JT22CW wrote:You certainly aren't going to have 10' 6"-wide commuter cars passing those platforms.
In fairness, today's 10-ft-6-in wide cars are only 10-0 wide at floor level. For all I know there is a 6.1-inch gap between Harrison platform and an H&M car, which would maybe leave 0.1 inch for a commuter car. That's why I asked what the gap is at Harrison nowadays.
I don't see the point of arguing matters relating to an era before the construction of Newark Penn, which opened in 1935. Market Street Station was an entirely different animal. There was no connection to Tracks A through 5 from the Harrison platforms post-1935, it seems to me; and the H&M's tracks were certainly separated from the PRR's, going through Dock (over which no catenary wire existed either).Furthermore, perusing the many passenger car diagrams on this page, it looks to me like there were several classes of PRR car that would have fit the H&M's high platforms when operating up until 1927. The MU page includes H&M joint service cars. And the postcard below, which depicts a DD-1 at NY Penn prior to catenary wire erection, seems to show a generous gap between rail vehicle and platform.
If PRR trains stopped at the Harrison station until 1927, then obviously the high platforms could accomodate them. The H&M - PRR joint service to Park Street Newark began before 1927. This should settle the main argument. Again, Harrsion was NOT AN H&M STATION. It was a PRR station and the Hudson Teminal - Newark service was a joint PRR - H&M service. Why would not the catenary have been installed on the local tracks? There was no reason not to install it. Again, there were crossovers just west of the Newark draw bridge, and the catenary would have provide operating flexibility in times of track maintenance, etc. This permtited Exchange Place bound commuter trains to switch to the Journal Square bound tracks before the junction rather than after, and this was probably done any time there was congestion, at least during WWII.
The crossovers west of the Newark draw bridge were removed either at the time when PATH bought the tracks it wished to use from PRR or when the Northeast Corridor improvements were implemented and the corridor tracks upgraded.
At the time of the PATH takeover, the turnstile fare on H&M was 25 cents. 15 cents extra got you the PRR ticket good to Newark. 40 cents got you a PRR-H&M joint ticket from Newark to NY, Hudson Terminal with of course free transfer at Journal Square, across the platform or on the same track, to a "33rd Street" uptown train. (The 33rd Street name was continued after the station was rebuilt in connection with the 6th Avenue Subway construction, but actually the tracks only go to 32nd Street, and 33rd Street exits are via the 6th Avenue Subway mezzanine.) The 40-cent fare also applied inbound from Harrison. Possibly if one left the system at JOurnal Sq, one could show a punched ticket and get some kind of refund, but I am not certain about that. I am also uncertain about what the Harrison-Newark fare was, but with roving train conductors a separate fare was possible.
PATH installed turnstiles on the two inbound Newark platforms flanking the single track used by the Hudson Terminal (now to become World Trade Center) trains. Turnstiles were also intalled at the inbound Harrison station. There was now a 30-cent system-wide fare, and the former PRR Journal Square - Newark line was now part of the PATH system. With one exception: No turnstiles were intalled on the Newark-bound Harrison platform, one could ride free, until fairly recently, at least up to my move to Jerusalem 12 years ago, from Harrinson to Newark. I understand there are turnstiles, or rather pass-gates with card readers, there now. And the fare is of course much higher.
One could not be a fare-beater by riding a Newark bound train from Harrison in the hopes of staying aboard and riding to New York from Newark. Every passenger had to leave the train at the arrival Newark platform. The platforms at Newark used by the Hudson Terminal service were always designed for narrow cars and there was no reason to design them for anything else. The platforms at Harrison were completely rebuilt some time before I moved here, the rebuilding thorough enough that at times one platform or the other was completelyi out of service, with passengers having to back-track.
I'll get back to you on Henderson shops. Connected to the PATH system by a elevator, like in a streetcar barn.
The photographs do show me in error on one point. The PRR and H&M Hudson Terminal - Newark cars do not show the characteristic details for a Stillwell-design car, but rather those of George Gibbs, with a family relationship to the PRR-built LIRR and IRT sample steel cars of 1904, as well as later PRR. LIRR, and IRT equipment. Of course Stillwell and Gibbs were good friends, but still......
The H&M Stillwell-designed black cars could not operate west of Journal Squage because they lacked the PRR ATC equipment that automaticlaly applied brakes when passing a restrictive or stopped signal at higher than authorized speed, and this ATC was in place until the signal system west of Journal Square was revised to be identacle to that on the H&M system, with mechanical tripping of air valves on cars if a red signal was passed, similar but not identacle to that on New York's subway lines.
timz wrote:How wide are H&M cars at floor level-- 9 feet?
daveklepper wrote: under wire at the double-track drawbridge between JOurnal Square and where the line joins the PRR main, and another photo shows a post-war K-class train under wire just west of the yard west of Journal Square Station.
daveklepper wrote:the Harrison platform tracks also recieved the overhead wire
daveklepper wrote: and the line rebuilding included crossovers just east of the drawbridge east of Newark Station.
There was catenary and there were crossovers, and I am certain I saw them. Photo confirmation from the latest ERA New York Division Bulletin shows a H&M-PRR Newark train with the original equipment under wire at the double-track drawbridge between JOurnal Square and where the line joins the PRR main, and another photo shows a post-war K-class train under wire just west of the yard west of Journal Square Station. (So apparently the wire remained until PATH took over.) Possibly the crossovers were put in some time after the relocation of the line to Newark Pennslyvania Station. Before that station (the current one) was built as part of the Trenton -Sunnyside Yark electrification extension and grade elimination, the joint service had its own elevated two-track stub-end rapid-transit type station in Newark, Park Street Station, removed when Newark Penn Station was opened. The signs said "Pennsylvania Railroad Trains to Hudson Terminal, Manhattan." They did not say H&M or Hudson Tubes!
In 1927, when PRR trains stopped Harrison service, there was no overhead wire in the vicinity and it is possibly that the Newark - Hudson Terminal trains were segregated, Harrison - Newark, without crossovers, west of Manhattan transfer, where there definitely were crossovers. But when the AC catenary electrication was extended, Manhattan Transfer removed, the Harrison platform tracks also recieved the overhead wire, and the line rebuilding included crossovers just east of the drawbridge east of Newark Station. Note that the H&M - PRR through service was placed on what was an existing PRR line west of Journal Square, Jersey City, and I would imagine that the crossovers west of the yard west of Journal Square station were existing crossovers.
Ralfans should not assume that what is seen today was always the situaton.
daveklepper wrote:I am fairly certain that during WWII, if not earlier, box cars wereloaded and unloaded at the Harrison high-platforms.
How wide are H&M cars at floor level-- 9 feet? If so, is there a 6 inch gap betwen the car and the platform at Harrison?
daveklepper wrote:at the time this was a PRR Station, not H&M.
As a youngster, about age six, 1938, I rode the front car looking out front, of a train from Journal Square to Newark. Not only was there catenary over the track at Harrison Station, but it was over the track just about all the way from Journal Square to the crossovers before the bridge into the Newark Station. I remember this quite clearly. Probably, the catenary was taken down during WWII and used elsewhere and then not replaced after WWII. The position light signals lasted a lot longer, in fact into the operation by PATH. Possibly the crossovers at the approach to the bridge in Newark have been removed. The last time I rode the line, about 14 years ago, there was one crossover on each side between PATH tracks and Amtrak tracks, but I forget just where they were located, east or west of Harrison station. Freights at one time did use the tracks used by the H&M-PRR through service as a diversion from their parallel double-track line. The parallel double-track line was also used by the PRR passenger trains that terminated at the Jersey City ferry terminal and did not run into New York. These included MU's, steam, and later diesels. The service into the Jersey City Exchannge Place terminal outlasted the ferries by a few years (one could board a PATH train there). Again, there were crossovers both east of the bridge at Newark and west of the Journal Square station in Jersey City.
Fare on the H&M lines was a dime, collected through turnstyles. But to go to Harrison or Newark, one either bought an additional ticket from the conductor on the train or from the ticket agent - change booth at any of the H&M stations. I recall the extra fare being something lile twelve cents for a child and seventeen for an adult. These tickets were punched or collected between Newark and Journal Square.
daveklepper wrote:The "H&M" tracks at Harrison were never owned by the H&M. They were part of the six-track main line of the PRR and at one time had catenary over them
No one will ever find a picture (or a timetable) showing catenary over the tracks next to the platforms at H&M's Harrison station-- no reason for such a thing to exist. There was no reason for any PRR train (freight or passenger) ever to run on the tracks next to the Harrison platform-- there was no place for it to go.
The "H&M" tracks at Harrison were never owned by the H&M. They were part of the six-track main line of the PRR and at one time had catenary over them as welll as the H&M third rail. After PATH took over operations, the tracks between Journal Square and Newark were segregated as to which were PATH's and which were PRR's. Then freights could no longer use the PATH tracks and then the signal system on the PATH tracks was changed from PRR posidtion light to color-light.
Before the PATH purchase, H&M did not really operate to Newark. The Hudson Terminal - Newark trains were a joint PRR-H&M operation, with half the mu cars owned by PRR and Half by H&M. This was true for the original Stillwell designed red cars, which were more powerful and faster than the other black H&M cars, and the postwar air-conditioned cars that replaced them. The H&M and PRR cars were mixed in the same trains. At one time crews actually changed at Journal Square, but then run-trhough agreements were made.
daveklepper wrote:Platforms at Harrison were originally a compromise, and that is where any [freight car] scrape occured, but now the platform tracks at Harrsion see no freights and the gap has been narrowed.
Why would the H&M tracks at Harrison ever have seen a freight car? Where would it be going?
Penn Station platforms always could accomodate freight cars, and during WWII coal trains from Pennsylvania to New England points regularly ran through Penn Station each night during periods of light passenger traffic.
Standard railway freight cars never ran on PATH (Hudson Tubes) east of Journal Square (Jersey City) station. Path cars have clearance characteristics similar to Chicago's CTA and are narrower than regular equipment. Platforms at Harrison were originally a compromise, and that is where any scrape occured, but now the platform tracks at Harrsion see no freights and the gap has been narrowed.
Part of the issue on clearances with high platforms is that until very recently, light rail and rapid transit equipment did not operate on freight railroads that had a larger clearance diagram. One situation with which I'm familiar where this happened was on the Chicago, Aurora and Elgin, where the passenger equipment had to be narrower in order to fit on the Chicago Rapid Transit Company tracks east of Laramie. The high-level platforms which were required for Rapid Transit Company equipment that operated to Westchester were hinged so they could be folded back to clear the occasional freight train. On the North Shore Line Skokie Valley Route south of Dempster, gantlet tracks were used to clear the high-level station platforms for the Rapid Transit's Skokie locals.
The Chicago Transit Authority got around the issue of close clearance high platforms by the use of fishbelly sides on all equipment since the PCC rapid transit cars were purchased. The carbodies are wider above floor level to put the extra width where it's needed without having to rebuild the entire system.
Metro North and LIRR have begun welding metal strips on the outside of the door sills of all their passenger equpment to close the gap to the high-platforms. A lot less expensive solution that installing gauntlet track to allow continued freight service while narrowing the gap.
There is absolutely no reason whatsover, that modern commuter equipment and modern light rail equipment on newly constructed lines that don't need to address old clearance situations should not use full 10-feet + width rolling stock, regardless of whether they run under trolley wire, take power from third rail, use diesel, fuel cell, nuclear, battery, whatever. Whether the equipment is self-propelled mu or locomotive-push-pull. And Pacific Electric and Illinois Terminal ran 10-feet wide cars on city streets mixed with ordinary (and narrower) streetcars. South Shore, of course, still does run in the street. The narrowness of light rail started because Calgary and Edmonton and San Diego opted for a standard Duwag U-2 car designed originally for the Frankfurt-on-Mein tram subway. (Similarly the traditional "modern" top speed of 55mph when may interurbans ran up into the 90's.)
New Jersey's Hudson-Bergan light rail should have opted for a different and wider design than the now nearly identacle equpment provided for the existing Newark streetcar subway. The only possible reason for using the same design under the different conditions of the two operations might be the possibility of their being linked together some day. Although the old Hudson Divison streetcar network, with its Hoboken Elevated, was linked by a line to Newark before WWII, the chances of such a link being recreated are pretty slim, considering that NJT has a diesel commuter route from Hoboken to Penn Station Newark and a frequent-service electric route from Hoboken to Broad Street Station, Newark, both served by Newark's NJT light rail. And then there is PATH rapid transit to Nerwark from a number of stations served by Hudson-Bergan light rail. Economy of using the same design for multiple car orders? Wider cars can carry people with greater economy (and possibly greater comfort) than narrow cars.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.