Greetings,
These are my the trains that run on the tracks a few miles from my home.

The one on the left is a Local commuter train run my Metro-North New Haven Line. The one of the right is the 'high tech' Amtrak Acela. The tracks are part of the Northeast Corridor in Westchester County NY. The track runs just about parallel to I95 and Long Island Sound. About 35,000 people travel on those track on a weekday...not bad.

Oh, and the Metro-North train uses both overhad Catanary and thrid rail (In the tunnels of Grand Central Station)




Regards,
Paul

George,

You are absolutly correct! And I have a friend of mine who hears it every morning.

Here's the story:
The Power's that Be are upgrading all of the Metro-North trains. They were state of the art in the world back in 1974 when my father took me to see the 'great new trains that Dad rides to work'. They worked wonderfuly till the late 90's when they began to show their age.

The other lines of Metro-North commuter rail got their's frist. While we on the NH line waited, the PTB decided to hold back a year on ordering the new trains for us because of budget concerns....except....no one bothered to call the factory and tell them about the delay.

So...when they called back a year later to place the order for NH trains, they were told that the company had excepted other construction orders and NH would have to wait at least a year.

With the old trains breaking down at an alarming rate, and no real need to give them full overhauls just a year or 2 prior to retirement....the PTB hauled out a 1950's diesel loco and gave it a shiny new NH color's paint job....And we even get to sit in 'museum quality' old coaches to boot! :)

Well, just a few months ago Metro-North recieved the firt batch of 100+ new trains. They look SUPER SLICK!! High back chairs, all the creatur comforts of a commuter rail train. I guess when my son turns 40 he'll get his 'new' trains too :)

Here's the proof:

Thanks a lot for your response to my question, and all the additional info. I must confess that I
really do like the old livery, and actually have an old M* loco with the identical livery.

Robert,
The amusement park is called "Playland" and it still features the 100 year old "Dragon Coaster". It's still VERY much there. It's even earned a 'historic landmark' status. Exit 19 on I95 will get you to it.

http://www.ryeplayland.org/

As far as the New Haven Line, as far as I know all trains run to Grand Central Terminal. However, Amtrak makes stops in New Rochelle and those trains run to Penn Station, with connecting trains to all across America.

The New Jersey trains now run mostly to the PATH train station that used to be called 'World Trade Center' until events of 9/11 changed that. The station is still in operation and construction of the new building is progressing quickly now.

Essentially, from what I understand, all commuter train lines are no longer in private hands, as the PRR and NH lines once were. These are quazi government operations called 'Public Corporations'. However, there was once a time that to be a Railroad man was a proud and mighty thing. Today, they are just government workers with union jobs. The mistique is gone but they do get the job done.

Oh, and might I add that I wish the new NH trains were built in the US with US workers?? We have skilled people here in the USA that could have build decent trains.

Paul

Thanks for the very detailed information. AFAIK, the Harlem Hudson branch uses some diesel equipment, but it has been a few years since I took that branch, so the info may be pretty old.
Also, Playland in Rye was a real treat when I was a child. Very old-school amusement park.I am glad to hear that it still is in full operation. Unlike Palisades Amusement Park and most of the Coney Island attractions

We have GM, Greyhound and other companies to thank for the decline of passenger rail in North America. As GM had done for streetcars in many North American cities, they also set out to demolish the passenger rail industry. The reason, trains would be replaced by buses, which would make GM more money. Other companies like Greyhound jumped on board, seeing this as a way to increase their business. At the same time, airlines like TWA, Eastern, etc also jumped on board, and proved to be the big winners in the intercity travel business. Many rail companies decided to get out of passenger operations due to the changes in the market and the US Government had to step in to save what was left. The passenger operations of a number of rail operators were combined into a new Federal entity, Amtrak. The problem, however, was that Amtrak did not have a major budget and was forced to use older rolling stock, which was subject to frequent problems and breakdowns. Only on the West Coast and on the Northeast corridor did Amtrak have a good operation. The Northeast corridor stretched from Boston to Washington DC and used the trackage of NH and PRR for most of the route.
Sadly, passenger rail traffic in America lags far behind Europe and Japan (and soon China). It is disconcerting to see some decisions in Europe parallelling mistakes made in North America in the 1960s and 1970s, like splitting the passenger and cargo divisions into separate operations. Freight has always been a money maker, while passenger service was often operated as a break-even or loss, subsidized by the money made hauling goods. By splitting the companies, they have created profitable cargo companies and passenger companies that either fail or are facing hard times, driving travellers to buses and airplanes.

Rail travel could recover due to requirements for new mass transport capabilities. The question is will Government commit the money required to relaunch these networks, and will special interests still stand in the way of the ongoing operation and any new developments that might be required?

Regards

Mike C

I was reading that the automobile is the competitor not the airplane to trains.
With auto companies building more fuel efficent cars and using less gasoline, the government collects less and less fuel tax.
So, in order to compensate for increase in highway maintenance, the fuel taxes will need to be raised.
Naturally this will raise the cost to operate autos.
I have a diesel auto and just love to watch gasoline powered cars pull in to fuel up.

Here in California, the state has this wonderful dream of a high speed train traveling from LA to San Francisco.
I think they should improve the running time of conventional trains first and when there is a capacity problem, then go Hi Speed.

Paul:
I thought there was a "Made in America" clause or at lease assembled in American for government projects.
SEPTA in Philly, is buying the car shells from Korea but the cars are assembled in South Philadelphia.

Just my 2 cents.

Robert

Hi all, just a few clarifications to tnis thread that I'd like to add.

When both Pennsylvania Station and the current Grand Central Terminal in Manhattan were built in the first decade of the 1900s, the City of New York banned the use of steam locomotives in Manhattan. This, as well as a mandate that only steel passenger cars could be used in the tunnels, was done for safety reasons. By that time, electric motive power was proven and the New York Central acquired its first fleet of electric locos to haul trains between GCT and Croton-Harmon on the Hudson Line (host to most of its famous long-haul passenger trains) and between GCT and North White Plains on the Harlem Division. The New Haven Railroad, which owned 50% of GCT, used the Central's 3rd rail power system between GCT and Mount Vernon, NY, where it switched to its own catenary system. Passenger trains headed east or north of New Haven switched to steam power at that location. Commuter trains were primarily operated with multiple-unit cars on both the NYC and the NYNH&H, while long distance trains were hauled to/from Manhattan by a fleet of boxcab electric locos. Both railroads supplemented their original fleets of electric locos in later years, with the NH line operating streamlined electric locos into both GCT and Penn Station (on the trains running through to Washington, D.C.). The FL-9 diesels built by GM replaced most of the electric locos that hauled the long distance trains terminating in GCT and did not require an engine change at New Haven. But a reduced fleet of electric locos was still needed for the through trains that ran into Penn Station (where they were exchanged for the PRR's GG-1. Once the New Haven RR was absorbed by the Penn Central system, GG-1s ran all the way to New Haven and the legacy fleet was orphaned.

As for Pennsylvania Station, trains from the west originally exchanged their steam locos for electric power at a location called "Manhattan Transfer" between Newark NJ & the new tunnels under the Hudson River. The PRR used third rail power, the same system that it installed for its subsidiary Long Island RR that operated from Penn Station eastward. The third rail system to Manhattan Transfer was eliminated upon the completion of the PRR's long distance electrification in the 1930s, although I recall reading somewhare that the 3rd rail remains in use in the Hudson River tunnels as an alternate power source for maintenace work on the overhead electrical system.

In fact, diesel power such as pictured in the first article on this topic are used for an intra-Connecticut service called "Shore Line East" (SLE). This service is not part of the Metro-North operation and mainly serves communities between Old Saybrook and New Haven, CT. There is limited service east of Old Saybrook to New London, CT. SLE passengers may transfer to Metro-North's GCT-bound trains at New Haven and commuters may purchase tickets that cover travel on both lines. The SLE trains operate in push-pull mode. When SLE began operations, electrification did not extend east of New Haven. That's not the case today, so it's a fair question to ask why CT continues to operate diesels on the SLE route rather than electrics.

Merry Christmas to all!