand services,” said Hannon. “But not at the expense of the (LIRR)’s ability to operate into Penn Station now and into the future. This proposal could have the effect of actually putting more riders into their cars on already over-congested roads, something we are trying to avoid at all costs. Some politicians should really STFU. :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted February 11, 2012 Share #37 Posted February 11, 2012 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted February 11, 2012 Share #38 Posted February 11, 2012 Nope, I'd not do that for the monthly, people already have another option, it's called the Express Bus, Reply for City Ticket would be below... Since CityTicket is now $3.75, I'd say $5.50 on weekdays (or equivalent with Express Bus Fares). This way, the fare structure would be more consistent and not every single person who don't want to ride the Subway want to ride the Railroad. The problem is for express bus service in SE queens there is zero demand outside rush hours and what needs to be done is bidirectional reverse service on the X68 and X63 after merging with QM21 and dropping merrick blvd segment. And Reverse service on the QM3 which might increase ridership to acceptable levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted February 12, 2012 Share #39 Posted February 12, 2012 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nexis4Jersey Posted February 12, 2012 Share #40 Posted February 12, 2012 There is a roadblock in the way of MNRR service to Penn, and that is LI politicians who really need to study up on transit. NewsLI has more..... Some politicians should really STFU. :mad: Don't they realize that most LIRR riders work near GCT and will be using the ESA vs Penn station? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted February 13, 2012 Share #41 Posted February 13, 2012 Don't they realize that most LIRR riders work near GCT and will be using the ESA vs Penn station? Polititians know NOTHING about the commutes of everyday LIslanders cause if they did there would be no opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1447 Posted February 17, 2012 Author Share #42 Posted February 17, 2012 More info about the study on the MTA website: Penn Station Access Study Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.