North East Corridor (NEC) speeds, new stations and state of repair

BlackDiamond said:

I assume by "NJT is all 60 Hz" you mean lines that are exclusively NJT such as the former Lackawanna out of Hoboken.

There is really no reason to convert from 25 Hz to 60 Hz and such a change would require a massive replacement of fairly modern solid state frequency converter substations plus the Susquehanna River dam generators that provide 25 Hz directly. Consider that in Europe Germany and Switzerland (and Austria?) still use 16.7 Hz and have no plans to convert from the lower frequency.

Click to expand...

There are plenty of reasons to convert the remainder of the system from 25 to 60 Hz. Interoperability with equipment designed for the 60-Hz systems that exist everywhere in the country except a portion of the NEC, simplified specs for future orders of locomotives / trainsets, ability to use power from the grid without frequency converters, etc.

Maybe those reasons justify the cost, maybe they don't, but there definitely are reasons.

Anyone know why the PRR decided to go with the lower frequency in the first place? Surely even by the 1930s 60-Hz power was becoming standard. Lower reactive losses? The pantograph skipping off the wire at frequencies near 60 Hz?

b1xn00d said:

Anyone know why the PRR decided to go with the lower frequency in the first place? Surely even by the 1930s 60-Hz power was becoming standard. Lower reactive losses? The pantograph skipping off the wire at frequencies near 60 Hz?

Click to expand...

I strongly recommend that you ask Google "Why did PRR use 25Hz for electrification?" and tell us what you find. I suspect you will find the answer to your question and learn quite a bit more to start asking more interesting questions on the subject

For reference just click on the following link:

https://www.google.com/search?q=Why+did+PRR+use+25Hz+for+electrification

b1xn00d said:

There are plenty of reasons to convert the remainder of the system from 25 to 60 Hz. Interoperability with equipment designed for the 60-Hz systems that exist everywhere in the country except a portion of the NEC, simplified specs for future orders of locomotives / trainsets, ability to use power from the grid without frequency converters, etc.

Maybe those reasons justify the cost, maybe they don't, but there definitely are reasons.

Anyone know why the PRR decided to go with the lower frequency in the first place? Surely even by the 1930s 60-Hz power was becoming standard. Lower reactive losses? The pantograph skipping off the wire at frequencies near 60 Hz?

Click to expand...

I agree that all things being equal, having a common 60 hz frequency would be better. However considering all that is needed in the Corridor for SOGR I think that is a lower priority than for example constant tension catenary so trains aren't pulling the wires down on hot days.

They are going to install over-sliding 3rd rail up the Hell Gate line into western Wooside about a mile and a half up from Harold, so that takes care of the commonality need for MN MU trains to Penn Station. NJT Arrow MU's will be gone in 2 or 3 years. Everything else can convert on the fly. SEPTA is in no financial shape nor has the need to convert their own Pennsy and Reading branches to 60Hz.

Amtrak25 said:

They are going to install over-sliding 3rd rail up the Hell Gate line into western Wooside about a mile and a half up from Harold, so that takes care of the commonality need for MN MU trains to Penn Station. NJT Arrow MU's will be gone in 2 or 3 years. Everything else can convert on the fly. SEPTA is in no financial shape nor has the need to convert their own Pennsy and Reading branches to 60Hz.

Click to expand...

I don’t understand the MN MU comment. The M8’s have pantographs and operate on overhead wire for most of their journeys today. Why would they need to add third rail for them?

Forgive me, but I really don’t get the interest with this proposed project. Conversion to 60HZ seems that it would save a small amount on future rolling stock purchases, but if I’m understanding rightly, it would have little impact on reliability and operating expenses, cause difficulty for commuter roads, and require significant capital expenditure. Wouldn’t it be better to just accept we have a legacy system, and move forward with more pressing issues?

There are some locations mainly in coal country that still use 25 hZ. That is slowly being reduced.

blueman271 said:

I don’t understand the MN MU comment. The M8’s have pantographs and operate on overhead wire for most of their journeys today. Why would they need to add third rail for them?

Click to expand...

M8s cannot operate under 25Hz. It is 60Hz upto CP Gate. From there on it is 25Hz into Penn Station. M8s will operate on DC from Third Rail in 25Hz territory.

jis said:

M8s cannot operate under 25Hz. It is 60Hz upto CP Gate. From there on it is 25Hz into Penn Station. M8s will operate on DC from Third Rail in 25Hz territory.

Click to expand...

If M-8's had the heavy transformers to handle the 25Hz, it would have put the cars over 80 tons. Not worth it for the handful to operate in this service.

M-8's assigned to ShorelIne East service (12 of the Connecticut-owned ones) had their 3rd rail shoes removed since they could have been torn off by bridge structures east of New Haven.

There is no such thing as a universal MU.

Septa9739 said:

Forgive me, but I really don’t get the interest with this proposed project. Conversion to 60HZ seems that it would save a small amount on future rolling stock purchases, but if I’m understanding rightly, it would have little impact on reliability and operating expenses, cause difficulty for commuter roads, and require significant capital expenditure. Wouldn’t it be better to just accept we have a legacy system, and move forward with more pressing issues?

Click to expand...

Europe is littered with both 50 Hz and 16 2/3 Hz train lines. If they don't feel obligated over there to unify under the grid standard 50 Hz, I doubt there's a justification or compelling reason to do so here either. It's still a hurdle, but it's pretty low.

There is an infatuation, among the "content mills" in particular, with identifying this as a huge problem because it is in fact a relic of being "old" but that doesn't automatically make it a problem. The difficulty in procuring parts is a problem, though.

Besides that, I think Amtrak's 25 Hz system is actually especially resilient because of its ability to run with several converters offline combined with its near-total continuity of highly redundant long distance transmission lines. As far as I know, typical new-build 25kV/50kV autotransformer systems as seen here in the US and around the world can have a localized outage when a single provider at a single substation fails. I haven't heard of the underlying transmission system system failing any time recently, but I have heard of utility provider failures on Amtrak's and NJ Transit's 60 Hz systems. Amtrak's system covers over 200 miles of rail and doesn't depend on a single utility connection.

How We Get Around made a "response" video to Half as Interesting's low quality video on NEC south-end electrification:


Note: Safe Harbor is not the sole source of Amtrak's 25 Hz power but it's the only connection/generation that isn't first converted from the grid 60 Hz: it's straight from hydroelectric turbine to 25 Hz power. (Safe Harbor has two turbines but also has a motor-generator)

FY25 documents (FY2025-FY2029) from the NEC Commission came out this month. I can't outline every project so I'll stick to a few I already know a lot about. Big news today with signal and catenary funding yesterday/today, too.

https://nec-commission.com/documents/

FY25 project appendix: https://nec-commission.com/app/uploads/2024/11/FY25-29-Appendix_Nov-4.pdf

Name: Clark to Ham Constant Tension Upgrade Project
(CP Clark - Ham Interlocking)

Scope: Provide constant tension Upgrade between Clark NJ to Ham Interlocking. Construction, testing/commissioning, acceptance and closeout for 7 route miles of 4-track mainline constant tension catenary, including installation of 305 Foundations, 155 portal beams, 6 catenary cantilever structures, and approximately 28 miles of constant tension catenary wires and hardwares. Removal and retire existing catenary structures, installation of temporary platforms at two New Jersey Transit stations and other support tasks. This work is to be performed over multiple years.

Click to expand...

Current projection for completion is December 2029.

Sporadic foundations and catenary poles ("lower columns"?) have been up in this section for a few years already.

The FY23 plan (written 2 years ago in late 2022) was a little more specific about the order in which things are to happen.
Link: https://nec-commission.com/app/uplo...apital-Investment-Plan-02-Appendix-Oct-22.pdf

Planned Scope of Work for FY23: The scope for FY23 is to complete the Lower Column and Portal Erection installation and start
overnight weekend [sic] outage for Track 4 Wire Installation.
Planned Scope of Work for FY24: Overnight & Weekend outages to finish wiring on Tracks 4 and begin wiring on Track 3

Click to expand...

Temporary platforms (movable flatcars) were installed at Princeton Junction and Hamilton on track 4 sometime this week. Track 4 is now out of service continuously, so westbound Princeton Junction stops are now made on track 3. Before this week and in the last month track 4 was closed nightly somewhere after 11PM so westbound trains would either low level over 4 or just use 1 if eastbound traffic was low enough.

As of this week, in addition to the temporary platforms, it looks like maintenance has intensified and maintenance is also starting earlier each night. There was even a Philadelphia maintenance crew (KP657) a few nights working Midway - Ham. I'm guessing these are active steps to get constant tension going although it would be hard to disambiguate track outages for the constant tension project with those for the Ham Interlocking Renewal Project. Someone over there should take a peek.

---

There was a separate announcement for security of more funding for a few projects.

FRA link: https://railroads.dot.gov/about-fra...vesting-america-biden-harris-administration-4

Full list: https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/2024-11/FY24 FSP-NEC Selections_PDFa.pdf

Projects:
Connecticut – Cos Cob Bridge Replacement Planning Study
New Jersey – Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Final Design Supplement and Pre-Construction Support Services
Connecticut – Connecticut River Bridge Replacement Project: Springfield Line
Connecticut – Hartford Line Rail Program Double Track Phase 3B Project
Connecticut – Hartford Station Relocation Project
Connecticut – Track Improvement and Mobility Enhancement (TIME)-1
District of Columbia – Washington Union Station Expansion Project
District of Columbia – Washington Union Station: Near Term Rail Program
Maryland – Baltimore Penn Station: Master Plan Completion Project
Maryland – Bridge to Burgos Catenary Renewal (Mid-Atlantic Division South Catenary Renewal: Baltimore-New Carrollton)
Maryland – Mid-Atlantic South Signal System Upgrades to 562 Project
New Jersey – County-Newark Catenary Upgrades Project
New Jersey – Kearny Substation 41 Relocation Design and Construction
New Jersey – New York Metro Signal System Upgrades to 562 Program Phase 1: County to Elmora
New York – New York Penn Station Reconstruction
New York – Gateway: New York Penn Station Capacity Expansion
Pennsylvania – Keystone Line Interlocking SOGR Program - Phase 1: Potts
Pennsylvania – Mid-Atlantic OCS Replacement Program Phase 1: Zoo to Paoli Project
Pennsylvania – SEPTA Regional Rail Master Plan Implementation

Conversion to rule 562 territory (County - Elmora, MP 32.8 - 14.7) means wayside signals (not at interlockings) will be removed and all tracks will be fully bidirectional. Trains will rely on cab signals only. County - Ham (MP 32.8 - 55.7) is already 562 and there are plenty of others.

County-Newark Catenary Upgrades (FY25 project appendix)

The scope of this project is the replacement of all catenary structures from the EBHS of County Interlocking (MP 32.8) to west of Newark Station (MP 9.3) Including testing/commissioning, acceptance and closeout for 25 route miles of 4-track mainline catenary, upgrade of all catenary with SAP assemblies and fixed termination catenary, installation of new OCS foundations, portal beams, structures, installation of temporary platforms, installation of new grounding and bounding of stations within the project limits, and demolition and removal existing catenary structures. This work will occur over multiple years.

Click to expand...

I think the plan is to replace the catenary for County - Newark with fixed-termination SAP rather than "gold standard" constant tension. SAP is in place from County - Midway and CP Clark - Ham and I think those sections were actually supposed to be constant tension. CP Clark - Ham is of course to be converted to constant tension.

New grant came through for Amtrak’s NEC
https://media.amtrak.com/2024/11/amtrak-secures-funding-to-advance-13-key-infrastructure-projects/

JuniusLivonius said:

I think the plan is to replace the catenary for County - Newark with fixed-termination SAP rather than "gold standard" constant tension. SAP is in place from County - Midway and CP Clark - Ham and I think those sections were actually supposed to be constant tension. CP Clark - Ham is of course to be converted to constant tension.

Click to expand...

About CP Clark - Ham: it appears work on the new catenary has stopped. Did they run out of money again? And in the meantime, if it already has SAP, why is the speed limit still 135 instead of 145 as it is north of Monmouth Junction?

JuniusLivonius said:

FY25 documents (FY2025-FY2029) from the NEC Commission came out this month. I can't outline every project so I'll stick to a few I already know a lot about. Big news today with signal and catenary funding yesterday/today, too.

https://nec-commission.com/documents/

FY25 project appendix: https://nec-commission.com/app/uploads/2024/11/FY25-29-Appendix_Nov-4.pdf

Name: Clark to Ham Constant Tension Upgrade Project
(CP Clark - Ham Interlocking)



Current projection for completion is December 2029.

Sporadic foundations and catenary poles ("lower columns"?) have been up in this section for a few years already.

The FY23 plan (written 2 years ago in late 2022) was a little more specific about the order in which things are to happen.
Link: https://nec-commission.com/app/uplo...apital-Investment-Plan-02-Appendix-Oct-22.pdf



Temporary platforms (movable flatcars) were installed at Princeton Junction and Hamilton on track 4 sometime this week. Track 4 is now out of service continuously, so westbound Princeton Junction stops are now made on track 3. Before this week and in the last month track 4 was closed nightly somewhere after 11PM so westbound trains would either low level over 4 or just use 1 if eastbound traffic was low enough.

As of this week, in addition to the temporary platforms, it looks like maintenance has intensified and maintenance is also starting earlier each night. There was even a Philadelphia maintenance crew (KP657) a few nights working Midway - Ham. I'm guessing these are active steps to get constant tension going although it would be hard to disambiguate track outages for the constant tension project with those for the Ham Interlocking Renewal Project. Someone over there should take a peek.

---

There was a separate announcement for security of more funding for a few projects.

FRA link: https://railroads.dot.gov/about-fra...vesting-america-biden-harris-administration-4

Full list: https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/2024-11/FY24 FSP-NEC Selections_PDFa.pdf

Projects:
Connecticut – Cos Cob Bridge Replacement Planning Study
New Jersey – Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Final Design Supplement and Pre-Construction Support Services
Connecticut – Connecticut River Bridge Replacement Project: Springfield Line
Connecticut – Hartford Line Rail Program Double Track Phase 3B Project
Connecticut – Hartford Station Relocation Project
Connecticut – Track Improvement and Mobility Enhancement (TIME)-1
District of Columbia – Washington Union Station Expansion Project
District of Columbia – Washington Union Station: Near Term Rail Program
Maryland – Baltimore Penn Station: Master Plan Completion Project
Maryland – Bridge to Burgos Catenary Renewal (Mid-Atlantic Division South Catenary Renewal: Baltimore-New Carrollton)
Maryland – Mid-Atlantic South Signal System Upgrades to 562 Project
New Jersey – County-Newark Catenary Upgrades Project
New Jersey – Kearny Substation 41 Relocation Design and Construction
New Jersey – New York Metro Signal System Upgrades to 562 Program Phase 1: County to Elmora
New York – New York Penn Station Reconstruction
New York – Gateway: New York Penn Station Capacity Expansion
Pennsylvania – Keystone Line Interlocking SOGR Program - Phase 1: Potts
Pennsylvania – Mid-Atlantic OCS Replacement Program Phase 1: Zoo to Paoli Project
Pennsylvania – SEPTA Regional Rail Master Plan Implementation

Conversion to rule 562 territory (County - Elmora, MP 32.8 - 14.7) means wayside signals (not at interlockings) will be removed and all tracks will be fully bidirectional. Trains will rely on cab signals only. County - Ham (MP 32.8 - 55.7) is already 562 and there are plenty of others.

County-Newark Catenary Upgrades (FY25 project appendix)


I think the plan is to replace the catenary for County - Newark with fixed-termination SAP rather than "gold standard" constant tension. SAP is in place from County - Midway and CP Clark - Ham and I think those sections were actually supposed to be constant tension. CP Clark - Ham is of course to be converted to constant tension.

Click to expand...

Am I reading this correctly that it costs $190mm to just design the saw tooth bridge replacement? My lord what a waste of money.

Touchdowntom9 said:

Am I reading this correctly that it costs $190mm to just design the saw tooth bridge replacement? My lord what a waste of money.

Click to expand...

You do not realize how complicated design is going to be,
1. design has to allow for service to continua over the current bridge. So, construction has to be in stages. Then moving trains to new bridge to replace remaining old bridge.
2. The addition of a track from Hoboken to the southbound NEC track(s) means moving current supports of the present bridge. This will allow for more direct Hoboken service to Newark and beyond as the present set up requires those train to cross the active NEC. This is a biggie.
3. Any new and some old locations for caissons will require geo tech borings to determine depth and any other unknowns. Then any redesign needed.

west point said:

You do not realize how complicated design is going to be,
1. design has to allow for service to continua over the current bridge. So, construction has to be in stages. Then moving trains to new bridge to replace remaining old bridge.
2. The addition of a track from Hoboken to the southbound NEC track(s) means moving current supports of the present bridge. This will allow for more direct Hoboken service to Newark and beyond as the present set up requires those train to cross the active NEC. This is a biggie.
3. Any new and some old locations for caissons will require geo tech borings to determine depth and any other unknowns. Then any redesign needed.

Click to expand...

Fair enough and appreciate the breakdown of what’s going into this project. Hopefully the project itself isn’t too expensive because getting the funding for it and the portal south won’t be easy.

One other question about these recent grants—for the constant tension catenary upgrade in NJ and the signaling system upgrade between NB and Elizabeth, is that funding strictly for design or also inclusive of construction / implementation as well?

Seems like this signal upgrade project would also finally solve the ‘approach limited’ issue that currently hamstring’s train speed at the Elizabeth S curve.

And for anyone who might know, how much of the infrastructure funding remains available for rail after these grants?

It still sounds like an awful lot of money to me. If 18 engineers and a project manager got paid $200,000 each per year, they would have to work five years on the project to cost $190 million, right?

Literalman said:

It still sounds like an awful lot of money to me. If 18 engineers and a project manager got paid $200,000 each per year, they would have to work five years on the project to cost $190 million, right?

Click to expand...

Do not forget all the visual inspections by specialists and GEO tech work isn't cheap

Literalman said:

It still sounds like an awful lot of money to me. If 18 engineers and a project manager got paid $200,000 each per year, they would have to work five years on the project to cost $190 million, right?

Click to expand...

Believe it would be for 50 years, not 5 years. 19 people at 200k a year is $3.8mm / year. Still mind boggling how it likely takes longer and cost more to design a bridge today than it did for the whole project to be completed back then, even adjusting for inflation.

Rule of thumb for construction used to be about 15% of total for design, give or take. That may no longer be the case, or this kind of project isn’t comparable to that, but what is $190 million 15% of? It’s too late to do math.

Stevenz said:

what is $190 million 15% of?

Click to expand...

about $1.3 billion

Matt Johnson said:

About CP Clark - Ham: it appears work on the new catenary has stopped. Did they run out of money again? And in the meantime, if it already has SAP, why is the speed limit still 135 instead of 145 as it is north of Monmouth Junction?

Click to expand...

No idea what they're doing with CP Clark - Ham catenary. The lower columns (vertical) for constant tension in this section look 95% complete and installed. Almost all the portal structures (horizontal gantries) appear to be missing and each probably requires an all-track outage. For reference, there's a natural outage every day between #3805 at 3:00AM and #3806 at 3:50AM.

I will be keeping and eye on any catenary changes; RFW videos are instrumental in tracking progress. The last reference point I have is August 2024:

Older but also a cool video from April 2024:

The current work near Princeton Junction and Hamilton looks like track replacement because they've laid out rails inside and along the right-of-way. They might still be taking actions for constant tension installation, though.

As for SAP speed limits: it seems like they've waited years between the finish of installation and speed upgrades. I've sampled a bunch of bridges over the NEC on Google Streetview and went into the past. The new SAP and constant tension sections looked complete as far as I could tell yet speed upgrades didn't happen for years. CP Clark - Ham looks like SAP is mostly complete yet the inner tracks are still bound to 135mph.