Talk:NJ Transit Rail Operations

954 miles way too high

The figure of 954 miles is way too high. This sounds like track-miles, not route-miles. Ldemery 22:06, 23 May 2006

This older Railway Age article cites NJT's route mileage as 471.3. 71.241.104.97 06:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Existing right of way foundation for new Atlantic City line

There are plans for a new NYC- Atlantic City direct line. It will presumably use existing track. Trackage exists, running northeast to southwest from the vicinity of Old Bridge to Hammonton in northern Atlantic County. Dogru144 00:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

That's not the route they plan to use, if at all. The route right now under consideration is the one for the former Amtrak NYC-AC service, via Pennsylvania (Trenton to Delair, then via the entire P-RSL from Shore Interlocking).

Further, there are no tracks in Old Bridge; it sounds like you are thinking of the former Central Railroad of New Jersey's Southern Division (Conrail's Southern Secondary), over which the Blue Comet train operated, which starts in Red Bank and connects to the Atlantic City Line at Winslow Junction. This is not the route being considered. 71.241.104.97 06:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Fare Zones

Does anyone know enough about fare zones/ticketing to write a section on it? I know, for example, that you can take a 10 zone monthly from one line and use it on another. What about if your ticket is to Newark Penn or Hoboken and you want to go to NYP. How does passing through the fare gates work?Tvh2k 15:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

General Electric P40 Locomotives

NJT is going to be using GE P40BH locomotives for the Atlantic City Express service. These locomotives are being leased from Amtrak. It is possible that they will end up operating on other NJT lines as well. They should not be added to the roster here until NJT decides what NJT numbers they will wear. Ken S. 15:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

New Dual mode electric locos on order!

http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/media-centre/press-releases/details?docID=0901260d80040301

if anyone want's to update the page with this, go ahead. since i don't have the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fan Railer (talk • contribs) 19:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

• SIGH* Never mind. Fan Railer (talk) 21:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

September 2009 map updates

I wouldn't add this to the article. Sorry.

There's really no reason to include every closed station that is on the currently active lines, as that is of way too limited interest for a general-interest encyclopedia. They're noted on the individual line templates, like the one here, so they don't need to be on the general map, which is more likely to be looked at by a someone just trying to get the basic overview than by a railfan who'd want to know those things. In other words, there's too much potential for confusion.

Also, while I can appreciate the addition of proposed extensions to the map, all of the ones you included are years away from completion. There's far too much chance for things to change, adding them now would only serve to confuse the general interest reader. (see also WP:CRYSTALBALL) Also, the line work on them is a bit shoddy, especially when expanded fully, and are likely not to geographically-accurate scale, the same as the rest of the map, which was created by tracing a geological survey map. As the geographical accuracy is stated in the map key, it must be maintained.

So, in short, while a good project, it's not the right map for wikipedia's present-day general interest crowd. Therefore, I've reverted to the previous version of the map.oknazevad (talk) 03:00, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Readable map in infobox?

The current map of NJ Transit rail operations is excellent. However, there's one problem: It's too big to be reasonably compressed into an infobox. I have a fairly modern computer with Chrome, and it's not only unreadable at that scale but a muddled mess that doesn't provide any useful information - which renders it a waste of space in the infobox.

Thus, my question: Would it be better to have a readable map (i.e, no text) in the infobox, with a link to the with-text map? I could fairly quickly create such a map by removing text and thickening lines on the current map, or by creating a new non-geographic schematic. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:34, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

There are certainly things I could see changing. I like that the map is geographically accurate (except for the tacked in Meadowlands line, which doesn't accurately reflect that it branches from the Pascack Valley Line after the latter branches from the Bergen County Line).

But some of the labels could certainly be clearer at the small scale. I think larger text for the stations and line labels could help. (Some are also dated and incorrect, such as Princeton Junction (the "at West Windsor" is not part of the station name), the old name for New Bridge Landing and others. The idea of a low text thumbnail that links to the fully labelled version sounds good, but I don't know if that's possible.

I could even see leaving off the Port Jervis Line, as that's technically Metro-North (though operated under contract by NJT), which would allow more room for the rest of the system to breathe, as it were. Or putting it in a separate insert, as NJT does on their own map. Either way, it need to be labelled, as there's nothing currently indicating it's separate nature.

Drop me a line if you have any drafts to look over. oknazevad (talk) 17:29, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I'll start by fixing Meadowlands on the main map.

The main problem with the current map is that it's designed for 3000 pixels wide. Which will be great for 2020 when we all have 3000x4000 monitors, and it's fine for geographic work now, but not so useful for a 5-second understanding. So my alternate map will cut out most of the station names; I'll probably leave in Newark, Secaucus, Hoboken NY Penn and maybe a few other terminals. The line names will be upsized for readability at 300px wide (and we could even give that infobox a few more pixels). I'll let you know when I've got a draft. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:41, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Here's the first draft, at infobox size (300px):

I will have to play with the text, as it renders differently here than in Inkscape. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:42, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to take so long getting back to you; busy in RL.

As for the map, looks good. Would probably still include a separate label for the Port Jervis Line (not just Port Jervis as a station) to show the distinction between it and the Main Line, which terminates in Suffern (which I think should be included as a label). Also, just so it doesn't look like a random little grey thing hanging off the side, the Meadowlands station should probably be labeled, and, in the vein of including Secaucus and Newark Penn, Newark Broad Street and possibly Summit could be labeled, as they're important transfer stations (especially on weekends).

I'm also wondering if the River Line should really be included; it's not part of NJT Rail Operations (it's technically diesel light rail, and is operated under contract by a consortium lead by Bombardier), so it seems to me that including it on the map for this article is misinformation. What say ye? oknazevad (talk) 12:02, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I made most of the changes; there's no way to fit in boxes for both the Main and Bergen lines. I may have to futz with text again, but take a look (may have to purge your cache). Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:33, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Hm, I'm wondering if separate boxes with pointer lines would work; someone not from the area is unlikely to know where Bergen County is, and therefore not be able to tell the lines apart. Maybe slightly smaller boxes would help, but that'd get to readability issue. But overall I like it. oknazevad (talk) 05:43, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll work on the Bergen/Main issue later. (I.e, when it's not 95 degrees and I can only keep Inkscape open for a few minutes.) But after more playing with the spacing I think I've got an acceptable V1.0 for the infobox. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:48, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Stay cool; this heat is ridiculous. oknazevad (talk) 16:31, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

File:ALP-44 IMG 1573.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:ALP-44 IMG 1573.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

File:NJT Arrows III ALP-44.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:NJT Arrows III ALP-44.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

File:NJT PL42AC.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:NJT PL42AC.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Below/above ground?

It would be helpful to have some overview, either in map or text form, of which portions of the system are above vs. below ground (or diesel vs. electric, for that matter, if different). -- Beland (talk) 03:57, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Rolling stock; Cabooses too?

Evidently a screen cap of an episode of the ABC Family Channel series Switched at Birth contains a New Jersey Transit caboose. Why isn't this noted among the rolling stock? -------User:DanTD (talk) 02:59, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

NJT Map

This isn't the greatest map, the text is pretty fuzzy. Is there another version that is free that is available? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

The map is actually an SVG (Scaled Vector Graphics) file, which can be scaled to any size without loss of image quality (unlike photographs, which get pixelated at too-large sizes). However, the map doesn't render perfectly well at 300px wide in an infobox - no map of a system of this complexity will. I spent a while making sure this map is readable at all at 300 pixels wide - the old map was not. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

A 'totals' column should be added for Locomotives table

The Passenger Cars table has a 'totals' column that breaks down the exact number of cars. The same should be done for the Locomotives, especially since the Notes section indicates that not all of each type are in service. I do not want to edit the article because I am unaware of the exact number of locomotives in service.Grand Fenwick (talk) 02:39, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

NJDOT/NJT

NJT owned trackage "Recording and Coding Guide for Structure Inventory and Appraisal" (PDF). New Jersey Department of Transportation. 2003.</ref>

• 4001 Pascack V alley Line
• 4002 Bergen County Line
• 4003 Main Line
• 4004 Boonton Line (MP 2.70 to 34.10)
• 4005 Morristown Line (MP 34.10 to 47.90)
• 4006 Morristown Line (MP 00.00 to 36.30)
• 4007 Harrison Connection
• 4008 Montclair Branch
• 4009 Gladstone Line
• 4011 Raritan V alley Line, Bayonne Branch, North Jersey Coast Line
• 4012 Freehold Branch
• 4013 Freehold Secondary
• 4014 Southern Branch
• 4015 Princeton Line
• 4050 Atlantic City Line
• 4051 Cape May Line
• 4052 Ocean City Branch
• 4056 Millville Branch
• 4057 Pemberton Secondary
• 5000 to 5699 state owned railroad carrying bridges over state owned routes
• 5700 to 5999 state owned railroad carrying bridges over other features

Other NJ trackage ownership

• 6000 to 6149 Amtrak and Conrail bridges.
• 6000b to 6099b Amtrak-Northeast Corridor
• 6100b to 6149b Conrail (Joint Assets), Norfolk Southern and CSX
• 6150 NY Susquehanna and Western Railroad (NYS&W) (Delaware & Otsego Railroad owned)
• 6151 Staten Island Rapid Transit (SIRT)
• 6152 SEPTA owned portion of the NY Branch (Former Reading Railroad-USRA Line code 0326)
• 6153 Black River and Western Railroad (BR&W)
• 6154 Rahway Valley Railroad
• 6155 Morristown and Erie Railroad (ME)
• 6156 Miscellaneous abandoned Traction Companies (P.S. Trolley, Bergen County Traction Company, etc.)
• 6157 Abandoned New York Branch Spur (to Pennington Mountain Quarry)
• 6158 to 6199 miscellaneous railroad lines

What is the electrification

What is the electrification? Catenary (at what volt) only, or third rail as well? Peter Horn User talk 19:11, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

I found the answer in ALP-46. Peter Horn User talk 19:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

The NEC and North Jersey Coast Line to Mattawan are part of Amtrak's 25 Hz traction power system, which was inherited from the Pennsylvania Railroad. The Coast Line from Mattawan to Long Branch, which was added later, is 25 kV at 60Hz. The entirety of the electrification on the Morris & Essex Lines and Montclair-Boonton Line is also 25 kV/60 Hz, converted over in the early 80s from the original Edison DC system (and extended to Montclair State University as part of the Montclair Connection). No part of the NJ Transit system is 12.5 kV/60 Hz. That's used for Metro-North's New Haven Line, which the ALP-46s were designed to accommodate to allow for possible through-running (which they only do for NFL game specials) or possible Amtrak purchase (they went with the Siemans Sprinter instead), which is why it's in the ALP-46 specs. You'd have been better off checking the individual line articles. Being that the whole system isn't electrified, I don't know if putting it in this infobox isn't giving a false impresssion that it is to unfamiliar readers. That said, I'll leave it there. oknazevad (talk) 23:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)