https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_AFDb7bVVQzqC5bQ0e2Pwxw#/registration?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=8de07726-ef0e-4d3f-803e-130d37b3edf2
The obvious candidate for commuter thru-running of Penn Station would be between trains running on the New Haven line and NJT since they both use AC cat. I'm guessing the main obsticle is that they are run by two different agencies in two different states.
The other possibility would be LIRR to Metro-North Hudson Line. They both use 3rd rail, however, one uses under-running and the other uses over-running 3rd rail shoes. NH used to have shoes that could be adjusted to both, which might make it practicle to run loco hauled trains, but might be problematic for EMUs.
The problem comes down to one item. NYP and Amtrak west of there is 25 Hz power. MNRR has operational reasons to not modify any M-8s to 25 / 60 Hz. As I understand it the M-8s with a passenger crush load are at the maximum gross weight of the Park avenue viaduct superstructure, A 25 / 60 Hz transformer is much heavier than a 60 Hz transformer and would put those cars over that weight limit. MNRR did not even consider a dedicated fleet to NYP but has chosen to put in dual over running / under running 3rd rail shoes.
That leaves NJ Transit to provide all equipment. With NJT's finances it is very unlikely that it would even consider such dedication of equipment.
IMO there is only one solution but it runs up against Amtrak's needs to use all NEC capital for the very needed projects to keep the NEC in a state of good repair. It would take a phased approach to convert all NY City and to at least Newark station to 60 Hz.
1st would be to convert SSY to 60 Hz and then approaches to NYP under East river. However East river tunnel bore closures for rehab limit that until that project is complete. ( a very delayed project due to LIRR unexpected NYP passenger loads after opening GCT service ). I would expect that each East river bore renewal will have 25 / 60 HZ dual capability installed during rehab. Then you have to wait for the North river tunnel bores to be rehabed as well as part of Gateway. Expectations are they will not be completed until 2035 - 2040 time frame depending how many surprises occurr.
So Amtrak being very conservative says 2060 to implement thru running. Remember it took over 2 years to just convert Gate - New Rochelle to 60 Hz and now that is having to get more capacity installed for the new MNRR servicee to NYP. Last I read that will take over a year. Conversion is not easy. Some PRR 25 Hz transformers cannot operate on 60 Hz for what ever reason. As well PRR relays and other equipment will all have to have 25 / 60 Hz equipment installed.
As well signal equipment will need conversion into a power source that will not receive interference from either 25 or 60 Hz. As understood that conversion is an ongoing project now for signals.
If you are old enough you'll remember Amtrak intending to convert the then-electrified part of the NEC fully over to 60Hz, first in the early '70s and then during the Carter Administration initial 'push' to develop "150mph" speed in the Corridor, at least south of NYP.
Most of the expense and complexity, I think, has been in something other than 25-to-60Hz electrical changeover -- it is the conversion of the Gibbs and Hill variable-tension catenary architecture to modern constant-tension capable of higher speed and Far Less Bounce. (I loved the Silverliner spark shows, but I also heard quite a few bad words from Metroliner riding maintainers...)
I don't know how long Amtrak has contracted arrangements to supply the 25Hz power, for example from Safe Harbor via utility arrangements. But to me it would make little sense to go to the expense of extensively rebuilding the overhead arrangements, bonding, etc. while not simultaneously transitioning to grid-compatible 60Hz frequency. One might argue that it would make sense to fit rebuilt M8s with weight load cells, and restrict the pax load at peak to accommodate an appropriate greater vehicle 'tare' weight as rebuilt with 60Hz devices... or perhaps extend an indulgence in current New York policy regarding peak demand charges, to require a billable surcharge to commuters riding certain trains approaching capacity...
A potentially severe problem with the upcoming Zoom rally is that, if we take the rhetoric in the announcement as a guide, many if not most of the proponents are crayonista ungineers -- they think a train is a train, and since the tracks go through with electric wires over them, it just takes community organizing and effective lobbying to 'make it so'. It will be interesting to see how the discussion develops.
Who else was in on the call? What were your impressions?
To me the one with the best common sense -- but who might not realize they had it -- was Christine Berthet, who noted that the way to initiate runthrough operations, both for assessment and initial service, was to optimize operation within the constraints of the current station layout, and avoid the "distraction of concurrent operations".
Apparently the base of operations for some of the run-through sets is to be Port Morris in the Bronx, rather than a revived and streamlined operation at Sunnyside.
To me there was considerable 'bracket creep' about what the various stakeholders think 'run-through service' means, how it would be implemented, and what frequency and type of service would be involved. One presenter talked about mproving local access for underserved communities like the Rockaways rather than the usual 'Long Island' through destinations; another about the advantages of HSR to a run-through market fundamentally liimited to Scranton and Easton on the west, Albany to the north, and Easthampton/Montauk to the east... something easily served time-efficiently by 125mph HrSR with proper amenities if operated at its design speed for a major portion of the route between stations.
Only one presenter seemed to recognize that applicable equipment might involve trimode power, and even he didn't mention the concerns with overrunning vs. underrunning pickup. I think we've already addressed the fun involved in trans-Hudson allocation of responsibilities -- probably a major stumbling block for the unwary, but already solved in principle with the NJT/MNCR service to Port Jervis, and in more detail with a logical recrew during the mandatory station stop at NYP either way.
It also seems at this late date that all the events surrounding the ARC-tunnel-related expansion of the #7 line to New Jersey have been lost of forgotten. One issue 'then' was that MTA doesn't have the agreement that MNCR does to interwork with New Jersey agencies; I see very little difficulty hammering out an accord to allow MTA personnel to operate on a dedicated right-of-way into New Jersey... or perhaps following the arrangements used over the years for the Hudson Tubes?
To me, the news that the New Haven ConnDOT and MN equpment to run from the New Haven Line into Penn Station will have the dual-sprung 3rd-rail shoes, instead of 25 cps (or Hz if you insist) capability, is good news. It means New Haven - Hudson through routing is inevitable, with Amtrak chosing which type of 3rd rail to return electrification ti the former West Side Freight Line, now used exclusively by Amtrak. Stations near Lincoln Center, Columbia University, and the George Washington Bridge would make sense, Some LIRR equipment could also be equipped with these shoes for through running.
As I understand it the Safe Harbor hydro power plant supplies both 25 Hz single phase power and 60 Hz 3 phase power. What not understood is whether any of the 60 Hz power goes to Amtrak thru either motor generator sets or solid state converters as 25 Hz?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.