Talk:Metro-North Railroad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

[edit] Official name?

Is the official name of the railroad the "Metro-North Commuter Railroad Company"? I don't see that name anywhere on their web site, for example. —Morven 22:00, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)

Metro-North Commuter Railroad Company is the official legal name for the MTA agency known as MTA Metro-North Railroad. In 1993, MTA rebranded all of its affiliates and subsidiaries as MTA [blank] (e.g., MTA New York City Transit) in order to create a consolidated identity and to show that they are all part of the larger MTA regional transportation organization. However, as this article [1] states, these "legal names" are only used for procurement documents and official transactions. The most common names, IMO, would be Metro-North, Metro-North Railroad, or MTA Metro-North Railroad. Just my two cents. Darkcore 03:50, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It's general Wikipedia policy to "use common names", and I feel that using this name when it's commonly used by nobody is against that policy. I'd like to propose moving this page to either Metro-North Railroad or MTA Metro-North Railroad. Any opinions, pro, con, or for one name or the other? —Morven 07:50, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)

Metro-North Railroad would be my choice for a title.

Atlant 12:58, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Metro Man?

I have never seen such a thing in my years of riding MN. If noone objects, I will remove it.

It looks to be one of those things that goes around to local schools and teaches the kids safety. [2] --SPUI (talk) 19:33, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Keep the metro man.

[edit] History

Can anyone add some history about this railroad? (compare with Long Island Rail Road article) The table says that Metro-North has been running since 1983. Were these routes served only by Amtrak before that, or was the commuter service under some name other than Metro-North? I know New York Central figures into the history of the route itself but maybe the Amtrak service is the "true" descendent? Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 05:04, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

I think you may find some of your answer in the New Haven Railroad.

Atlant 23:15, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

As well as New York and Harlem Railroad, New York and Putnam Railroad and Hudson River Railroad. The New Haven ran what are now MN and Amtrak services into Connecticut, and the New York Central Railroad ran what are now MN and Amtrak on the three other lines (the Putnam was ended in 1980). --SPUI (talk) 00:28, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

After the NYNH&H went bankrupt (1969), it was operated by Penn Central Transportation Company on January 1st, 1969. In 1974, it was transferred to Conrail, then in 1983 became Metro North.

See: *History of the NHRR (New Haven Railroad Historical and Technical Association)

(Keotaman 21:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC))

[edit] 8 questions

Here are 8 questions:

Which of the lines in this system is red on maps??
" " orange " "
" " yellow " "
" " green " "
" " blue " "
" " purple " "
" " brown " "
" " pink " "

Answers: (If no line on this system is the particular color, just write NONE.

New Haven
none
none (I think LIRR uses this)
Hudson
Harlem
none
none
none

Georgia guy 19:21, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Current line colors on maps give the Port Jervis Line orange and the Pascack Valley Line purple, in line with their colors on NJ transit maps.--oknazevad 17:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Error in Lines / Third Rail Info

The article states: "The Harlem Line has third rail from Southeast station and diesel north of that station to the Poughkeepsie (Metro-North station)" The Poughkeepsie station is on the Hudson Line, not the Harlem line. Additionally, there is no third rail between Poughkeepsie and Croton-Harmon. So, does this mean that there is no third rail NORTH of Southeast (fmr. Croton-Harmon)? Anyone know? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Davidlvb (talk • contribs).

That's a typo; it should say Wassaic, not Poughkeepsie. --CComMack 21:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Metro Man

71.235.67.159 added this text to the talk page (but inadvertantly blanked other text); here it is restored:

Metro Man is housed in either Croton Harmon or North White Plains - it is a robot that talks about safety along the right of way.

[edit] Self-propelled trainsets

Metro-North operates some trainsets (typically 4 cars) in which each car has its own propulsion system for local trains- I know that all local traffic on the New Haven line consists of these. Can anyone find any facts about these?

I don't know what exactly you're talking about, all the EMU rolling stock on the New Haven Line are the same. The M2's (Budd/Canadian Vickers/General Electric-made) are in two-car pairs and do have propulsion systems in each car as opposed to the later M4's and M6's which are three-car groupings. I'm in the process of writing articles on the M2/M4/M6 and M1A/M3A series and I hope to have them up soon. Scrabbleship 01:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I operate this equipment daily, maybe I can help if it doesn't get too technical.

Our electric multiple units are either 2 car pairs or 3 car triplets. In the pairs (M2's), most of the cars are duplicates of each other -- one running forward, the other running in reverse; semi-permanently coupled back-to-back. Main differences are the Motor-Alternator (or newer Inverter) & the Pantograph are in the "A" car(even car #, 8400-8800 range, "B" car is one number higher than "A") & the Air Compressor is in the "B" car (or "C" car in the case of the 10 bar-pairs in use). Same idea for the triplets, except they goofed & made the middle D car (has a pantograph, also) about 2 feet shorter! Have to be careful when spotting the train at "bridgeplates".

(Keotaman 22:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC))

Question: Nearly all of the trainsets that run on the Metro-North track in Greenwich (where I live) have precisely 4 pantographs. Is this because I miscounted the number of cars, A and B cars have 2 pantographs, or some other reason? 69.177.176.154 19:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Ans: Metro North MU trains can be from 4 to 12 cars; each pair of cars has One pan, each triplet has Two pans. So, 8 M2 cars (4 pairs) have 4 pans, while 6 M4 or M6 cars (2 triplets) have 4 pans, & 8 cars (1 pair + 2 triplets) have Five pans.Pans are on A & D cars only, no B car has any pantograph.(Keotaman 20:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC))

Thanks for clarifing this. Does this mean that B and C cars are entirely unpowered? I'll assume that it does. 69.177.176.154 00:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

All cars are powered; 4 axles, 4 motors, every axle is powered. All cars of a trainset have a roof jumper(s) to carry the 13.8 kVAC overhead current between them. A triplet could have one damaged pan, but the remaining good one will supply power to all 3 cars of the trainset.Keotaman 06:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Keotaman, thank you for answering this. If you have a reliable source for this, I'll make sure to work your information into the article. Are any of the railcars capable of third-rail power for the last stretch of the line into Grand Central? As far as I can tell, the below-ground track between Harlem-125th Street and Grand Central doesn't have a catenary system. Thanks again. 69.177.176.154 01:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

The car specs are probably available somewhere. The article already explains about the dual-power capability of the cars. Once the catenary power ends (cat pole 38), the cars make changeover to DC mode (before cat pole 28 - wire ends). From there to the Harlem Line, then to the Hudson Line, then into GCT, they are powered from the 3rd rail.

Suggest you get an account name, instead of just using the ISp addy.

Keotaman 09:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. 69.177.176.154 14:34, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Question: Why does MTA use railcars on the New Haven line but not elsewhere even on express trains, even when nearly all other trains going into Grand Central or Penn Staion (as far as my observations have been able to determine), as well as Metroliner service from Penn Station to Stamford, run on a distinct locomotive? 64.252.202.233 00:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Metro North can use railcars for express service on the New Haven Line because the New Haven Line is electrified to New Haven & beyond (State Street station). On the Harlem & Hudson Lines, an express train's purpose is to expedite passenger's travel. By using Bombardier ("standard") equipment, there is no need to change trains at the end of electrified territory, the trains make their station stop & then go. Most of the 600+ trains run on weekdays are NOT locomotive hauled trains, including nearly 100% of the local & zipper trains.

(expansion) - locomotive hauled trains are a bit slower starting up & reaching track speed, but when used on express trains, they bypass most or all "local" stops until they reach the midpoint change. On the Hudson line at Croton-Harmon is end of electrification, so service north must be by diesel-electric locomotive. If used all the way from GCT, then no train change is needed at Harmon. On the Harlem line at White Plains or Southeast, the express trains will start making local stops, with diesel being required north of Southeast. If MN is short of equipment, then the express may indeed be railcar trainsets, with a train change to loco hauled train at end of third rail.

Note: Metro North made a decision awhile back to increase the diesel locomotive fleet (Genesis), primarily to have more options during service outages due to inclement weather, such as icing & heavy snow, & electrical outages.

Metro North does not provide service to Penn station; all Amtrak trains are locomotive hauled, or are the Acela trainsets, there are no other choices. Someone else will have to answer for the LIRR & PATH. Keotaman 09:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Then why doesn't Metro-North use electric locomotives on the New Haven Line? Does Metro-North even own any? Is there some sort of inherent advantage in the use of railcars? 64.252.202.233 19:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

MN's only electric locos are used in yard switching. The advantage of railcar-trainsets is the rapid acceleration, stations are often only 2-3 minutes apart; the 0-40mph acceleration time is greatest factor in achieving scheduled transit time. Also, with "quarter-point" doors, passengers can leave & enter cars more quickly, saving time.

Keo 00:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I can see how railcars would have greater acceleration, but how does having railcars or a locomotive and regular cars affect the type of doors that one can use? C. M. Harris 21:22, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Not the type, but the location, is what ¼ point refers to: Any type could be used on nearly any type of equipment. The choice is usually dictated by the type of service for the cars.

Coaches are usually longer distance travel, stops 15-30 minutes apart, more individual space. Hence, doors are usually at ends of cars, in a vestibule closed off when moving to reduce noise. Passengers can be as far as 40 feet from a door! This slows down the leaving & boarding process, so station stops take longer.

(Note: In an effort to mitigate this flaw, MN "project 38" coaches have an additional center-door vestibule, thus reducing maximum distance to 20 feet, on a par with railcars).

Railcars are designed for sprint type service, stops every 2, 3, or 4 minutes, with maximum passenger capacity. Doors are "quarter-point" doors, which means ¼ carlength in from each end. Passengers are never more than 20 feet from a door, expediting the leaving & boarding process, so "dwell time" in a station is shorter, sometimes as short as 12-15 seconds!

For a really graphic example, compare the appearance of a standard rail coach with the appearance of a subway car. See how the subway car expedites the leaving & boarding process, often allowing both to occur simultaneously? Can't do that at the end of a standard coach.Keo 09:31, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

It would be nice to have ridership information on the infobox, according to http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/mta/investor/pdf/2005_annual_report.pdf for 2005 there were 74507341 riders in 2005, this is rivaling that of many radip transit systems in the US. The daily ridership is therefore 204130, but I think average weekday might be a more useful figure.