Aegrotatio,
I have not forgotten the Susquenanna Transfer. But I have to confess that is only because I never heard of it in the first place. It was before my time in New Jersey.
But back when I lived in Bergen County I recall reading about how the New York Susquehanna and Western Railroad labored mightily to get rid of its passenger service and how. to the detriment of people living along the line, it finally succeeded. I have also seen some talk of restoring it to connect with New Jersey Transit's Main Line at Hawthorn but nothing has ever happened.
John
When there wasn't a traffic jam.
What about weekends?
timzSteam trains from Jersey City didn't need to stop [at Manh Tfr].
I trhink Jersey Transit got the most improvement for its passengers possible for the money spent. It was a wise investment, and efficient use of the money available,
You can check the Official Guide of the era or PRR timetables of the era.
And PRR did indeed look for company in Manhattan in that they talked with the DL&W I believe about sharing some costs but, I think it was the Davis era on the DL&W, and he and his board declined to spend the money.
Yes, Secaucus is like Manhattan Transfer of old by being built for the transfer to other trains. Being a true junction is also possible because you can change trains on the same platform from Morristown Line to Corridor and North Jersey Coast Line trains on the upper level while on the lower level you can change from the Main Line, the Bergen Cutt Off, Pascack Valley, and Sportsline trains. But neither the upper nor lower level can meet. It appears to be working well. There are elevators and escalators and stairs to and from all levels. It is not confusing if you follow the color assignments of lines and the train boards not just on the mezzanine but also in hallways and on platforms. Our Ridewithmehenry trips have used it to change trains from all the lines to the others in all directions.directions with no problems. Some waits allow some fun train watching on both levels. As a fan, it is fun. As a rider it is most convenient and can be time saving; or you can use the layover to grab breakfast or lunch.
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.
Anyone got a timetable showing a Jersey City PRR train that stopped at Manh Tfr?
But some, or even most, all non-rush-hour, Jersey City trains did stop to allow transfer to Penn Station trains and to the H&M-PRR joint-service trains. True, the transfer could also be made at the Exchange Place Jersey City PRR terminal, but some passengers may have wanted to go to Journal Square or via transfer there to Hoboaken or Pavionia. A few Bay Head Jc. Jersey Coast expresses probably did skip.
John WR All PRR trains stopped at Manhattan Transfer as long as steam engines ran.
Correct, except that west of Journal Square they were technically PRR trains, not H&M. The Newark - Hudson Terminal line was a "Joint Service" line with identacle cars 50 owned by PRR and 50 owned by H&M, with the property line at the west end of the Journal Square yard. Crews ran through and belonged to the Brotherhoods. And the H&M was legally a railroad.
I have yet to use Seacuas...let alone pronounce it. Still use Hoboken to get the Port Jervis Train.
Manhattan Transfer was originally built to allow Pennsylvania Railroad trains to change engines because steam engines were not allowed to enter New York. After it was built Hudson and Manhattan (now PATH) trains would stop there too and a change to a train entering lower Manhattan was possible. All PRR trains stopped at Manhattan Transfer as long as steam engines ran.
If what I've read is correct, Secaucus Junction is intended to be similar to Manhattan Transfer, not a station for passengers starting or ending their trips but a connecting point for passengers who need to change trains to complete their commute. I doubt that Amtrak was ever considered as part of the equation since it isn't supposed to be a suburban carrier and this is an NJT project.
Sound like you are another Pat McGinnis who wanted intercity trans to emulate airliens with their airports.
Most corridor passengers are business travelers and are happy with intown terminals. But if you are talkiing aobu a high-speed Boston - Wshington nonstop, that is another mater.
aegrotatioNot to belabor an earlier point but the lack of Amtrak access is a thorn in my side. I want a two-seat ride to points north west-of-Hudson, not three. Perhaps a master plan exists somewhere where a Metro-North rail line over the New Tappan Zee Bridge will solve this, but, oops, Amtrak doesn't stop at Grand Central anymore.
Aegrotatio, And another thing. If Amtrak did as you suggest and build a Hudson River Crossing at the New Tappan Zee Bridge they could also have west bound (actually south bound) trains stop there and make that their Manhattan station. The trains would run a lot faster than they can in Manhattan, especially in the tunnels. I actually discussed this with a guy I met who works for Amtrak. His response was "Don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on your way out." We both laughed.
Amtrak reports operating margins, i.e. the operating results, for each identifiable line of its business, i.e. NEC, State Supported and Other Short Corridor Trains, and Long Distance Trains. In FY12 it showed an operating profit for the NEC, offset by operating losses for the Short........ and Long Distance Trains.
The Consolidated Statement of Operations includes non-current items. The biggest are depreciation and interest expense. These items, together with the large operating losses incurred by the Long Distance Trains, wiped out the NEC operating profits. As a result, in FY12 Amtrak had an consolidated loss of more than $1.2 billion on total revenues of $2.9 billion.
Without access to Amtrak's books, it is impossible to know how much of the depreciation and interest expense is allocated to the NEC. Based on what we know about Amtrak's capital expenditures over the past 10 to 20 years, it probably is fair to say that the NEC drives a substantial amount of the capital (depreciation and interest) expense.
Amtrak received a substantial chunk of ARRA funds. Most of these were spent for capital items. In addition, it is purchasing new locomotives for the NEC and adding more than 100 new single level cars to its long distance fleet. Moreover, its wish list includes new trains to replace the aging Acela trains. These items will increase Amtrak's depreciation expense and, unless the company can find a way to offset the higher depreciation with increased revenues (more riders willing to pay higher fares),its financial situation could deteriorate even further.
A competitive business must cover all of its costs in time, or it goes out of business. Of course, Amtrak is not a competitive business, although it is a government sponsored commercial enterprise.
Correct. Capital expenditure is never counted.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
only if you do not count capital expenditure
BOSTON - NYC - WASHINGTON --- MAKES MONEY.... Needs no Subsidy.
Newport News/Norfolk - Boston?
daveklepper But Boston - Washington, Boston - NY, NY - Washington are clearly interstate long distance, and the fact that it is a corridor doesn't change that.
But Boston - Washington, Boston - NY, NY - Washington are clearly interstate long distance, and the fact that it is a corridor doesn't change that.
Boston to Washington is clearly interstate. But, within Congress's current framework which requires 750 miles, I don't see how the distance, about 450 miles, is sufficient.
They do. By their taxpayers subsidizing Amtrak. The way Congress seems to want it, the Fed. Gov. subsidizes interstate = long-distance routes, and states subsidize routes entirely within their states. Wjy the Chicago - Indianapolis train is not called long distance is a very good question, since it is obviously interstate. I think Indiana has a very very good case. But Boston - Washington, Boston - NY, NY - Washington are clearly interstate long distance, and the fact that it is a corridor doesn't change that.
I do understand New York Sate subsidizes Amtrak's Empire Service, Lion. But as far as I know the Northeast Corridor is not subsidized at all. Since I live on the Corridor I am happy to be able to reach into your pockets and the pockets of many others to pay for the passenger service in my back yard. But Boston to Washington is about 450 miles so I don't see why we are not talking about the states it serves chipping in for it.
Many States subsidize AMTK trains on routes where they (the states) want service over and above what AMTK would otherwise run. NYS subsidizes many runs within the state.
Many states have commuter or regional lines and contract AMTK to run them.
Lion,
As far as I know the states along the Northeast Corridor Line do not subsidize Amtrak to run its trains there. Those state agencies that run trains on Amtrak's tracks do pay rent to Amtrak in order to do so. But there is no division of costs between the Federal and state governments.
I did find some information that some people want to re start the North Coast Hiawatha which used to run on the Northern Pacific's tracks. However, Congress seems unwilling to fund the train. It would be pretty expensive.
It seems to me that some people in Montana want to run a regional rail service just within that state and are trying to get the state to fund it. Whether or not they will succeed I don't known.
John WRIn New Jersey Amtrak has added stops at Newark Liberty Airport and at Metropark, both of which are between Newark Penn Station and New Brunswick where some Amtrak trains traditionally stop.
AMTK is a political animal: You pay them enough money and they will do what you want them to do.
AMTK *wants* (more or less) to run a train on the old NP line, and lots of people in North Dakota think that this is a great idea, but the legislature in Bismarck does not think that is is a good enough idea to spend state money on, and so it will not happen.
BTW The ND legislature meets for only 90 days every other year.
But Amtrak will also stop where traffic warrants. Newark Penn and Newark Airport are close because both provide passengers. NJT is charged with taking local people to local places and, when and where needed or convenient and sensible, transfer to Amtrak. And Amtrak uses the operating philosophy of Limiteds whereby not all trains serve all stations.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.