Eastern Railroad Discussion > Trenton Line Triple Track

I went to check the Trenton Line from Woodborne to West Trenton today. All of the rail has been delivered. Some grading has been done, but no ties and no crossing work. It appears that the third track will begin a couple hundred yards south of the Yardley station. This looks like the spot where the 4 tracks started/ended in Reading days. In West Trenton there are several new concrete footings for new catenary poles just north of the station and the steel is there too. No sign of any track re-alignment to create CSX's new track. Does anyone know how the Septa yard will be modified to allow the CSX track to pass on the east side of the yards?

While on the topic - why did the Reading stop short and
go to two rails(?) before reaching the station at West
Trenton? If I recall correctly the line went back to 4
track (with additional sidings) after West Trenton?

Seems they had (and CSX will still have) a bottleneck
between Yardley (South of the station, no less) and
West Trenton. It's almost as if they are simply
getting a longer yard lead.

I believe the bridge over the Delaware is two track,
perhaps that is why? But why not run 3 /4 tracks
up to the bridge and again, once in NJ? Was the West
Trenton line always 4 track or did it start as a two
track main expanded later (when, if so?)

/Mitch

CSX will swing the current #2 track around [more east] the existing Septa yard.

Mgoldman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> why did the Reading stop short and
> go to two [tracks] before reaching the station at
> West Trenton?

The double-track bridge across the Delaware might have had something to do with that.

CPR_4000 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mgoldman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > why did the Reading stop short and
> > go to two before reaching the station at
> > West Trenton?
>
> The double-track bridge across the Delaware might
> have had something to do with that.

COST !!! a 2 track bridge is cheaper than a 4 track bridge ... same principle for single track tunnels in 2 track territory

Posted from Android

I can't believe they are actually going through with this. There is nothing that would technically prevent both PTC systems from being in service on that section of track. What an unbelievable waste of money. I guess this is what happens when SEPTA gets an increase in funding.

If you really want to howl notice how the amount of third track being added would probably be enough to extend the R3 to Wawa.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/15 09:12 by mbrotzman.

Do not agree a waste of money. my timetable is out in the car and it is too miserable even to walk the few feet to get it. But Google clearly shows the Delaware River bridge and approaches as two tracks. If the third track begins south of Yardley and extends to Woodburne/Fairless Jct the CSX gains about 4.5 miles at a cost of $1-$2 million a mile on existing right of way. Has to make both passenger and freight operations more fluid on one of the few railroad lines in the nation where full size double stacks containers can move under catenary. One or more trains set off and pick up at Fairless Jct every day and it should help with that. But to go along with this does CSX have any plans to add sidings or completely double track from north of West Trenton to south of Bound Brook? That is one long 'dead spot'. This line now see 20+ freights a day, about twice what Conrail operated in the late nineties.

I don't get it...

Seems a lot of money just to get trains 4 miles further out of the
yard before merging back with SEPTA. It would make a just a bit
more sense if the triple track was to extend past the station at
Yardley where SEPTA trains must stop.

Then again, why not just use one track for SEPTA and another for
CSX. Why does SEPTA need two tracks at it's terminus? Same goes
for CSX which runs single track a bit further north.

(All for it by the way, lol - if we could just get the "look" of
the Reading 4 track back!)

/Mitch

check it out on Google earth but looks like to me north of Yardley where it is only 2 tracks it has always been just that and it might be on a fill and there are smaller bridges, which would be typical of a major river crossing. Same way on the north side. Making that wider for another tracks would cost many millions. Expand where it was more than 2 tracks in the past cheaply, it will still add capacity. I think, but stand to be corrected, that from West Trenton north to Bound Brook was always just two tracks. I've ridden the line at least several times in CR office car trains but just do not remember.

Having all main tracks available for all movements is preferable from a capacity standpoint than having two parallel segments of single track railroad. I don't really care about CSX, but as far as SEPTA is concerned they are basically throwing up their hands at ever running a more frequent service to West Trenton. Fox Chase already got the shaft 10 years ago when the New York Short Line was deconflicted in the same way.

At the end of the day I suspect that SEPTA and CSX simply can't stand having to work together. SEPTA doesn't like rail transit and SEPTA doesn't like having to deal with CSX's complaints about white periods and freight trains getting delayed. It's the riders and taxpayers who end up losing.