I feel like I'm being outvoted here, Dave. Well, I have to agree that if the Port Authority does build a line to Newark Airport the sky will not fall. We will have to wait and see what the PA does.
The fact that standees are evident between NY & Newark, even packed trains, means that NJT is loosing long distance commuters to places like New Bruswick and Princeton Jc. Putting some of the short distance commuters on PATH will allow more space for longer distance commuters and thus improve the publc transit to auto commuter ratio. People like one-seat rides . There are plenty of NYC empoyment opportunities in the region from Cortland Street to Herald Square, but PATH has not gone after this business, except for people living in Hoboken and JC and commuting via the old DL&W and Erie lines. In the end, NJT ridership will continue to increase and a greater proportion will be longer distance,
Yes a train pulls into Newark PATH departure track as soon as one leaves. But it sits there a while and does not fill all at once. They are running about a 270 second headway at the tightest, and a 90 or 100 second headway is technically possible, with modern signalling, computer control of junctions, and hostlers at Newark for the reversing pocket moves. Then WTC trains can alternate with Herald Sq. trains..
Well I lived next to the DL&W, about a quarter mile west of Denville station from 1946 until leaving for college in 1961. My parents lived their until their deaths and the house left the family. So I just go down there to ride trains. As I mentoned we're going out of Port Jervis ths Wednesday. We have another trip planned for later this fall from either Hackettstown or Mt. Arlington to Hoboken to Spring Valley and return. Ild lke to get a trip up the Harlem line sometime, soon. We often do Saturday trips...there are some that can only be done on weekends just like some that can only be done weekdays...from either Port Jervis or Denville. send me your email address to ridewithmehenry@hotmail.com and I'll put you on my list that I notify when we plan trips. I do not charge...gas is shared out of Binghamton and sometimes I get my dinner paid for, but othrewise it is to ride trains and lines and see daily operations rather than tourst trains.
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.
Thank you for the invitation, Henry, but I'll have to say no thanks to your invitation. These days I'm retired and get the same OFF you do but I have a little part time job taking my grandson to nursery school and bringing him home so I'm not really available. I do live in the metropolitan area, in Bloomfield close to the Montclair Boonton Line and some trains go directly to Penn Station so the logistics would work but, as I say, my schedule won't.
For about 20 years I commuted to Hoboken from the Waldwick Station on the old Erie Port Jervis Line. Do you ever go to a place like Lyndhurst where Jay Gould raised his orchids?
I agree, Mike, that people should be able to find a seat on NJT trains. But do you really think PATH trains will offer an improvement? My experience is that in Newark PATH trains can be so crowded that you can't even get on the train much less find a seat and you have to wait for the next train. The Port Authority cannot add more PATH trains because the system is at its maximum capacity right now. An Airport link would only add standing room. But the PATH fare to the Airport would in all probability be cheaper than NJT and attract people for that reason.
Also, bear in mind that only people who leave Manhattan during the evening rush hour would have difficulty finding seats on NJT trains. At Newark a lot of people get off to change to diesel trains so seats are freed up.
My impression is that most people who fly out of Newark take morning flights.
JohnWR...are you in the NY metropolitan area now? If so, join us in one of our RIdewthmehenry trips. We drive from Binghamton to a NJT/MNRR railhead and ride to the end of LIRR or MNRR or NTJ lines, even SEPTA. This Wednesday, in fact, we are planning to take the 7:46AM out of Port Jervis with an eye to going to Jamaica on the LIRR then search some surface subway riding taking the J train over the Williamsburg Bridge to Manhattan, F train to 4th in Brooklyn, R train to 36th, D train detour to D train route and north stopping at 9th Ave before continuing the D train to the N train over the Manhattan Bridge. Maybe R train from Chambers St. to Rector and PATH to Hoboken....it's partly planned and partly winging dependent on weather, etc. We all, this time anyway, use OFF---Old Fart Fares---so its a cheap day. Often we are joined enroute by those who don't live up here in the hinterlands...Anybody reading this can join us, too....but would like to know who you are and where you will be catching up with us so I can be sure to be where you will meet us at a given time.
John, I can admire your loyalty to NJT, however, making people stand from NYP to Newark Airport just makes them annoyed and looking for other options. They may even loose some of the longer distance passengers that they should be serving. It's not ideal public service. Adding the PATH option would entice more people to to use public transit. The short fares NJT looses to PATH could conceivably be made up by retaining the longer fares.
I reviews this whole thread and went back 4 pages but found nothing I could recognize about the "PATH system's client design," Henry. I am aware the tubes were deliberately kept small so trains would push air out and pull air in for ventilation. And when the PATH was built certainly there was no thought of Newark Airport. I suppose there were reasons it was built with such tight curves but we agree that it would make no sense to re do it to modern standards.
In a perfect world I would like to see a direct rail connection between NY Penn Station and Grand Central. The lack of a connection is the price we have paid for private ownership of railroads. They should have been connected when Penn Station was built.
You started riding trains earlier than I did. As a teenager I began going from New York to Boston in the 50's. Then I went into the Army and began riding between Trenton and Providence. After the Army I took a long trip but talking about it is taboo. Then, as life took me different places, I simply chose to ride trains whenever I could as a paying passenger.
I was born in 1943 and was immediately riding the subway and trolley system...by the time I was all of 3 months old, I rode Chicago to Sacramento...to Texas less than 5 months later and back to NY not two months later than that. My mother and I lived with her parents in Jamaica, LI and after the war my parents bought a house in NJ literally on the track of the Lackawanna RR. Many trips to and from Denville, NJ and NYC have followed including a commutation stint in the summer of 1957. I have always followed the plights and flights of the NYC area commuter service virtually since I was about 10 or so years old not just as a rider buy as an enthusiast and historian.I
I never said anything about PATH that I would alter or expect the ateration of its cars or infratructure. The almost right angle curves and the confines of real tubes cannot be overcome without extensive reengineering and rebuilding, a cost that is far beyond comprehension and ability at this time. But see the exchange I've had above about system's client design marketing and use to help understand my thinking. And I am not a big fan of Robert Moses in the long run, but can see his practicality of the times in both political perspective as well as social perspective along with the persuasive lobbying by highway and oil interests of the time. The two track Corridor actually begins nearer to old Hudson tower where the line takes off north from the PRR main line to Jersey City, is four tracked only at Secaucus for the Junction.. If you step outside NJ, it is mostly 2 track I believe most of the way from Wilmington to Baltimore but back to 3 or 4 tracks from there to D.C. Another Hudson River tunnel for two or more tracks is an absolute must. But I also advocate it or another be dug further south nearer Hoboken and Jersey City and like the PRR project of the 1910's also continue under the East River to connect with the LIRR either at Atlantic Ave. or, via other unused rights to way to Fresh Pond and Jamaica.
I don't know that either Amtrak or New Jersey Transit need or want to be relieved of their burden of passengers going to or from Newark Airport.
My own experience on Amtrak's Northeast Regional trains is that they have the capacity to include riders to and from Newark Airport so that is simply a source of added revenue at no added cost. There are some Acelas that stop at Newark Airport Station. Generally, northbound Acelas are limited to discharging passengers and southbound Acelas are limited to receiving passengers. Acelas do run full but there is not suggestion Amtrak cannot accommodate people at this station.
NJT probably has the capacity to carry Newark Airport passengers. First of all, trains outside the rush hour and in the opposite direction of rush hour trains have a lot of excess capacity and many our most airline passengers travel at this time or in this direction. Inbound rush hour trains that pick up airline passengers discharge them all before Newark Penn Station where people transfer from diesel trains to electric trains to NY Penn Station. Outbound evening rush hour trains can be crowded to the point of passengers standing at NY Penn Station but the evening rush hour covers a longer period than the morning rush hour so trains tend to be less crowded and Newark Airport is usually one stop after Newark so the ride is short. People who board at Newark Airport in the evening should not have difficulty getting a seat.
Airport workers who ride New Jersey Transit trains to work and buy 30 day commuter tickets do not have to pay the $5.50 monorail charge. Their monthly ticket does not include the cost.
If the PATH were extended to serve Newark Airport with either no increase or a modest addon to PATH fare no doubt many workers and airline passengers would ride PATH. But certainly this would reduce revenue for New Jersey Transit and it could greatly reduce revenue for NJT. The spirt of Jay Gould is alive at the Port Authority.
You certainly have a lot more experience with trains than I do, Henry. I have been riding trains all of my life but I've done it in order to get somewhere, not to learn about railroads as you have.
Frankly, I am not a fan of Robert Moses. I prefer the Jane Jacobs perspective but I don't want to get on my soap box about the many issues involved either.
Certainly many railroads in the Northeast have good links to public transit. However, it seems to me that the Newark Airport station with its monorail connection to both New Jersey Transit and Amtrak trains is as good as any of them.
You are right that the Northeast Corridor has 4 tracks from the Portal Bridge to Philadelphia. My point is that these 4 tracks are sufficient for NJT and Amtrak if we could add 2 more tracks to the 2 track tunnel.
And I also agree that PATH "is what it is." But the tight curves of the system and the tunnels that closely fit the cars mean it will never be much more than what it is, with small cars and low speeds. That is why I think new tunnels for the Northeast Corridor trains is a much better solution to current overcrowding and future increased demand.
Well, it is not much different than the Atlantic City service from Phladelphia. Intitally Amtrak was carrying interstate travelers, tourists, and the like while NJT carried casual gamblers but mostly employees. Today it is only NJT and they carry both Atlantic City and Philadelphia commuters.
Amtrak stops at Baltimore Washington airport and EWR. SEPTA goes to Philadelphia Airport and Boston's Blue Line I think goes to Logan International. I am sure that each has a different clientle. So I do accept the theory as being real but my curiosity is piqued.
henry6 Interesting observations, Midlanmike. I kind of assume the same. I wonder if there is any statistical verification.
Interesting observations, Midlanmike. I kind of assume the same. I wonder if there is any statistical verification.
I don't remember any statistics, but I would not be surprised if a consultant somewhere did a study. I remember an article about a city that was considering a rail link to their airport, trying to decide what type of service. They decided the people who worked at and around the airport were the segment they would be serving, and they chose the transit option. The cars were designed with no provisions for luggage or anything likely to entice airline passengers.
From what I read about airport-rail links: railroads get more airline passengers with their luggage, while transit rail gets more local passengers and airport workers. The two forms seem to complement each other more than compete with each other. Relieving the railroads of the local short haul passengers frees up their longer haul assets.
John, I've been riding NYC area railroads since 1943, so I am fully familiar with the lines, the systems,and plans that have been put forth and either failed or made it since then. The Stewart line has been talked about either connecting to the CSX River Line, reviving the old connection the Newburg Jct. on the Erie main above Harriman, or the old NJ&NY Pascack Valley line, or across a new Tappen Zee or other bridge. Nothing has ever been deatailed but speculated only. And while I don't really think Moses made mistakes, he was acting under the then popular assumptions about the automobile and the lobbyists from that pursuasion, we have found ourselves beyond the capatilties of that system of highways and bridges and are facing new challanges. Better airport links than Newark...Philadelphia is a good start, as is Logan in Boston, Baltimore-Washington airport,; there is a long list. And the Corridor in many places south of Philadelphia, is only two, not 4 tracks. I can't figure out why your comment about PATH equipment....it is what it is and always has been and withoug massive rebulding cannot be changed.
If almost embarrasses me in my plodding writing to respond to your eloquence, Henry. But here is a start.
The PATH system with its tight curves and close fitting tunnels is very limited. Car sizes cannot be increased. The shoes that pick up electricity cannot be replaced with a catenary and paintographs which are used today by modern electric trains.
On the other hand, from Northern New Jersey to Washington DC we have in place a 4 track rail line which is not at capacity because it is limited by the two track Hudson River Tunnel. A new tunnel is the key to expanding our rail system. We should build it and build it now.
As far as airport links are concerned, Newark Airport already has a rail link to the Northeast Corridor Line. Does any airport have a better link than Newark?
I don't know what kind of a rail connection you foresee for Stewart Airport. Perhaps to the Pascack Valley line or the Port Jervis line? New Jersey Transit is, I think, slowly extending its Morris and Essex line to Scranton and there is talk about New York and Pennsylvania building a line to Binghamton. But it seems to me that this is undoing the mistakes of the Robert Moses era when we forgot about the importance of railroads and almost lost them.
When the PRR owned the Hudson and Manhattan Railroad, or Tubes, 33rd St, NY to Newark, NJ was direct competition, therefore was never instituted. Thus it was never put into the traffic pattern. I also believe, for the most part, there is no real market for such a route. And PATH/Tubes never have run direct 33rd St. to downtown WTC or the old Chambers St. so as not to compete directly with the NYC subway especially with the PATH fares usually lower than subway fares. While this lack of service is understandable, travelling from 33rd St to Newark today would make more sense because there is so little NYP to Newark exclusive traffic on NJT or even Amtrak. Losing customers, too, is not always bad...they maybe too few to be of consequence to the bottom line or just too costly to serve; there may be other services that are available. Yes, at least another set of tracks--a pair or more-- is needed into Manhattan.
And when talking passenger train operations, freight operations also have to be considered. As harbor business increases, there is pressure for more highways and freight rail services, too. These factors have to impact passenger rail decisions, too.
Yes, the current Hudson River Tunnels between New Jersey and Manhattan are at capacity. We certainly need new ones to add to the total capacity but if you are in New Jersey (as I suspect you may be) you know what happened to the Access to the Region's Core project.
Right now NJT's rush hour trains run with standing room only. Not only can NJT put more trains through the tunnels but it cannot add cars to existing trains because current trains are as long as the platforms can handle and longer than some suburban stations can handle. But I think NJT could accommodate more standing passengers. This is not ideal for customers or even NJT in the long run but it does help NJT's revenues.
I just don't see how losing customers could be good for New Jersey Transit.
As far as running PATH 33rd Street trains through to Newark, my only question is why PATH does not do it. It certainly would better serve passengers. However, during the rush hours PATH trains at Newark Penn Station are now very frequent; as soon as one leaves another pulls in. Also, PATH cars are small and trains are short--almost like overgrown trolley cars--and even getting on the PATH can be difficult during the rush hour. So would it be possible to add more PATH cars at Newark?
Dave underscores what too many people overlook: the world is always changing, the NY Metropolitan area is always growing. Predictions are for increased population; increased truck, bus, and auto traffic; increased rail traffic. Planners are not thinking the status quo but increased population and increased transportation needs in the near and distant future. The Great Depression of the 30's was good for the US in that FDR saw fit to put people to work building highways and other infrastructure which allowed us to fight WWII and to achieve Post War economic prosperity because the transportation infrastructure was 80% in place with only a few turnpikes and other four lanes to be built into the 50's. Then Eisenhower saw fit to expand the highway system to what we know today to augment what had been done previously. We cannot face 21st Century poplulation growth and passenger and freight transportation needs using 19th and 20th Century left overs...we have to build and alter more to increas the capabities of our infrasatructure. We are relying on business to take care of freight and calling on government to take care of people. But soon the two are going to have to come together to put into place a program that divides up the land and resources and work to a system that accomodates the new Century needs of society. PATH trains from inner city to Newark Airport is only a small first step. We're going to see a rail service from Newburg and Stewart Air Field in NY into the area for instance, and perhaps an actual loop like service through the airports; a more regional rail system rather than just Amtrak and the commuter agencies; maybe more airports further out of the area linked by rail services; improvements in port facilities in both size and interfacility connections. It's no longer the burgeoinging age of the Industrial Revolution; patterns of people movements and commodity movements are different and wil be different. What we did yesterday has to be revised to meet the changes.
Except that NJT says it is running at capacity through the existing tunnels to Penn Station. Shifting some of that passenger load to PATH, and structuring PATH to absorb it without problems, could mean more people using public transit. I have long advocated doubling the Jersey City - Newark service by running uptown trains to Newark instead of terminating all of them at Journal Square. The problem of the capacity of the pocket to reverse trains would be handled by having hostlers assigned to Newark to releive the road engineers, having one at each end, and not requiring the trains to spend time in the pocket tracks for the road engineer to walk from one end to the other. A two-minute headway on JC-Newark section would then be possible.
Speaking for myself, Streak, I did read the article but I didn't read it as carefully as I should have. Also when the headline at the top said the Port Authority will study service to "Newark Airport" I assumed the article referred to a place where you get on a plane rather than a place where you change trains. Silly me.
According to the article the Port Authority hopes to attract commuters who will park in its airport lot. Right now up and down Route 1 there are a number of parking lots at NJT's stations. By driving several miles furthers those NJT riders could park at the airport and switch to a PATH train. This would move a large number of commuters from NJT to the PATH train. Current PATH fare with a multi ride ticket is $3 per day, $66 for a 21 day month. From Metro Park to NY Penn Station NJT charges $284 per month. Of course the Port Authority would need to reconsider its monorail fare ($5.50 one way) as well as airport parking fees (long term parking is $18 for the first day). However, they have excess capacity in their parking lot and on the Monorail.
Meanwhile what happens to NJT's loss of revenue from commuters and other riders? This sounds like a return to the competition of the 1870's and 80's and is in the spirit of Jay Gould.
It is disappointing to this poster that the article was not read.
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/passenger_rail/news/New-Yorkarea-port-authority-to-study-direct-rail-extension-to-Newark-airport--32570
The article says that PATH is studying the expansion to the AIR TRAIN station only not to the terminals! I was operating out of EWR airport a lot while the AIR TRAIN was being built and also when the AIR TRAIN expansion to the NEC station was also being built.
A bit of history is needed here.
1. Newark airport was the first airport for the New York area then followed by LaGuardia, then Idlewild ( JFK ).
2. Much of the present airport land was not part of the original airport.
3. When building the present terminals ( 3rd itteration ) dirt piles up to 30 - 40 ft were placed over the future foot print of the buildings to compact the soils.
4. Several unknown crossing utilities were broken at that time and bypassed but some remain to this day. there were many pipe lines crossing the land as this was once a large refining area.
5. when the present terminals were built many utilities were mis located on drawings and when the AIR TRAIN was built a common occurrence was loss of a utility during foundation and other excavation work One time the whole terminal "C" lost electrical power after a casing borer cut the power feed.
6. I have no idea if all utilities have been properly located but suspect they have not been to this day.
7. To bujild PATH to the airport terminals would require engineering the work in stages with foundations located and then relocated when necessary. Only then could above ground work be designed and constructed. That would require too many years IMHO.
PATH service direct to the airport, without the use of the monrail shuttle, would mean one could walk through securitiy, pick up bags, etc., and board a train to a station directly adjacent to a Mnhattan hotel, any of the five Manhattan stations.
This should make Newark preferred over Kennedy until Kennedy gets its own subway link. But isn't Kennedy already at capacity. I know LaGuardia is.
It is what public agencies do.
Aside from that snarky remark, I think they are looking and a new era and new needs, They are looking for what they have to deal with in the next 25, 50, etc. years. If they don't keep investigating and thinking about the future they could get caught flatfooted and die or screw things up royally. Who knows what they will find or have to come up with to deal with it all. The current situtation maybe could be better or better off replaced...only a study will tell.
I agree, Henry, that a PATH train to EWR with a one seat connection and a lower fare would be convenient and popular.
What I don't understand is why the Port Authority would want to duplicate the current service. The spent a lot of money building the monorail and the EWR railroad station so why would they now build a new railroad connection that can only compete with what they already have? I don't even see why now they want to spend money to study a new PATH connection to EWR so there is something going on I don't understand.
I don't doubt that even train and transfer at EWR is faster than the bus. But the real service clincher for many is as few transfers as possible. Even, or especially, the 62 bus from Newark Penn Sta reprsents a transfer from NTJ, Amtrak, PATH or other bus but eliminates the extra fare of the monorail. Thus I feel a PATH train direct to two or three of the terminal buildings on a loop through presents the service and the price could be regular PATH fares or with a premium from Newark...depends on how many, if any, stops there are between Newark Penn and the airport. I wouldn't expect Amtrak riders or marketing to use PATH, but I would expect more from the NJT operations. In fact it would give NJT a chance to either bail out of it entirely or the fine tune their marketing and choice of trains that did make the EWR stop.
I'm sure you are right, Henry, about a PATH fare with a $2 surcharge to get to Newark Airport. Right now New Jersey Transit charges $12.50 from New York Penn and $8.25 from Newark to the Airport.
I didn't mean to suggest the 62 bus is as fast as Air Train. It isn't. But if you have the extra time and not too much luggage it is no more difficult to schlepp from the PATH train to the bus station than to schlepp from the PATH train to the ticket window and back to the track for the Air Train.
When the monorail was being planned there was some talk of continuing the PATH train to Plainfield but nothing ever came of it.
And PATH could add on up to $2 after Newark Penn if need be, as long as it went directly to the airport terminals with one, two or three stops there. People will pay for convenience. Plus if there are no stations after Newark Penn, it should also be quicker than the bus and much more convenient and cheaper than NJT/monorail.
One of the things I can't remember off hand was whether or not the earlier proposals for PATH had this as part of the proposed Plainfield extension...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.