Passenger Trains > NYC NJ ---> NEC at a standstill

BULLETIN on Traffic watch:

NEW JERSEY TRANSIT TRAINS SERVICE SUSPENDED in and out of new york city on the northeast corridor and north jersey coastline due to amtrak power problems before new york city ++ midtown direct trains being rerouted to hoboken ++.



News reports say a dozen trains are stalled in the New York city metro. The initial report is low voltage on Amtrak. Sufficient to keep lights on and some heat, but not enough to move trains.

NJ Transit usually keeps a mixed protection set in Harrison yard for such emergencies. One GP40 and one ALP44/46.

They'll get some work today

Looking at the train status info online, there are some problems with outbound trains. The 10:03 Acela was canceled. A regional to Boston is 3 hours late. I did not look at southbound trains, but suspect it is the same story.

At the moment, 11:40 AM EST, MSNBC is reporting that all Amtrak service in and out of Penn Station is suspended, some rains canceled. Amtrak is issuing the usual "We expect to have the problem resolved soon" statements.

lowwater

At 11:55 AM announcing that power has been restored.

lowwater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At the moment, 11:40 AM EST, MSNBC is reporting
> that all Amtrak service in and out of Penn Station
> is suspended, some rains canceled. Amtrak is
> issuing the usual "We expect to have the problem
> resolved soon" statements.
>
> lowwater

1202 - NEW JERSEY TRANSIT TRAINS DELAYS UP TO ONE HOUR in and out of new york city on the northeast corridor, north jersey coastline & midtown direct trains...++ power problems have been repaired & service has been restored ++.

----------------------

In the interim, some PATH trains from 33rd street in New York, which usually terminate in Journal Square, Jersey City, ran through to Newark Penn Station.

I'm assuming that Raritan Valley and Coast line diesel trains, which originate in Newark, may have continued some operations.

NJ Transit has the capability and equipment to offer diesel service on the NEC south of Newark, if Amtrak's signals are functioning, and if crews are available.

NJT does run revenue trains over the NEC between Newark and Philly. Therefore some NJT crews are qualified.

Trains so run are Aces and Atlantic City trains plus deadhead equipment moves between Newark and Philly

No, NJT does not run revenue trains, as such, between Newark and Philadelphia. The ACES trains operate between New York, Newark and Atlantic City, via a reverse connection at Frankford Jct in northeast Philadelphia. NJT also operates revenue trains between Philadelphia and Atlantic City, which began after Amtrak exited the market. And, yes, NJT operates deadhead trains between Philadelphia and Newark, which are the Atlantic City trains being deadheaded between Philadelphia and the Meadows Maintenance Center for maintenance. But NJT is not allowed to operate revenue trains from New York and "north" Jersey into Philadelphia. That market is covered by Amtrak, as the "intercity" provider, and by NJT to Trenton, with a change to SEPTA trains at Trenton for the trip through Bucks County into Philadelphia. There's nothing to prevent NJT and SEPTA from operating a joint service or even through trains between New York, north Jersey and Philadelphia, but my guess is that SEPTA and Amtrak would combine forces to fight NJT operating its own through trains between New York, Trenton and Philadelphia. In fact, NJT and SEPTA could do a much more coordinated job of offering a joint service, but the NJT trains generally are much more heavily patronized and are longer trains than are almost all of the SEPTA trains, so it would be a waste of mileage and poor equipment utilization for the NJT equipment to operate through to and from Philadelphia.

stone23 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NJT does run revenue trains over the NEC between
> Newark and Philly. Therefore some NJT crews are
> qualified.
>
> Trains so run are Aces and Atlantic City trains
> plus deadhead equipment moves between Newark and
> Philly

Not precisely. NJT doesn't run revenue trains between Newark and Philly, if you consider Philly to be a destination. The ACES trains are run through the northern reaches of Philly, and on to Atlantic City, but they don't accept passengers in Philly or even go as far as north Philadelphia station. Deadhead trains aren't revenue moves.

I don't believe NJ Transit has an authority to run revenue trains with passengers between Newark and Philly on the NEC.

My clearly noted point in the post was NJT could run DIESEL trains on the NEC to its destinations on the Coast line and the NEC, if Amtrak's signals worked, and crews / equipment were available.

Picky, picky. One of my grandsons and I have ridden every inch of the NEC between Newark and Philly on NJT revenue trains. Yes, we agree that we were on two separate NJT services, but it shows that NJT COULD run such service if it chose!

stone23 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Picky, picky. One of my grandsons and I have
> ridden every inch of the NEC between Newark and
> Philly on NJT revenue trains. Yes, we agree that
> we were on two separate NJT services, but it shows
> that NJT COULD run such service if it chose!

NJT would need to reach an agreement with Septa if it sought to carry revenue passengers from Trenton to points served by Septa, including 30th street.

I believe they (NJT and Septa) discussed an informal agreement to carry eastbound passengers from a to be built station at the layover yard at Morrisville, but that's not been implemented.

The same issues would come into play if they ever implement a plan to carry West Trenton line passengers from Septa points to Bound Brook and Newark. Not impossible, but they need to be arranged in advance.

stone23 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Picky, picky. One of my grandsons and I have
> ridden every inch of the NEC between Newark and
> Philly on NJT revenue trains. Yes, we agree that
> we were on two separate NJT services, but it shows
> that NJT COULD run such service if it chose!

Correction: NJT could run such trains if SEPTA agreed.

Yes, rescue engines are kept around - but they often don't do the job. An Amtrak rescue engine that Amtrak keeps outside the Hudson River tubes at NYP (a dual mode diesel engine I believe, as opposed to a straight diesel P42) could not pull our train out of the tunnel when we got "stuck." We were within a few yards of the first car emerging from the tunnel when we got affected by the outage around 8:15 a.m., but the Amtrak dual mode diesel/electric engine had trouble "coupling" onto our multilevel train set. Finally enough power was restored so we could continue into NYP under our own power about 40 minutes later. So yes, rescue engines are great - as long as they can indeed "rescue."

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, rescue engines are kept around - but they
> often don't do the job. An Amtrak rescue engine
> that Amtrak keeps outside the Hudson River tubes
> at NYP (a dual mode diesel engine I believe, as
> opposed to a straight diesel P42) could not pull
> our train out of the tunnel when we got "stuck."
> We were within a few yards of the first car
> emerging from the tunnel when we got affected by
> the outage around 8:15 a.m., but the Amtrak dual
> mode diesel/electric engine had trouble "coupling"
> onto our multilevel train set. Finally enough
> power was restored so we could continue into NYP
> under our own power about 40 minutes later. So
> yes, rescue engines are great - as long as they
> can indeed "rescue."


That's a pretty steep slope, coming out of the tunnels into NYP. Figure 8 or 9 MLs and an ALP, add in a 1.5% climb, and that's a lot for a 3200 hp DM.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jp1822 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yes, rescue engines are kept around - but they
> > often don't do the job. An Amtrak rescue engine
> > that Amtrak keeps outside the Hudson River
> tubes
> > at NYP (a dual mode diesel engine I believe, as
> > opposed to a straight diesel P42) could not
> pull
> > our train out of the tunnel when we got
> "stuck."
> > We were within a few yards of the first car
> > emerging from the tunnel when we got affected
> by
> > the outage around 8:15 a.m., but the Amtrak
> dual
> > mode diesel/electric engine had trouble
> "coupling"
> > onto our multilevel train set. Finally enough
> > power was restored so we could continue into
> NYP
> > under our own power about 40 minutes later. So
> > yes, rescue engines are great - as long as they
> > can indeed "rescue."
>
>
> That's a pretty steep slope, coming out of the
> tunnels into NYP. Figure 8 or 9 MLs and an ALP,
> add in a 1.5% climb, and that's a lot for a 3200
> hp DM.


I think we had 10 multilevel cars in the consist with an ALP46. This is Amtrak and NJT's "rescue" plan in place when any train gets stuck in a tunnel - bring in the diesel to haul it out! And I am pretty sure they keep a dual mode on hand. You can see it as you enter into the NYP station track platforms coming from NJ (sits almost right underneath what would be the west end of the Farley Post Office building). But again, they couldn't hook the diesel up to us - couldn't get it "coupled on."