And Acela fares east of NY are lower I think.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
henry6 Haven't had enough gold in the purse to do Acela yet, especially to Philly but hope to soon.
Haven't had enough gold in the purse to do Acela yet, especially to Philly but hope to soon.
Out of curiosity I checked the fares between Newark Penn and Philadelphia. For Wednesday, January 30 the morning Acela fare Newark to Philadelphia is $97 a little after 10, 11 and 12 noon. That is the cheapest. Higher fare Acelas are $161.
Morning Northeast Regional trains are a lot less, $36 one way. Again, that is the cheapest Amtrak fare.
The Acela is more expensive but not impossible. On the return trip a person could economize by taking SEPTA to Trenton and New Jersey Transit to Newark.
Your father had a long commute, Henry. I reverse commuted between Trenton and Hoboken for a while. That was enough for me. It was comfortable enough. I got a lot of reading done and had coffee on the train. But it does take up a lot of time.
Amtrak coach seats are more comfortable than the old Pennsylvania commuter seats but Pennsy was pretty comfortable too. The reading lights and trays are the big improvement.
However, I've been noticing that on Amfleet cars the upholstery is wearing out. After a while they aren't as comfortable. Other than that the cars are OK.
I'm too frugal to ride Acela. If time were more important I would but it isn't that important to me.
Back in the 30's my grandfather who was an artist for vaudeville show houses was forced to work in Philadelphia...had to take the LIRR from Jamaica to Penn Sta then the PRR to Philadelphia and back every day for the better part of a year! He made good money, as my mother used to tell us, bringing $300 to $500 home each week, so the sacrifice of commuting to Philly was no hardship as long as he could read his Daily News and snooze Oh, yeah, the reason I mention this is because he rode the Clockers, of course.
Of course the Amtrak ride vs commuter coach ride is different with fewer but more comfortable seats, better trucking and cushioning of the ride, etc. When we do Ridewithmehenry trips to Poughkeepsie we take the Amtrak up and MNRR down for time and comparison.....Also have done Amtrak up to Stamford for ConnDot rides, too. Haven't had enough gold in the purse to do Acela yet, especially to Philly but hope to soon.
,
Certainly Amtrak is a passenger rail system. However, it also operates commuter service under contract with some states so I think there is an overlap here.
No doubt you know that back in the days when Amtrak operated Clockers a few of them provided commuter service in New Jersey. That agreement fell apart. However, I think it was good for Amtrak. Even though NJT fares are a lot lower than Amtrak fares Amtrack still got a lot of regular riders for seats that otherwise would have been empty and even carried standing passengers. I commuted on Amtrak trains. I liked them better than I like NJT (although the new NJT double deckers are almost as good).
Amtrak is not a rapid transit system it is a passenger railroad, the step above rapid transit.
But there are plenty of Amtrak stations without high level platforms. Sometimes there is no platform at all.
And uses equipment with train doors so crew members can walk the length of the train, and uses high-level platforms. But the main thing is all-private-right of way and grade separated at that!
I remember the nickle fare on the Tubes and the subways....er, and trolley cars.
OK, Henry. I see what you're saying. Now if only you know how to get the fare back to 25¢.
John
I'm not that technical. But I would guess a pan is more stable than a trolley pole, can be automatically controlled for raising and lowering. For starters. PATH is heavy rail because it runs trains rather than cars, complete with conductor(s) and a motorman on a private right of way, and signaled ...again for starters.
Thanks for the information, Henry.
I find it interesting that the PATH trains are heavy rail.
I know Newark Lightrail is, as its name says, light rail. However, it does use a pantograph to pick up its electric power. Do you know what the considerations for this may be instead of using a traditional trolley pole? Perhaps higher voltage than in a traditional trolley car?
PATH is standard or "heavy" rail while the River Line, HBLR, and Newark Subway are light rail...two different things. But, yes former IRT lines, Staten Island RR, Chicago EL, and PATH are all short cars because of the early building dates of the infrastructures. but were incorporated as railroads and thus heavy rail. The light rail is what used to be trolley lines, or in a stretch, interurban as trolleys were more common to in street tracks. Newark City Subway was built out of Penn Sta. Newark on the underground towpath of and followed the course of the Morris Canal through Branchbrook park. The River Line is light rail but diesel instead of electric.
henry6Length and width of rapid transit cars vary. H&M, Staten Island RR, IRT, and Chicago Transit cars have always bee short because of the almots 90 degree curves. Other, later, lines opened up the curvature and allow for longer cars. In some cases articulated cars were tried!
Henry,
Do you know if this is still true? I do know that Newark Light Rail uses articulated cars but most of it runs over rails originally built for trolley cars fairly early on in the last century.
I have heard that when the Port Authority took over the H&M trains they were given the H&M Manhattan terminal to develop the land. In exchange they were supposed to keep the fare at 25¢. That of course is long ago. And long forgotten.
Going back to the question of track connections there is an industrial spur that crosses the PATH line near the shops east of where PATH leaves the Corridor. One lead connects to PATH, the other goes to what looks like a propane storage facilty. On the Google maps I was looking at, a trackmobile was visible.
Henry is right about the 50%/50% split in ownership of the Hudson - Terminal - Newark service red Gibbs-designed cars, which was also true for the K-class air-conditioned post WWII replacements, long since relegated to work service for the few remaining. The line west of Journal Sq., including the "H&M" original Newark Park Street elevated station, was totally owned by PRR. It was a joint service, with crews allowed to work through by agreement. There was an extra fare, using tickets, for travel west of Journal Square to Harrison or Newark. Now, the whole line is owned by PATH.
IRT and PATH cars have similar dimension, PATH cars being a trifle shorter. PATh cars cannot operate on the IRT because of the curved side that allows more elbow room for a cross seat or a slightly wider aisle for longitudinal seats. IRT cars cannot operate on PATH because their longer length would give clearance problems on sharp curves. But the original Stillwell-designed "black" cars for the Hoboken and Jopurnal Sq. service (actually very dark green) were run in test operation on the IRT 2nd Avenue Elevated. The black cars were all owned by the H&M. Now the whole line is owned by PATH, including the tracks, but not the RofW, along the corridor, and the Harrison Station.
The H&M and the PRR main line interchange is amazing! Do you all know that the systematic interconnections and operations of that Manhattan transfer interlock is equivalent to the PATH train line directly connecting to Amtraks and NJTransit at Harrison yard! That will be a very complicated operation. I don't even think that this type of operation will be practical or appropriate because it will be such a mess.
Alloboard,
Your map is fascinating.
New York Times February 6 1908. The headline is Trolley Tunnel Open to New Jersey. This in is a footnote to the Wiki article on the PATH train. However, the newspaper has lost the story; at least that is what their message says when I click on the link. But the headline says it all.
It is all well documented....Google or Bing Hudson and Manhattan Railroad for starters.
I understand that the H&M tunnels under the Hudson were built very early on and are narrower than most tunnels. Also, ventilation is by using the trains and tunnels as a piston and cylinder. Each train pushes the air in front of it and creates a vacuum that pulls air in in back of it. And also the curves are very tight. For these reasons cars are both shorter and narrower than subway cars.
The source of my information is conversations with my fellow commuters back in the days when I rode the Erie Bergen County Line in to Hoboken. It seems reasonable to me but I cannot vouch for the total accuracy of my information.
Length and width of rapid transit cars vary. H&M, Staten Island RR, IRT, and Chicago Transit cars have always bee short because of the almots 90 degree curves. Other, later, lines opened up the curvature and allow for longer cars. In some cases articulated cars were tried!
henry6 A unique feature was that because the H&M cars were narrower than standard railroad cars, there were gauntlet tracks at the platforms so the Tube cars could leave and pick up passengers but not use the gauntlet if the trains wasn't stopping!.
A unique feature was that because the H&M cars were narrower than standard railroad cars, there were gauntlet tracks at the platforms so the Tube cars could leave and pick up passengers but not use the gauntlet if the trains wasn't stopping!.
The North Shore had similar gauntlets on both the Skokie Valley and Shore line (1940 relocation). At least one station on the NEC had or has gauntlets so freight cars will clear the high level platforms.
How long are the PATH cars? CTA has stuck with 47 feet and 8' 8" wide for a pretty long time.
alloboard I believe I was always aware that rapid transit cars were only shorter not smaller and rapid transit cars are proportional to railroad standards in terms of size. I don't think the PATH cars are smaller there just shorter. Shorter does not mean smaller in height. Rapid transit cars are heavy for their own size because of the motors.
I believe I was always aware that rapid transit cars were only shorter not smaller and rapid transit cars are proportional to railroad standards in terms of size. I don't think the PATH cars are smaller there just shorter. Shorter does not mean smaller in height. Rapid transit cars are heavy for their own size because of the motors.
PATH equipment has a similar clearance diagram to CTA and it's pretty tight. Consider that CTA equipment can be transported on flatcars and still be within railroad clearances. Although they are appreciably longer, I can remember seeing the NYCTA R-46 cars being transported on flatcars on the IHB in a regular transfer run.
Rapid transit equipment is generally shorter, narrower and not as tall as conventional railroad equipment.
alloboard This is the map I once saw: http://www.northeast.railfan.net/classic/NYCity4.html
This is the map I once saw:
http://www.northeast.railfan.net/classic/NYCity4.html
activated
This is the map I once saw: http://www.northeast.railfan.net/classic/NYCity4.html
I've heard PATH trains referred to as a "Toonerville Trolley" because the cars are so small, far smaller than standard railroad cars.
Checked Brian Cudahy's Rails Under the Hudson, his book about the early years of the PRR electrification. He has a great track diagram of MT and copy that shows that H&M was indeed integrated totally with the PRR in and out of MT. A unique feature was that because the H&M cars were narrower than standard railroad cars, there were gauntlet tracks at the platforms so the Tube cars could leave and pick up passengers but not use the gauntlet if the trains wasn't stopping!. Cudahy also explained that the H&M connections to the PRR tracks were removed when MT was demolished; that the station had no access but by PRR or M&H trains; and that the "high line" fill covers most of it now.
I still believe the PRR and PC owned and operated the system until the mid 50's. The H&M may never lost its identity but the operation and company was under the control of the PRR until it set it free because of bankruptcy of the Tubes. PRR did the same with the LIRR in 1949/50.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.