First, the design of the EMD FL-9 third rail shoe was simple. There were two springs, one above and one below. At rest, the shoe would extend horizontally, with an overruning third rail shoe forcing the shoe upward, and an underruning (NYCentral) third rail forcing the shoe downward. Now, to keep this type of shoe operating properly:
The third rails had to be withing the tolerances suppled by NYNH&H and NYC to EMD, and track had to be maintained to reasonable standards, plus truck springing and balance, to prevent undue rocking.
The ramps at gaps had to meet specifications. Note that an overruning third rail ramp can be overdesigned, with rail bent practicalliy to ground level if kept insulated from ground water. But a ramp curving upward on the NYC underrruning type can run into clearance problems if the height is excessive.
The upper and lower springs had to be in balance, the correct durometer. Inspections had to be performed regularly to insure that the rest position of the shoe was horizontal. And in addition, the presssure had to be checked, insufficient pressure meant bad electric contract and sparks that could set fires with any trash on the RofW. Too much pressure and the shoe could be ripped off. After 50 years, metalurgy has improved where such springs should be far longer lasting and retain their exact durometer much longer.
Some one can tell me if the Vapor Company is still in bussiness. This company made electrical and pneumatic-electical contactors for many rail (also building air-conditioning) applcations, and EMD was a steady customer. I did learn that the changeover contacts for the FL-9 could no longer be supplied, and improvised solutions were a main source of problems. Other items were also special.
As supplied and when maintained properly, the FL-9's were good and reliable locomotives that ran into Penn and GCT reliably, with good third rail pick-up. Otherwise, after a year's experience, a repeat order would not have been placed to double the roster. And even with the lousy maintenance they did receive shortly after a Hurricain and McGinnis's management style and the construction of the parallel superhighways devastated the NYNH&H, that so many did survive to run 50 years later is a tribute to that fact.
But they should never have been bought. The idea was to remove the electrification east of Stamford. This proved impossible. Also, even a good 1750HP diesel isn't the equal of a 3600HP electric, and diesel operation was less economical than electric, even with the Cos Cob maintenance problem. Penn Central and Amtrak proved the point by replacing them with GG-1's west of New Haven. They did come into their own on the Metro North Brewster service until electrification was extended north of N. White Plains.
The reason there isn't through LIRR - Metro North service is more a matter of management politics than technical issues. Duplicates of the Amtrak Albany Penn Station power could power the trains tomorrow morning without any difficulty whatsover, using third rail pickup on the LIRR, but using diesel north of the West Penn Station tunnel entrance, as Amtrak does. And the business is there.
You may be correct, and in that case, the diesel option is the one to be implemented, since it is already in use on the Lake Shore and Amtrak's Emire Service trains. One compromise would be to electrify the West Side Line (beyond the existing point at the new tunnel to Penn Station's mouth) with LIRR third rail to a point just north of the GW Bridge, allowing Amtrak and the through service to use electric power through most of Manhattan and then diesel power with the shoes out of the way north of that point.
And while you are corrrect about mutliple points of insection and maintenance, and indeed the FL-9 shoes required daily insection to keep their efficiency, mettalurgy has improved, and it should be possible to upgrade the design to the point where maintenance is no greater problem than other locomotive items.
Both the West Side Line and the empty NJT trains in the LIRR-PRR East River Tunnels represent unused capacity for moving people into the CBD where capacity is needed. The NJT trains could be handling commuters from Stamford etc, whose business is closer to Penn than GCT aas well as in New Jersey itself.
Similarly, the two lanes of the GWB designed for rapid transit should be used for that and not just the two additional highway lanes as they have been. This would involve relocation of the bus terminal to the New Jersey Side, running the 8th Avenue express trains to the New Jersey Terminal and the local service to 207th Street instead of 168th Street, or both to each during rush hours. There is additional capacity in the Central Park West subway to handle the extra riders, and this would somewhat reduce the problem of New Jersey access to the CBD until the new tunnels are built, and remain useful afterward. It would be particularly valuable if West Shore passenger service was restored, since the New Jersey Temrinal of the A train could be both the major bus terminal and a West Shore LIne station.
There have been proposals to electrify the entire Penn Station - Albany line to AC catenary electriication. In that case, the service to Albany could become a Metro North responsibility and the through service provided New Haven - Albany via Penn Station. This would leave the empty NJT trains in the E. River tunnels however. But the LIRR could sell through tickets in combination with MN to get people to the upper West Side employment and educational points.
Another possibility is electrification of the West Side line for LIRR trains to an interchange station either at Spuyten Dyvil or under the G. W. Bridge, with convenient transfer to Metro North trains at that point. The GW choice for interchange would require the GW Bridge 8th Avenue subway extension to make it really worthwile for MN to divert some Hudson trains to the interchange station, since a one-seat ride to Penn Station would be lost. No diversion would be needed at Spuyten Dyvil, just the stop's restoration and a suitable interchange station.
daveklepper wrote: There have been proposals to electrify the entire Penn Station - Albany line to AC catenary electriication. In that case, the service to Albany could become a Metro North responsibility and the through service provided New Haven - Albany via Penn Station. This would leave the empty NJT trains in the E. River tunnels however. But the LIRR could sell through tickets in combination with MN to get people to the upper West Side employment and educational points.Another possibility is electrification of the West Side line for LIRR trains to an interchange station either at Spuyten Dyvil or under the G. W. Bridge, with convenient transfer to Metro North trains at that point. The GW choice for interchange would require the GW Bridge 8th Avenue subway extension to make it really worthwile for MN to divert some Hudson trains to the interchange station, since a one-seat ride to Penn Station would be lost. No diversion would be needed at Spuyten Dyvil, just the stop's restoration and a suitable interchange station.
And just where would you get the money for this???
A paultry sum compared to the LIRR effort to get to Grand Central or the new NJT Hudson River Tunnels. Indeed, if instead of a third subteranian level, the LIRR could use four or six of the lower level existing GCT tracks, then the money saved would be more than sufficient.
But the Spuyten Dyvil interchange station presents another idea. For New Haven commuter line access to Penn Station, all that is needed (and this could start operations tomorrow morning in terms of the physical plant and rolling stock) is to extend New Jersey Transit trains, say every half hour during rush hours only, to track 5, the old Harlem River Shuttle track, at New Rochelle, and provide a transfer there to the Metro North trains that stop there. Costs for the service would be shared by NJT and MN, giving New Jersey riders a station close to LaGuardia Airport and convenient service to employment locations in Westchester, and particularly in Stamford and Bridgeport, and Connecticut riders a convenient way to get to Queens and the Penn Station area, as well as Newark and other New Jersey employment locations. Amtrak would be paid to furnish the New Rochelle-Penn crews, would be paid for the power and nominal track charges between Harold Tower and Shell interlocking, but would not share in the revenue. NJT equipment is already compatible with signals and power on the line. This would be equipment that normally layes over at Sunnyside Yard. The connection would be established and then a Queens station would be built, one reasonably situated for interchange with the LIRR, a Queens subway line, and reasonably traffic free bus transfers to LaGuardia and Kennedy. There are several choices, where the Hell Gate line crosses Queens Blvd., for one.
Track 5 at the New Rochelle is used on occasion by Amtrak, but not regularly. It is not used nearly as intensively as the other four tracks at the station. And both east of the station and railroad west of the interlocking, on the Hell Gate line, there is plenty of room for one or two sidings for mid-day and weekend storage.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.