RAILforum: Is the Cutoff a waste of money

This is topic Is the Cutoff a waste of money in forum Commuter Trains at RAILforum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.railforum.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/12/51.html

Posted by Derek Fenton (Member # 1483) on :

According to an old DL&W timetable I have, the trip from Scranton to Dover took about 2 hours. Since the DL&W had pretty good track, and NJT operates the M&E/Gladstone/Montclair branches at pretty much the same travel times, is the proposed restoration of service on the Lackawanna Cutoff worth it?

It seems like people could drive to Dover in the same amount of time it would take to ride the train and not require additional infrastructure.

I'm not asserting a fact. I am asking a question. I posted portions of the old schedules at: http://users.erols.com/drfenton/Cutoff_is_a_mistake.htm

It s

Posted by gct29 (Member # 1551) on :

As with most new rail service, its purpose is not necessarily to provide faster transportation but alternate transportation.

Projected growth in Northeastern Pennsylvania is such that, within 10 years or so, the roads will be saturated. One could argue that the authorities should provide more road space (added lanes, new roads), but that is almost always economically and environmentally damaging, and would be tremendouslty difficult in the Delaware Water Gap, through which most east/west traffic passes.

Another benefit of passenger service is that it often (though not as often as some advocates claim) revitalizes towns through which it passes by increasing pedestrian traffic and tourist interest, something highways tend to diminish.

Of course, I'm probably preaching to the choir here.

As for the schedule, it shows local service that makes 23 stops between Scranton and Dover. I doubt there'd be any more than 5-7 stops on the new service. Considering the ac/deceleration of steam and older diesel trains, I'd say times on the schedule are much slower than they would be with modern equipment.

[This message has been edited by gct29 (edited 04-15-2002).]

Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :

Well, if you consider muddling through rush-hour traffic and waiting until doomsday before you can make it through the toll booths at the tunnels/bridge to be a good time, then it'd not be worth it one bit. How fast is a run to NYC when the traffic piles up at morning rush, after all? That's why there are so many people doing the SRO thing on the NJT trains bound for NYP. Heavy traffic makes a world of difference...of course, there's no saying that the Lackawanna Cutoff will beat the Northeast Corridor for speed of trip, but compared to fighting the traffic jams, a train ride across both the Hudson and Delaware into the Poconos—not something that we have right now, but would be taken advantage of if it were available—would be considered by quite a few to be somewhat of a godsend...

(heck, if people ride from as far away as Port Jervis still, you can't tell me there ain't a market...)

Posted by gct29 (Member # 1551) on :

quote:
Originally posted by irishchieftain:
(heck, if people ride from as far away as Port Jervis still, you can't tell me there ain't a market...)

Very true. And for perspective, they're even talking about increasing service on that line. If a roundabout, rural route to Port Jervis--one that wasn't even built for passenger service to begin with--can pull that much demand, just imagine what ridership would be for a direct, well-populated route to Scranton.

Posted by Derek Fenton (Member # 1483) on :

FWIW, the web page was an employee timetable. Trains only stopped where these is an "s,", "ss," or an "f" next to the posted time. All other times are shown for information only. For example No. 6 made ten stops.

quote:
Originally posted by gct29:
As for the schedule, it shows local service that makes 23 stops between Scranton and Dover. I doubt there'd be any more than 5-7 stops on the new service. Considering the ac/deceleration of steam and older diesel trains, I'd say times on the schedule are much slower than they would be with modern equipment.
[This message has been edited by gct29 (edited 04-15-2002).]

Posted by CNJ (Member # 1465) on :

You have a valid point Derek, however you need to remember that at the time the DL&W was running trains through there you did not have nearly the population base in either New Jersey or Pennsylvania.

From what I understand, there are commuters that make the trek into the city from Pennsylvania.

Personally, I think the train would be worth it, even if for now it terminated at Hoboken.

Regards....

[This message has been edited by CNJ (edited 04-16-2002).]

Posted by gct29 (Member # 1551) on :

Good point--I missed that.

I still think that's a slow schedule, though. Even 10 stops along that route will slow things down substantially for a steam locomotive pulling heavyweights. And I'm sure the schedule was padded for deliveries (milk, mail, etc.) en route. I'd look at the schedule of a Lackawanna through train to Buffalo (Phoebe Snow?) for a more accurate comparison.

BTW--Thanks for posting that timetable. Good stuff.

Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :

Funny how my aside on the old Erie route to Port Jervis (and beyond, don't forget) was picked up on (anyone remember that this used to have service to/from Chicago on it, also? I'm too young to have experienced that...)

Well...how long ago was it since the old Erie main line via Greycourt, Goshen, Middletown, etc. was ripped up in favor of using the Graham Line full-time? The line used to be double-track all the way to Port Jervis, in addition to beyond to Binghamton and the rest of the main, etc. etc. into history. Of course, there were several problems that I've heard of, not the least of which being the at-grade alignment past Harriman through the centers of towns, not to mention the fact that one track was too close to a certain hotel in Goshen (Greycourt?) and trains kept scraping against one corner of the building...but the old mainline route was close to 9 miles shorter than the current route, which is the Graham Line; the other major disadvantage of the old main was the steeper grades, one going clear over Otisville Hill. (The grades of the Graham Line are far less severe, plus there's a tunnel through the mountain at Otisville...but the tunnel, like the Moodna Viaduct, is a single-track bottleneck, otherwise the Graham Line, even though it doesn't have it for most of its route, has room enough for two tracks.)

There's still talk of reviving service to Binghamton (and even beyond) via the Erie routes. Right now, it's just talk...but you never know what might work; Amtrak has a definite winner with their "Downeaster" trains, which operate on the old Boston & Maine between Boston North Station (MA) and Portland, ME (they had to double the length of trains shortly after their inauguration due to capacity constraints caused by its popularity)...

Posted by Derek Fenton (Member # 1483) on :

Nos. 3 and 6 were the Phoebie Snow.
No. 2 was the Pocono Express
No. 8 = New Yorker
No. 10 = New York Mail
No. 5 = Twilight
No. 7 = The Westerner

quote:
Originally posted by gct29:
I'd look at the schedule of a Lackawanna through train to Buffalo (Phoebe Snow?) for a more accurate comparison.
BTW--Thanks for posting that timetable. Good stuff.

Posted by Derek Fenton (Member # 1483) on :

How bad is Route 80 through the Water Gap during rush hour? This is something I am completely ignorant of.

Derek

Posted by jrr7 (Member # 1475) on :

2 lanes and all curves. Going east or at dusk, quite often the sun's in your eyes every other time you go around a curve. I think the speed limit is supposed to be 45 but sometimes you don't have a choice.

At least you have the old rail bridge to spot.

Posted by JLo (Member # 1481) on :

Don't forget the toll, which slows you down, or the significant grade on the PA side and the almost constant construction on either the road or the bridge.

Posted by Derek Fenton (Member # 1483) on :

Do we hve any idea where the proposed yard site is to be located?

Posted by Derek Fenton (Member # 1483) on :

quote:
Originally posted by gct29:
Projected growth in Northeastern Pennsylvania is such that, within 10 years or so, the roads will be saturated. One could argue that the authorities should provide more road space (added lanes, new roads), but that is almost always economically and environmentally damaging, and would be tremendouslty difficult in the Delaware Water Gap, through which most east/west traffic passes.

I can understand that. But will trains to New York or Hoboken really help with traffic in the Poconos? How many of the cars cluttering the region's roads contain people going to points on or near the M&E? It seems to me that real estate agents, local government officials, and many people think reactivating the Cutoff will increase development in the Poconos, which can only exacerbate traffic. But others whom espouse the virtues of rail service as a means of reducing highway congestion claim it will really help. Someone has to be wrong.

Look at Morris and Essex counties. They have lots of rail and bus service. Driving through the area is still a real pain.

Remember, I am just playing devil's advocate here. I'd love to see the cutoff put back in, and I love to discuss it.

Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :

quote:
It seems to me that real estate agents, local government officials, and many people think reactivating the Cutoff will increase development in the Poconos, which can only exacerbate traffic

Not really...any demand for rail service is merely a symptom of something that's already happening (not a cause), in this case the so-called "river-crosser" phenomenon. Any new development won't be spurred by new rail service more than it would be spurred by adding lanes on I-80...that is, unless it's a really fast train like on the NEC...

Incidentally...even though you mention the DL&W, you don't mention which cutoff you're talking about. Don't forget, after the Erie-Lackawanna merger, the Bergen County Cutoff was under their auspices...

Posted by CarterB (Member # 1439) on :

While the commuting population West of the Gap is surely increasing, I wonder how many of them work in NYC? The main backups on rt 80 seem to be from I 287 west, leading me to believe that many are commuting to the Parsippany/Morristown area. If this is the case, a comprehensive van or bus system from station to major employers would need to be effected to entice rail commuters.

Posted by Derek Fenton (Member # 1483) on :

The Parsippany angle interests me. It does seem like a lot of people work in the area but have no way of using mass transit (=trains) conveniently. I know some employer has a van pick their employees up at Convent station, but it seems like a lot more could be done. Especially on the Boonton line. A shuttle bus facility at the Route 46 undergrade bridge seems like a natural.