Originally posted by NTrain269 [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, March 21, 2005 2:09 PM Quickest/faster/shortest route is via Matawan or up the rte 9 corridor to S. Amboy. [:D] QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod You like that alignment better than the one running up from Monmouth Junction? Let me know what factors you valued in making this decision. (To save browsing around to find them, the three route maps are here): http://www.njtransit.com/pdf/an_cp_mom_MJalignment.pdf http://www.njtransit.com/pdf/an_cp_mom_matalignment.pdf http://www.njtransit.com/pdf/an_cp_mom_redbankalignment.pdf Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Monday, March 21, 2005 4:36 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Quickest/faster/shortest route is via Matawan or up the rte 9 corridor to S. Amboy. Yes, but these partially duplicate existing NJTransit mileage along the South Amboy branch. Admittedly you duplicate NEC mileage down to Monmouth Junction, but after that it's essentially virgin territory for NJT -- much of it amenable to the kind of upscale real-estate development that characterizes some Connecticut and Philadelphia-suburban operations. IIRC, the line from Monmouth Junction was electrified; I'd suspect the wire is down, but the bridges aren't. (It's been, let me see, over a quarter century since I was last at the Junction other than on a very fast-moving train... how time flies when you're not watching!) Wouldn't this constitute some capital advantage? (One side note: Is there still 'secure' traffic to the naval weapons station?) Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 7:15 AM Well I am out of NJ 8 years. When I was their though I remember that everybody alleged that the Rte 9 corridor was far to congested so my common sense if they are really going to spend the $$$$$$ that they do something to relieve that corridor. Also my opinion from being a commuter for many, many years on the NJCL was I always felt that commuters want to get from spot A to spot B as fast as possible. [:D][:D] Originally posted by Overmod Originally posted by spbed Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 7:39 PM Lets get back on the subject please. Reply Edit Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:36 AM All the comments so far ARE on the subject... except perhaps "I've wood love that one" -- which maybe you'd care to explain the semantics of ;-} Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:41 AM Hopefully he will reply. [:D] QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod All the comments so far ARE on the subject... except perhaps "I've wood love that one" -- which maybe you'd care to explain the semantics of ;-} Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 7:07 AM Just to clarify a bit: YES, I'm for a MOM line. Any of the alternatives is better than none. Personally, I'd like to see more than one of them built, as I think (with the rate of development in the areas of central New Jersey I've seen since my college days) there will be adequate demand by the time the trains actually start running. I'm not sure that road congestion in the Rt. 9 corridor would be relieved by commuter service -- it certainly wasn't in the Rt. 1 corridor despite much higher levels of railroad infrastructure (4-track "freight-free" NEC with plenty of Silverliners). On the other hand, the road traffic might develop into something MUCH worse in the absence of an actively improved rail transit system within the next few years. One of the reasons I worry about additional trains running over part of the Amboy Branch would be grade crossing occupancy. Can someone who lives in that area (or can reach it easily) comment, looking at the route maps, on how many crossings remain on the portion of 'common' trackage? I haven't run the numbers on how many trains per day would have to run on the MOM line in order to make it cost-effective for NJT, but I'd suspect at least 3-4 each day, each way at minimum -- effectively running in rush-hour-traffic windows for road traffic. Can those be sandwiched in with the Bay Head/Long Branch traffic without causing local irritation? Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 8:01 AM Well if my memory is correct between Matawan & S. Amboy there is only 2 grade crossings. There are 2 more in S. Amboy itself. Then there are no more all the way to either Nwk, NY or Hoboken. As for more traffic on the NJCL I would suspect that NJT has that answer. [:D][:D] Originally posted by Overmod [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:37 PM Why dump more traffic on the NEC at Monmouth??? I believe that the train should run on the former Jersey Central route. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 6:36 AM I think the CNJ bridge no longer exist over the channel. Also ferry serice would have to be restarted to get the commuters from JC to NY. Also the NJCL joins the former mainline at Rahway not Monmouth Jct where they have 6 tracks to Elizabeth then 4 tracks from Elizabeth to Nwk. [:D][:)] Originally posted by Murray Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 21, 2005 5:32 PM I just heard that the Red Bank alteritive was ruled out! now the time to tell me Mommouth Jct. or Matawan line. vote now! ( and no junk about rt 9) Reply Edit Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod You like that alignment better than the one running up from Monmouth Junction? Let me know what factors you valued in making this decision. (To save browsing around to find them, the three route maps are here): http://www.njtransit.com/pdf/an_cp_mom_MJalignment.pdf http://www.njtransit.com/pdf/an_cp_mom_matalignment.pdf http://www.njtransit.com/pdf/an_cp_mom_redbankalignment.pdf
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Quickest/faster/shortest route is via Matawan or up the rte 9 corridor to S. Amboy.
Originally posted by Overmod Originally posted by spbed Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 7:39 PM Lets get back on the subject please. Reply Edit Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:36 AM All the comments so far ARE on the subject... except perhaps "I've wood love that one" -- which maybe you'd care to explain the semantics of ;-} Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:41 AM Hopefully he will reply. [:D] QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod All the comments so far ARE on the subject... except perhaps "I've wood love that one" -- which maybe you'd care to explain the semantics of ;-} Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 7:07 AM Just to clarify a bit: YES, I'm for a MOM line. Any of the alternatives is better than none. Personally, I'd like to see more than one of them built, as I think (with the rate of development in the areas of central New Jersey I've seen since my college days) there will be adequate demand by the time the trains actually start running. I'm not sure that road congestion in the Rt. 9 corridor would be relieved by commuter service -- it certainly wasn't in the Rt. 1 corridor despite much higher levels of railroad infrastructure (4-track "freight-free" NEC with plenty of Silverliners). On the other hand, the road traffic might develop into something MUCH worse in the absence of an actively improved rail transit system within the next few years. One of the reasons I worry about additional trains running over part of the Amboy Branch would be grade crossing occupancy. Can someone who lives in that area (or can reach it easily) comment, looking at the route maps, on how many crossings remain on the portion of 'common' trackage? I haven't run the numbers on how many trains per day would have to run on the MOM line in order to make it cost-effective for NJT, but I'd suspect at least 3-4 each day, each way at minimum -- effectively running in rush-hour-traffic windows for road traffic. Can those be sandwiched in with the Bay Head/Long Branch traffic without causing local irritation? Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 8:01 AM Well if my memory is correct between Matawan & S. Amboy there is only 2 grade crossings. There are 2 more in S. Amboy itself. Then there are no more all the way to either Nwk, NY or Hoboken. As for more traffic on the NJCL I would suspect that NJT has that answer. [:D][:D] Originally posted by Overmod [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:37 PM Why dump more traffic on the NEC at Monmouth??? I believe that the train should run on the former Jersey Central route. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 6:36 AM I think the CNJ bridge no longer exist over the channel. Also ferry serice would have to be restarted to get the commuters from JC to NY. Also the NJCL joins the former mainline at Rahway not Monmouth Jct where they have 6 tracks to Elizabeth then 4 tracks from Elizabeth to Nwk. [:D][:)] Originally posted by Murray Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 21, 2005 5:32 PM I just heard that the Red Bank alteritive was ruled out! now the time to tell me Mommouth Jct. or Matawan line. vote now! ( and no junk about rt 9) Reply Edit Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by spbed Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 7:39 PM Lets get back on the subject please. Reply Edit Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:36 AM All the comments so far ARE on the subject... except perhaps "I've wood love that one" -- which maybe you'd care to explain the semantics of ;-} Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:41 AM Hopefully he will reply. [:D] QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod All the comments so far ARE on the subject... except perhaps "I've wood love that one" -- which maybe you'd care to explain the semantics of ;-} Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 7:07 AM Just to clarify a bit: YES, I'm for a MOM line. Any of the alternatives is better than none. Personally, I'd like to see more than one of them built, as I think (with the rate of development in the areas of central New Jersey I've seen since my college days) there will be adequate demand by the time the trains actually start running. I'm not sure that road congestion in the Rt. 9 corridor would be relieved by commuter service -- it certainly wasn't in the Rt. 1 corridor despite much higher levels of railroad infrastructure (4-track "freight-free" NEC with plenty of Silverliners). On the other hand, the road traffic might develop into something MUCH worse in the absence of an actively improved rail transit system within the next few years. One of the reasons I worry about additional trains running over part of the Amboy Branch would be grade crossing occupancy. Can someone who lives in that area (or can reach it easily) comment, looking at the route maps, on how many crossings remain on the portion of 'common' trackage? I haven't run the numbers on how many trains per day would have to run on the MOM line in order to make it cost-effective for NJT, but I'd suspect at least 3-4 each day, each way at minimum -- effectively running in rush-hour-traffic windows for road traffic. Can those be sandwiched in with the Bay Head/Long Branch traffic without causing local irritation? Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 8:01 AM Well if my memory is correct between Matawan & S. Amboy there is only 2 grade crossings. There are 2 more in S. Amboy itself. Then there are no more all the way to either Nwk, NY or Hoboken. As for more traffic on the NJCL I would suspect that NJT has that answer. [:D][:D] Originally posted by Overmod [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:37 PM Why dump more traffic on the NEC at Monmouth??? I believe that the train should run on the former Jersey Central route. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 6:36 AM I think the CNJ bridge no longer exist over the channel. Also ferry serice would have to be restarted to get the commuters from JC to NY. Also the NJCL joins the former mainline at Rahway not Monmouth Jct where they have 6 tracks to Elizabeth then 4 tracks from Elizabeth to Nwk. [:D][:)] Originally posted by Murray Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 21, 2005 5:32 PM I just heard that the Red Bank alteritive was ruled out! now the time to tell me Mommouth Jct. or Matawan line. vote now! ( and no junk about rt 9) Reply Edit Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod All the comments so far ARE on the subject... except perhaps "I've wood love that one" -- which maybe you'd care to explain the semantics of ;-}
Originally posted by Overmod [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:37 PM Why dump more traffic on the NEC at Monmouth??? I believe that the train should run on the former Jersey Central route. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 24, 2005 6:36 AM I think the CNJ bridge no longer exist over the channel. Also ferry serice would have to be restarted to get the commuters from JC to NY. Also the NJCL joins the former mainline at Rahway not Monmouth Jct where they have 6 tracks to Elizabeth then 4 tracks from Elizabeth to Nwk. [:D][:)] Originally posted by Murray Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 21, 2005 5:32 PM I just heard that the Red Bank alteritive was ruled out! now the time to tell me Mommouth Jct. or Matawan line. vote now! ( and no junk about rt 9) Reply Edit Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by Murray Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 21, 2005 5:32 PM I just heard that the Red Bank alteritive was ruled out! now the time to tell me Mommouth Jct. or Matawan line. vote now! ( and no junk about rt 9) Reply Edit Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.