Home Metro-North MTA eying Metro-North access to Penn Station

MTA eying Metro-North access to Penn Station

by Benjamin Kabak

The MTA is once again examining the possibility of bringin Metro North trains to Penn Station. Above, a map from a 2000 study.

When the Long Island Rail Road’s long-awaiting East Side Access project wraps up sometime later this decade, the MTA will shift numerous trains from Penn Station to Grand Central, and Metro-North riders bound for the West Side could stand to benefit from the move. With space available at Penn Station in a few years, the MTA is exploring a way to bring Metro-North westward, and the Bronx could gain a few more commuter rail stations if all goes according to plan.

“Metro-North is currently performing a Federal Environmental Assessment for the introduction of its rail service from the Hudson and New Haven Lines to Penn Station,” Aaron Donovan, authority spokesman, said to me in an email. “The review includes potential stations along Amtrak’s Hell Gate Line in the vicinity of Co-op City, Morris Park, Parkchester and Hunts Point. We anticipate completing this assessment in 2013.”

Earlier this week, MTA officials met with various stakeholders in the Bronx to discuss progress on the Federal Environmental Assessment. The Bronx Times was on hand to report on the meeting, and all involved spoke highly of the plan. “This is an idea that has been around for decades, and the meeting was just a preliminary step where the MTA wanted to gauge the reaction of elected officials and stakeholders, with the reaction being very positive,” John DeSio, a spokesman out of the Bronx Borough President office, said.

Patrick Rocchio had more:

The final plan could include the creation of new stations along Metro North’s New Haven line that would service Co-op City near Erskine Place, Morris Park near Einstein Medical Center and the Hutchinson Metro Center, Parkchester in the vicinity of Unionport Road and E. Tremont Avenue, and Hunts Point near Southern Boulevard, said Assemblyman Michael Benedetto.

Space for the extra trains coming into Penn Station from the new stations should be available in 2016, after Long Island Rail Road’s East Side Access Plan re-routes many of the trains currently terminating at Penn Station to Grand Central Terminal, Benedetto said. “They do expect this to happen, and therefore they want to start planning now so things are ready when space is freed up in Penn Station,” Benedetto said.

The public should not expect new Metro North stations in the Bronx in the next couple of years, even though construction theoretically could begin on the four new Bronx stations before space becomes available at Penn Station, Benedetto said.

In the Bronx, residents and property owners were thrilled with the idea of a direct line to Penn Station. “A new train station in Co-op City would enable commuters to get to Penn Station within 25 minutes, which is very welcome news to many residents of this great community,” Vernon Cooper, the general manager of Riverbay Corporation, said.

Meanwhile, early reports indicate that costs could be fairly reasonable. The Bronx Times reports that the project would come in at $350 million — $250 million from New York State and $100 million from Connecticut — a figure in line with the $91 million it cost to build one new Metro-North stop near Yankee Stadium.

Long-time MTA watchers may know this project, in vague terms, as the Penn Station Access Study. I’ve been told that the scoping documents and project plans for the early 2000s are now out of date, and the MTA plans to release more information later this year or early next. Still, this could be a relatively low-cost way to improve access from the Bronx and points north to the West Side, and I’ll keep an eye on it.

You may also like


Anon256 November 11, 2011 - 1:09 pm

There should be stations in Queens as well, definitely at Sunnyside (for transfer to LIRR) and maybe also Astoria.

Adam E November 11, 2011 - 1:11 pm

Why not downtown? Running trains to WTC would certainly be interesting.

Bolwerk November 11, 2011 - 1:13 pm

Not saying it’s a bad idea, but Midtown West is pretty dirt cheap to utilize and is probably a much bigger commuter destination than downtown. Better to get the low-hanging fruit first.

Jerrold November 11, 2011 - 2:39 pm

Along WHAT railroad line?

Jerrold November 11, 2011 - 2:42 pm

To make the message more clear, I was responding to the idea of service to the WTC.

al November 11, 2011 - 6:12 pm

Unless you want to reuse the piles and resurrect the elevated West Side Highway as an elevated rail viaduct, a downtown rail link would be very expensive.

ajedrez November 12, 2011 - 7:13 pm

Because it would require construction of a new ROW. Metro-North would use Amtrak’s ROW to reach Penn Station.

Chris G November 11, 2011 - 1:57 pm

I know this article is Bronx heavy, but I seriously hope they include a station at Sunnyside as well.

And I wish the MTA would get together and finally go to a single method of electrification so we could have run through trains. Yes this would be best with the Port Authority and involving NJT as well, but this is a good step towards more regional service.

Nathanael November 11, 2011 - 3:01 pm

LIRR doesn’t seem to want to share track with anyone; they just want their own independent playground, it seems.

Perhaps Metro-North could be convinced to go with overhead electrification on the Hudson line (and presumably Amtrak’s West Side Line); it would be of great benefit for high-speed rail to Upstate.

Walter November 11, 2011 - 3:50 pm

The new M8s are already capable of running on different electrical systems: they already run on Metro-North’s catenary and under-running third rail, and are able to run on the Amtrak’s catenary east of New Haven and west of New York. The M8s can also be fitted with retractable third rail shoes for over or under running third rail, though as of now they are not.

The M8s are also compatible with both Metro-North and Amtrak cab signaling, so if they wanted to the MTA could run them to Penn Station tomorrow.

I’m hoping for through-running with NJ Transit from New Haven all the way to Trenton myself, but that’s probably just a dream.

Ben November 13, 2011 - 11:12 pm

The M8 is not actually able to run on Amtrak catenary west of Penn Station–the AC frequency is different (25 Hz instead of 60 Hz), and they decided against including that transformer in the cars fairly late in the design process (owing to weight concerns, I think). This also means that they aren’t capable of running into Penn Station tomorrow (unless you can run about a mile and a half of LIRR 3rd rail up from Sunnyside to Hell Gate between now and breakfast, in which case can you please get a subcontracting job on East Side Access?)–but that plus the reversible shoes will make the M8s able to run in all of the MTA’s electrified territory, plus the Shore Line out to New London, which will be a first.

David in Astoria November 11, 2011 - 2:47 pm

Definitely a Queens stop for Long Islanders is a must.
Adding new access to The Bronx is a very positive step for our neglected mainland borough.
This needs to happen.

Clarke November 11, 2011 - 2:47 pm

There won’t be any Metro North/LIRR track connections will there? I wonder if a Metro North train bypassing GCT via 63rd St and onto Jamaica could be beneficial. It’d allow them to run game-day trains to Citi Field, allow for airport access, etc. I suppose it makes more sense/is cheaper to just transfer at GCT for LIRR for Metro North customers though.

Jerrold November 11, 2011 - 3:34 pm

I think that the tunnel coming in from the 63rd St. line will CURVE southward to run under Park Ave. to Grand Central. If so, it would NOT be possible for a train that is coming down from the Bronx to then go eastward to Queens instead of going to Grand Central.

Kevin C November 11, 2011 - 4:19 pm

Fans of re-using old RR ROW in general and those coveting the two unused alignments on the Hellgate are going to have to decide whether it is more important to allocate the Hellgate and its Queens approaches to commuter rail (e.g. Penn – Co-op City) or to NYCT as in the TriboroRX Proposal.

I personally believe that the Triboro RX should get first dibs on the Hellgate (and maybe have a branch serving Hunts Point and Co-op City) and that commuter rail should use the central or western alignments.

al November 11, 2011 - 5:23 pm

No need for that. The ROW connecting the (4 tracks wide) Hells Gate Bridge and Sunnyside Yards is 2 tracks wide. This proposal will use the southern pair of tracks that Amtrak currently uses. The northern track pair (that has 1 track in place) are for rail connection to the Bay Ridge Branch (and the rest of LIRR).

AlexB November 11, 2011 - 4:23 pm

Part of the east side access project is a new station in Sunnyside already, but there wouldn’t be a transfer from the subway. A station at Ditmars and 31st St would provide a transfer to the N/Q and a much faster connection to many parts of the Bronx and other points north compared to taking the M60 to 125th and transferring to the subway or metro north. One thought that would never happen: provide through service from the Hudson Line to Queens and vice versa.

al November 11, 2011 - 6:09 pm

I think they located the Sunnyside station far enough south that it would be close to Queens Plaza (E,M,R). That location might (depending on track configuration) make for a stop on NJ Transit trains looping through the Sunnyside Yards. Platform it over and it could be Queens’ version of Manhattan’s GCT Terminal City. Call me crazy but we can call it Union Station Queens.

A station (at 31st st) on the viaduct might take up space that might preclude (or complicate and add cost to) the TriboroRX. They might be able to do it by cantilevering the southern most track (the current Penn Station bound Amtrak) and an island platform over the southern side of the structure. The Triboro will likely use a similar structure over the north side for the platform. If the TriboroRX uses railcars that could negotiate steep grades (4-6%), then a station profile with 2 levels might be possible. The lower level uses the existing track for Southbound traffic, while the northbound track is on a structure over the southbound platform with platform to the north.

The Hudson Line runs through GCT. To run Hudson Line trains through Queens would require them running through Penn Station, and then under the East River, or boring a track new connection between LIRR and Metro North north of GCT @ 50th St.

Alon Levy November 11, 2011 - 4:47 pm

I’m glad to see that this is progressing, but dismayed at two things:

1. $350 million for 3-4 stations is not reasonable. $35 million for 3-4 stations is also pretty high.

2. For maximum usefulness, this line should offer high frequency all day. The lower New Haven Line is one of the few nationwide that offer half-hourly frequency in the weekday afternoon off-peak, but even that is pretty bad for urban service. And because of the two branches south of New Rochelle, frequency would suffer; it’s not a problem at the peak, because current service peaks at 20 tph and splitting that in half is no big deal, but hourly off-peak service is not very useful.

More on this on my blog later, for how they might want to use short-turns to achieve good frequency.

pea-jay November 11, 2011 - 6:26 pm

Thru running and short turns would be a sweet way to attain near rapid transit level of service on both the hudson and new bronx section to new rochelle. Why not runs some shorter train sets more frequently from yonkers thru penn to new rochelle and back?

al November 11, 2011 - 6:41 pm

Questioning the high cost is warranted. Looking at these locations on Google and Bing, these location require little more than some piles/compacted fill and prefab concrete slabs for platforms. The platform edge screens can’t cost this much. Nor would prefab stairs, customer service boots, foul weather wait areas, and overpasses to link the platforms, and street access to station. Do they want grand station houses above the station?

Walter November 12, 2011 - 4:52 am

I haven’t read this in any MTA material, but Amtrak’s study of the Northeast Corridor says Metro-North will run 121 revenue trains a day into Penn Station (must mean round trips, perhaps the late night inbound deadheading back to Stamford?).

I’d guess it’s hourly off-peak service, similar to what most of the Harlem and Hudson Line Bronx stops (other than the unique service at Fordham Road and certain express service to/from Marble Hill) currently have. Metro-North at least seems to be adding trains in total, probably because they have to maintain service to Pelham and Mount Vernon.

New Rochelle will probably make out very well with expanded service, as I’m sure most trains to/from Penn will stop there to allow for transfers with GCT trains. The service up the line is a question mark, though (i.e. Stamford locals or expresses).

Adirondacker12800 November 12, 2011 - 11:55 pm

Union NJ cost 25 million and it’s rather lush, Rebuilding Metropark cost 47 million. Yankee Stadium was under 100. The ROW is six tracks wide in the Bronx, plenty of space for anything they want to put in.

Jason Thomas November 11, 2011 - 5:21 pm

Be nice if the route we’re adjusted to be within an AirTran shot of LGA.

Donald November 11, 2011 - 6:22 pm

Who says there has to be stations in the Bronx and Queens? What is wrong with just running non-stop to Penn Station? If we start building all these stations, aren’t Metro North trains going to slow down the Amtrak trains directly behind them? Remember, the Amtrak trains will not be stopping at any of these stations. They will be flying through them at 50 and 60 MPH.

Alon Levy November 11, 2011 - 8:37 pm

Amtrak is excruciatingly slow. A fast regional train making 8 stops between Penn and New Rochelle could achieve similar travel time.

And even if Amtrak were sped up, it’s nothing that can’t be handled with good scheduling. We’re not talking about subway-level frequencies here.

SEAN November 11, 2011 - 7:16 pm

Why you ask? One of the goals of this project is to bring rail service to an area that is 1. dense & 2. underserved by rail. Have you ever visited Co-op City? It is one of the densist locations in the entire country. Traffic in & around the Bay Plaza Shopping Center is unweildy at best & now Macy’s has anounced they will be opening there in 2013 bringing even more traffic.

Transit service in that area is scattered & decentralized making transfers challenging both at BP as well as on the loop road network. A MNR station there could solve a multitude of transit problems at once by creating a central point for transfers between busses & commuter trains to numerous points besides Manhattan. Keep in mind that it can take a wile to reach Pelham Bay station & then you need to sit on the 6 while it meanders through J LO’s block.

As for a transfer station in sunnyside, that is esential. You need a means to connect to both railroads without the nessessity of going through Penn Station wich we all know can be a pain in the rear end.

Corey Best November 12, 2011 - 5:09 am

Here are my proposals for the Penn Station access ….Each station has a reason behind it.

New Haven line – Penn Station Extension
Penn Station

Sunnyside JCT < It would provide an Easier transfer for those going East or North and in my opinion would add 10,000s to both systems.. People who live on Long Island or parts of Queens and work in the Bronx / Westchester Mainly drive which clogs the highways and Parkways…

Hunts Point < It would give Low income residents of this neighborhood better access to higher paying jobs in Westchester and Fairfield Counties , it would also speed up the Urban Renewal Process.

Parkchester < See above

Morris Park < See Above

Co-Op City < Its an Under Served part of the city Transit wise….

City Island < An Under served and disconnected part of the city , a shuttle bus could run between the station and the Island

Pelham Manor < I don't see the harm in restoring this station , the only issue is there would be no parking…but that area is walkable and doubt people would really care…

Hudson line – Penn Station Extension
Penn Station

West 62nd Street < Don't have an Opinion on this station

West 125th Street < I don't think i need to explain this

Dyckman Street < It would give the residents of the Northern horn of Manhattan a faster way to get to Midtown or Westchester County…

Northern NJT / MNRR Long Term plans and Proposals – 2050 plan


ajedrez November 12, 2011 - 7:20 pm

I think your logic is flawed for Morris Park and Parkchester. I’m sure there are some low-income residents in those areas, but not as many as Hunt’s Point.

Corey Best November 12, 2011 - 5:19 am

And from what I know the New Haven line extension will be 4 tracked from New Rochelle to Eastchester Bay Bridge and from Eastchester Bay Bridge to Sunnyside… The Eastchester Bay Bridge will be 3 to 4 tracked , and replaced eventually…. The line from New Rochelle south has a max speed of 80mph….but with the Hell Gate that drops to 50-60mph , although with the Catenary and track replacement that is underway i beleave the Goal is to increase the speed to 80mph… As for how many trains should run per hour , for the Hudson line extension it should be 4 per hour and for the New Haven line extension 6-8 per Hour.

Alon Levy November 12, 2011 - 11:19 pm

Where did you hear that? There doesn’t seem to be any money budgeted for four-tracking; in addition, the Amtrak NEC Master Plan says nothing about adding tracks there, unlike in other spots such as the Providence Line.

Corey Best November 13, 2011 - 11:03 pm

I asked around the Amtrak employee watering hole….alot of bridges will be replaced and most of the Hell Gate line will be 3 or 4 tracked…it used to be and most of the Infrastructure is still there for 2 tracks to put in. There currently replacing the Ties and Catenary along the line….

Jon November 13, 2011 - 10:18 am

Please stop at Dyckman St. It will pass right by it, and all Washington Heights/Inwood folk could connect to the A express.

Jim Kingdon November 13, 2011 - 10:49 pm

Making that transfer would be about a 0.3 mile walk, if I’m using google maps correctly. While that doesn’t sound prohibitive, I’m not sure many people would make the trek, especially through a neighborhood that they probably don’t know.

Alon Levy November 14, 2011 - 5:22 am

They transfer would suck, but if the line were useful for local travel (i.e. reasonable cost, no-extra-charge transfers to NYCT, off-peak frequency that doesn’t suck), people would use it instead of the overcrowded A.

Monica Matos May 10, 2012 - 10:07 am

It’s closer than u think, and all on flat ground, that area of Inwood is really nice with private homes along apartment buildings, doesn’t make sense to get off the Metro North at Dyckman to transfer to the A. The station would better serve residents of the area who don’t have local commuter service into downtown like the Bronx does along the Harlem river. Geographically as well, a station at Dyckman St & 125 st make sense, a station at 62 st makes no sense when it takes 5 min by cab or subway to get there from Penn station!

Al D November 14, 2011 - 2:00 pm

Connecting with LIRR to have some New Haven trains run to Jamaica would be optimal. This would open up a whole new travel venue to people using JFK, or going to and fro LI to CT. Right now, it’s a slow drive through Queens, over the Throgs or Whitestone and up the Hutch or CT Tpke. There is real potential in this.

New Rochelle-Penn Station Regional Rail | Pedestrian Observations November 15, 2011 - 5:11 am

[…] week, the MTA again floated proposals for connecting Metro-North to Penn Station once East Side Access comes online and frees track space currently used by the LIRR. The New Haven […]

New York-New Rochelle Metro-North-HSR Compatibility | Pedestrian Observations November 17, 2011 - 11:59 pm

[…] demand. It’s planning on a peak of 6-8 tph according to what I’ve read in comments on Second Avenue Sagas. This naturally breaks into 4 tph that make local stops and 4 that do not (though my suspicion of […]

jj December 4, 2011 - 12:08 pm

a great idea

In Speech, Vacca Promises Support for Select Bus Service, Pedestrian Safety | Streetsblog New York City February 21, 2012 - 1:47 pm

[…] his speech, Vacca also mentioned his support for bringing Metro-North service to under-served parts of the Bronx, for expanding ferry service, and allowing drivers to use time purchased at one Muni-Meter in […]

At Transpo Hearing, Council Members Ask for More Select Bus Service | AECDigest June 19, 2012 - 7:24 pm

[…] discussed during today’s hearing were MTA plans to bring Metro-North trains into Penn Station along existing Amtrak tracks, which the agency is seriously pursuing. Hudson and Harlem line trains […]

Proposal to introduce Metro-North service along the Amtrak line could affect both the Bronx and western Queens | Queens NYC September 17, 2012 - 12:01 pm

[…] MTA eying Metro-North access to Penn Station [2nd Avenue Sagas] East Side Access [MTA] /* Tags: Amtrak, Bronx, Hell Gate Line, LIRR, Metro-North, MTA, new Sunnyside LIRR station ? (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js&#039;; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })(); !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); Comments will be held for moderation and may not show up immediately. […]

CHRIS S January 18, 2015 - 3:07 pm


I am submitting this suggestion to the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council for a better regional and reverse Commute, for a more efficient commuter rail system. This also entails a new ticket collection system and direct through train service between the Metro-North Commuter Railroad Upper Hudson Division, from Poughkeepsie, and Long Island Railroad’s Upper Port Jefferson Branch to Stony Brook /Port Jefferson Stations, via Penn Station. *This would make both railroads cost efficient, other advantages are flexible staffing and equipment, which would improve train service .In the case of Metro-North’s Hudson Division; it would provide access to Penn Station other than Amtrak.* Amtrak currently provides limited train service to Penn Station, from only three Metro-North Hudson Division Stations. For the Long Island Railroad, it means, non-electrified lines such as the Upper Port Jefferson Branch; would obtain more through train service to and from the Stony Brook/Port Jefferson area involving Penn Station. **The Stony Brook Station which is next to the Stony Brook University in particular, has over 13 ,151 commuting students and regular Commuters as well as 13,623 employees who use all modes of transportation. It will also free up MU Train sets from Penn to Huntington which connect at Huntington for trains to and from Port Jefferson. Track space will be critical when Amtrak is forced to close one of the tubes in 2015 for Sandy repairs. If all the railroads that use Penn Station could have through service to and from each other’s territory it would lessen the impact of closing of one the tunnels for Sandy repairs which would restrict the amount of that could used Penn Sation on a daily basis. These railroad carriers are New Jersey Transit and Amtrak’s Empire Corridor should also be looked at for through train service to Long Island via Penn Station using dual mode equipment. This through service to via Penn Station between various railroad carriers would diminish the 25% cut in railroad service to and from Penn Station, which is anticipated with the closing of one the four tunnels which are connected to Penn Station

This also would enhance the in adequate direct through to a Manhattan Railroad Terminal such as Penn Station to and from a non-electrified lines such as the Upper Port Jefferson Branch. Direct through train service to and from Penn Station on the Upper Port Jefferson Branch is limited to two peak round trips and some holiday service. ****In the past the Long Island Railroad has offered rail through rail fan trip to Danbury and Waterbury Connecticut and sent bowered locomotives for the Metro-North’s Harlem Division and Metro-North ran the project that used FL 9s dual powered locomotives with the LIRRs Bi-level coaches’ prototype. LIRR has tested M-2 trains in 1972 also tested M-3 train sets for Metro-North during the early1980’s at their Shea Stadium station and felicity. Later named Mets – Willets Point. This shows years of cooperation between the two in various transportation ventures. Interstate train service would also give a better connection at Metro-North’s Yonkers Station people going to Yankee Stadium

Foote notes
* Please note that the Long Island Railroad Bi-level, railroad passenger cars cannot be used for this type of train service, for further information see main proposal entitled “LIRR and Metro-North Commuter Railroads Interstate Train Service via Penn Station.
** The current Metro-North Commuter Railroad Hudson Division Station is also used by Amtrak on its Empire Corridor. Amtrak Trains Stop at Yonkers, Croton-On-Hudson and Poughkeepsie
** *This figure is from fall enrollment for 24,259 for 2013 The number of visitors to the university and what modes of transportation they use are neither unknown nor traditional commuters on persons using Stony Brook Station only for other destination s See pages 14-20 for further information on categories using the university
**** See pages 8-12 for photos

In addition the current Eastside Access Project to Grand Central Station does not address this issue, nor does it make both railroads into a more regional commuter rail system at less cost. In fact, this makes the gap for better train service to Manhattan Railroad Terminal between the Long Island Railroad’s electrified and non-electrified lines even worse. Stations which mark the end electrification such as Ronkonkoma [on the Mainline AKA the Ronkonkoma Branch] and Huntington are going to create more pollution and traffic jams. This would also hurt the development of the Ronkonkoma Hub. This situation would be cause by more and more people who live or work near a non-electrified station getting into a cars going to an electrified station for better train service.
This is what not what mass transit is for. Mass Transit should be a convent way for the people who use electrified and non-electrified commuter railroad lines to get to their final destination.
****Remember the old long Island Railroad Diesel Passenger saying before making the last stop at Jamaica” All passengers please change at Jamaica”. The Eastside Access to Grand Central will be just another station they will have to change too. There is also the problem of collecting fares in the form tickets or people paying for tickets on the train due to lack of enough train crew staff on trains which over crowded

By the way trains from Port Jefferson to Huntington, operated every hour about 40 years ago during the off peak period. I think the hourly off peak schedule for Upper Port Jefferson Branch ended in 1977.

My suggestion on interstate train service will also include several of essays I wrote on the subject. See index for essay listing.

Foote notes
***I know that the long island Railroad also offers through train service to Hunters point Ave and Long Island City for its diesel passengers Monday-Friday.

adirondacker12800 January 18, 2015 - 3:29 pm

Sending empty trains to the West Side Yards makes more sense then sending them empty to Poughkeepsie and then empty to Port Jefferson.

chris December 4, 2015 - 9:50 am



(No Subject)

Chris Swendsen to you

September 11Show Details

When will the MTA treat all their rail commuters fairly. 
The MTA should stop the two class system when it comes to commuter rail.The first class  are the electrified lines who in general have more through  train service to a Manhattan terminal such as Penn Station or Brooklyn. The second class rail lines are the non-electrified rail lines which have limited or no through train service to  a NYC terminal such as Penn Station without changing trains.

This problem  can be fixed without  expensive electrification.

Please read  the information below for details.

It’s a shame that the Long Island Railroad doesn’t have interstate train service between Metro-North’s Upper Hudson Division and the Long Island Railroad Upper Port Jefferson Branch via Penn Station. This would give more through service to Penn Station from non electrified areas. It will also give Hudson Division and LIRR customer’s better access to Yankee Stadium . it would also stop to need for people to drive from non electrified areas of the of the North Shore to Ronkonkoma. People keep talking about the east side access to Grand Central but that is for electric trains only not for diesel. To say it can happen Amtrak ran a train from Albany Rensselaer to Shea Stadium on June 14th 1997. Most of this route includes Metro-North Hudson Division, which is part of Amtrak Empire Corridor. People have to realize if given the track space you don’t need electrification to go to Penn Station what you needed to empower locomotives which Amtrak and Metro-North use extensively. through service between Metro-North and the Long Island would also increased track space for various railroads who use Penn Station. This also can be done for trains operating east of Babylon east of Ronkonkoma and even the Oyster Bay branch which is not electrified East of East Williston. If there are any problems with crews between both railroads, can be changed at Penn Station between Metro North and the Long Island Railroad to operate in each other’s territory. This is done somewhere between Metro North and New Jersey Transit when they operate the football train between Secaucus junction and New Haven. People have to remember as I said before the e
Eastside Access is only for electric trains.The talked about this and their assessment book between 2014 and 2034. they proposed with the right equipment have train from various railroads operate on each other’s territory . Electrification is to expensive and it doesn’t  include rolling stock.


Leave a Comment