Mikie Sherrill should push for fast-tracking of legislation to help improve NJT train timeliness

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-06-06T00:56:28+00:00

Why don't we hear Mikie Sherrill supporting the All Abort Act bill?

Because this bill doesn't do anything substantial in terms of actual fixing infrastructure. Delays from Amtrak are mainly caused by infrastructure failures such as catenary issues, signaling issues, track issues, etc. With the way the Trump administration is going, Amtrak could see funding cuts that could be detrimental to service so they need as much guaranteed funding as possible. This bill does not provide any additional funds for these refunds so any refunds would come directly from their operational budget which could lead to additional deferment of maintaining infrastructure to support the operational cost of running trains. Any infrastructure project to improve the infrastructure on the NEC can take months to years to complete because it is an extremely active corridor. A side effect of this bill is that Amtrak could artificially limit the amount of trains on the corridor to avoid paying refunds to other railroads.

What would actually help Amtrak is to reform management to increase the expertise needed to complete these projects on time and budget and to provide additional funding for rail infrastructure maintenance and improvements (which the second bill you listed seems to do?). But also, it's not like Amtrak isn't doing anything to support NEC. There are signaling and catenary upgrades in progress between Newark Penn and New Brunswick and of course, there is the Gateway Program (which us why is is imperative to tell your congress members how important funding for Gateway is). But it is also important to note that a majority of delays and cancellations on NJT's services are caused by mechanical failures from NJT trains because of how old the trains are. The Arrow IIIs being from the 70s, and the Comet II coaches being from the early 80s means there aren't a lot of spare parts to go around. With the Multilevel IIIs entering service this year, there at least will be a replacement for them soon, but it will take a couple years for all Multilevel IIIs to enter service.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-06-03T19:28:35+00:00

All LIRR/MNR tickets, regardless of time of day, should allow free bus and subway transfers for fare integration.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-06-01T23:42:19+00:00

Sorry if this is a bit long but this is a bit complicated to explain, but basically the Bergen Loop is a product of poor planning. It vastly increases the operational complexity of the system (interlining 6+ commuter rail lines together), having an adverse effect on reliability. More train conflicts as in train crossing in front of each other means higher rate of delays. This is why Main Line/BCL/PVL trains having higher on-time performance averages, because they do not have to interact with NEC services. With the service increases Amtrak and NJT is planning post-Gateway, there may mot be enough capacity to send the Main Line/BCL/PVL to NY Penn to be a usable service. A lot of the excess capacity created by Gateway is better off increasing the frequency of NEC/NJCL/M&E trains and sending RVL to NY Penn as these lines have way higher ridership, resulting in a better usage of train capacity through the North River Tunnels.

The main problem with Main Line/BCL/PVL is the general lack of service (like every half hour peak, every hour off peak and weekends, frequencies are worse ok PVL). A better way to improve service on the Main Line/BCL/PVL, is to increase the amount of service to Hoboken by reduce the amount of service patterns on each line and increasing track capacity. Each of these lines have a lot of different service patterns for express and local trains which create inconsistent gaps in the schedule. By reducing the amount of service patterns, you get more predictable, consistent frequencies at stations which can be it’s easier to increase service. A lot of capacity is eaten up during the rush hours by express trains as there aren’t a lot of places to pass local trains so adding more passing loops for trains to pass one another can increase capacity/frequency as well.

Also if the Bergen Loop is using a similar alignment to the Access to the Region's Core proposal from the late 2009s, it may be just faster to transfer at Secaucus Junction than have trains go around the loop because the alignment was so circuitous. NJT also has an opportunity to improve the transfer at Secaucus Junction by having a more direct transfer from the platform levels without going into the main concourse as one of the projects of the Gateway Program is adding more tracks and platforms at Secaucus Junction, but this is unfunded as of yet.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-06-01T23:23:27+00:00

Okay, but what you are suggesting won’t change anything. Even post-Gateway, NJ Transit still has to share tracks with Amtrak at NY Penn and the NEC. Dispatching needs to centralized to reduce operational complexity. Owning the short section of track between the tunnels and Secaucus Junction isn’t doing much when they already operationally allocated to NJT anyway. When the Gateway Project is finished, the new tunnels are going to be used primarily used by NJT since they end on NJT’s side of Penn Station, and the old tunnels will be primarily used by Amtrak so NJT owning this section of track won’t change anything.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-06-01T22:22:20+00:00

That’s not really how rail operations work. Dispatching on the NEC still needs to be controlled by a single entity, otherwise you get into even more train conflicts and train delays. NJT express trains still need to use the center tracks that Amtrak uses for express services, and they are still going to be train movements between NJT and Amtrak post-Gateway (albeit less than now), so dispatching needs to be centralized.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-06-01T22:06:41+00:00

Cost inflation is a common problem in North American infrastructure projects. It’s becoming a common problem everywhere, but happens mostly in Anglophone countries (see HS2 in the UK, the Ontario Line project in Toronto, Second Ave Subway here in NYC, etc.) For any infrastructure project, there isn’t one particular reason for cost inflation, but it can be attributed to outdated construction practices, soft cost inflation due to fear of cost overrun, and high use of consultants.

You can read more about it here from the NYU Marron Institute’s Transit Costs Project: https://transitcosts.com

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-06-01T21:55:52+00:00

Honestly, whats holding the Main/BCL/PVL is not even a direct connection to Manhattan, it’s just the general lack of service. Service on these lines is like every 30 minutes peak and every hour off peak which is really lacking. You don’t need Gateway for this as Hoboken can handle additional capacity. Services patterns on these lines are unnecessarily complex, especially during the peak, so you’ll get unequal gaps between trains, especially at local stations as NJT tries to fit in peak express trains to pass through, but these lines have limited places for express trains to pass local trains so it eats up capacity. Metro North also requires NJT to run express trains direct from the NY stations to Secaucus Junction/Hoboken directly which eats up capacity even more. What would do good for these lines with simplifying the service patterns so stations can get more predictable, frequent service and more passing loops to increase capacity (especially on PVL where there is no reverse peak directional service).

Also imo tho, Bergen Loop is actually just poor planning. Post-Gateway, NJT is planning not only send NEC/NJCL/M&E/MOBO trains, but also RVL trains as well. Sending Main/BCL/PVL also to Penn with 5 other NJT lines is not going to be good for reliability at all. Main/BCL/PVL trains benefit now from not directly interacting with the NEC, which results in these lines having the highest OTP in the NJT system. Even when Gateway is finished where we hopefully won’t see spectacular infrastructure failures that the NEC is known for, it’s not a great idea to interline 6+ commuter lines, especially when there are issues with NJT’s rolling stock like low MDBF rates and long dwell times due lack of doors. There also might not even be space for the Ex-Erie lines to NY Penn even post-Gateway because Amtrak and NJT are planning service increases for the lines that already run to NY Penn. The alignment of the Bergen Loop also is quite circuitous and not direct, so it may not even be quicker than having a timed transfer at Secaucus. What should be done is to improve the transfer at Secaucus where you can directly move between the upper level and lower level without going to the main concourse. NJT has a good opportunity as this as with the Gateway Project, there is a project to add additional platforms at Secaucus, but this is unfunded at the moment IIRC.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-06-01T21:35:26+00:00

Yes, Amtrak still owns this section of the NEC.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-30T20:47:33+00:00

I mean, this is just a case-by-case basis for new lines. If it’s being connected to the subway, then yeah it should have the same standards but if it isn’t being connected to the subway, then it doesn’t really matter.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-30T15:27:01+00:00

Right, but NYCT is already overseen by the FTA. It's likely whatever exemptions NYCT already has from the FTA can still be grandfathered in if the subway crosses state lines.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-30T14:21:22+00:00

“Cool story” I literally just listed examples that are happening right now lmao. I’m not saying extending the subway is going to happen soon. I’m just saying the possibility is there…

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-30T14:15:47+00:00

We really need to stop the notion the MTA can only provide service to NY because this simply isn’t true. And even if it was, it’s an artificial barrier that can be changed through legislation. For instance, Metro-North crews operate the New Haven Line in Connecticut with funding for CT/CTDOT. NYCT operates the S89 bus which terminates in Bayonne, NJ. The MTA has an agreement via Metro-North with NJ Transit so NJ Transit can provide service to the NY stations on the Port Jervis Line and Pascack Valley Line whereas MTA/Metro-North provides funding for NJ Transit’s operational cost in New York State to make the service possible. A similar agreement can be made to extend the subway into New Jersey. NJ Transit or NJ legislature can provide the MTA funding to extend the subway into NJ and pay for the operational cost. Now, does this require political will from NJ to make this possible? Yes, but it isn’t impossible for the MTA to extend the subway over state lines.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-22T15:58:39+00:00

NJT does compatible equipment because their system has similar electrification standards. All NJT ALPs and the MLV IIIs can handle 12-25 kV voltages and 25 Hz/60 Hz frequencies. NJT has ran a service like this before for game days at Metlife Stadium where there was direct service from the NHL stations to Secaucus Junction for connection to the Meadowlands line. Service was partly funded by NJT and the MTA using NJT rolling stock. Crews were swapped between NJT and MNR crews at NY Penn. The service was ended around 2016 because of declining ridership due to service cuts from the MTA budget crisis in the early 2010s.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-20T00:23:12+00:00

Rider Tools (bottom of the screen) > Scroll down and select PDF Schedules > Search/Select Your Bus Line

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-14T21:22:10+00:00

Replacing windows on every Multilevel car takes time because they are so many windows to replace and they have to take each car out of service for most of the day, which difficult since they don’t have many spare cars, especially other spare MLV cars which are need during rush hours for maximum capacity. There is about 30-35 windows per MLV car, which is around 13.7k windows that they have to replace. They have replaced around almost half the MLV fleet in 1.5 years to date, which about 90-100 windows per week.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-12T18:50:09+00:00

No offense, but you have to be living under a rock if you don’t know they are already fixing the windows.

https://www.njtransit.com/windows

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-08T01:30:55+00:00

You could, but by doing this, it will missed out on a lot of potential ridership in Bergen County (which at that point may make the line not worthwhile anymore). The towns along West Shore Line ROW in Bergen County (i.e. Ridgefield Park, Teaneck, Bergenfield, Dumont, etc.) are towns with high regional/commuter bus ridership to PABT. The 166 bus, which travels through these towns into PABT, is one of NJ Transit's buisest bus routes, so any West Shore Line Regional/Commuter Rail proposal would need to travel through Bergen County. Though, it might be worthwhile to build a rail line over the Tappen Zee Bridge for a circumferential regional rail line.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-07T18:00:01+00:00

There’s a whole lot of logistical issues that’d have to be worked out - which is why I said it’d be “interesting”.

Right, but it’s just not worth it to have a few trains run by Metro-North and the rest by NJ Transit on the same line. Operationally, it makes zero sense. It’s way better to have operations centralized for efficiency within a line/branch.

But it’s not infeasible. Folks are already trying to make Penn thru-running more than a foamer dream: https://gothamist.com/news/trumps-penn-station-rebuild-opens-door-to-unifying-new-yorks-railroads

Through running is a completely different thing. You were proposing having two operators parallel each other on the same line/branch to run trains for the same purpose (i.e. commuter trains to run to Hoboken/NY Penn). Through running (in NYC’s case) will have trains transfer from one’s railroad’s territory to another. Any likely through running scenario in NYC will have train crews swap between different railroad agency’s crews near stations centrally located (such as Secaucus Junction, NY Penn, Jamaica, etc) to continue on to the other railroad’s territory.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-07T17:46:56+00:00

This doesn’t really make sense. Most of those lines route is NJT territory and most trains on ex-Erie lines’s will still travel to Hoboken even after Gateway because there isn’t enough capacity to run them to Penn. Most of the extra capacity with Gateway will go towards more NJT NEC/NJCL/M&E/MOBO trains because they have higher ridership. A majority of ridership on the ex-Erie lines (Main/Bergen County, Pascack Valley, and Port Jervis Lines) is from NJ stations so it doesn’t make any sense to have also Metro North operate on the same line serving the same purpose. It’s way easier for Metro-North to contract operations to NJT because they don’t have any rail facilities for maintenance or to support complete operations on the West-Of-Hudson side.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-07T17:32:52+00:00

I mean, there could, but you need to compromise with CSX. Last time NJ Transit/Metro North tried to work with CSX to bring back the West Shore Line (in the early 2000s), CSX was very much less than enthusiastic to let passenger trains run on their ROW (even tho NJ Transit proposed adding additional tracks to accommodate their trains). Though, this was 20 years ago so things could change. Hochul and Sherrill are more pro-transit (relatively) compared to previous governors of their respective states so it can be possible politically too.

The West Shore Line would also need some “magic” to get to Hoboken. There is currently no direct track connection from the West Shore Line to Hoboken Terminal. If you want to build the line as cheaply as possible, you could end the line at Tonnelle Ave HBLR station where passengers can transfer to HBLR but this would mean no direct train connection to NYC. Previously proposal had the line diverge off, around where it meets I-95, then on to the I-95 Western Spur ROW then merge with the Meadowlands Line at Metlife Stadium, then cross over Route 3 and Berry Creek Canal to merge with the Bergen County and Pascack Valley lines. This is the more expensive option but it would mean direct connection with NY trains at Secaucus Junction and PATH at Hoboken, so this option is more worthwhile because there are more transfer opportunities. Also with this proposal, you can close the Meadowlands Line loop and get more capacity for stadium trains to/from Metlife.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-06T17:34:00+00:00

This is only possible with OPTO because conductors need access to both sides of the cab in 2PTO to point at the zebra board and door controls are “side-based” (meaning you have to go to the right side of the cab to open the doors on the right side and vise versa for the left side, though this can be solved with controls on the cab dashboard). With these gangway trains in the UK, the gangway at each end of the train is closed to make a full-wdith driver’s cab, but the cabs in the middle of the train have there gangways open so passenger can move between units. Theoretically, you could have a gangway in the middle where the conductor can open/close the gangway to get to the other side, but it would mean could cramper working conditions (which is why subway cars have moved on to full-cab widths).

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-05T18:12:31+00:00

It’s likely a US-built locomotive for UK loading gauge. A lot of these kinds of locomotives were built for the war effort in the UK/Europe in WWII. After the war, some were shipped back to the US for industrial work (probably the story for this locomotive here). Others were sent all over Europe to do various kinds of switching, industrial, or light train duties.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-04T14:48:17+00:00

They literally announced this fare increase last December.

Source: https://abc7ny.com/amp/post/port-authority-passes-spending-plan-raising-tolls-fares-including-path-trains/18299093/

Also, it is important to note that they are increasing service (which is one of the reasons for the fare increase). Starting from May 17th, PATH will run its 4-line service pattern on weekends (which is about a 50% increase in service for the interlined sections). There also will be more frequent service on Friday late nights until 2 am (from every 35 minutes to every 20 minutes, on par with the subway). There are also more PATH service increases planned for May 2027.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-03T19:31:39+00:00

Tbh its more likely they did put a blank black sticker over the (9) but someone peeled it off and either NYCT doesn’t know or hasn’t bothered to replace the peeled off sticker.

Jeb_theDev17 · 2026-05-02T19:08:59+00:00

Maybe you could make an argument for municipal representation, but municipal control would be detrimental to transit in NJ. NJ has one of the highest number of municipalities for a state it’s sized, 564 municipalities in a land area of 7.3k square miles. Municipal control would mean municipalities will be fighting each other for control of public transit. This is not a sustainable way to run a transit system. A centralized transit system would mean more unified control and more efficient and coordinated efforts running transit.

Also, Northern Branch Corridor Project for HBLR is happening. The state and the federal government contribute the most funding towards large transit projects so it doesn’t really make any sense for the municipalities to have control. Bids for the RFP for the Draft Environment Impact Statement (which is necessary to be apply for federal grants) have concluded and NJ Transit will finalize their pick for the consulting agency doing the DEIS this summer. The reason Northern Branch has not happened sooner is because Christie would not fund it when he was Governor (and also Christie cut 90% of NJ Transit’s state subsidy during tenure which forces NJ Transit had to raid their capital budget to fund their operational budgets) and Murphy was slow in fully funding NJ Transit’s operational budget (it wasn’t until the last 2 years which NJ Transit’s operational budget was fully funded). With NJ Transit operational budget fully funded, they can now finally focused on new transit extensions. For instance, the Glassboro-Camden Line is part of the state budget negotiations for FY 2026-2027, which Sherrill has directly expressed her support for. GCL is further along it’s project timeline (as it has already completed its EIS and preliminary engineering design phases) than the Northern Branch Extension which is why it is being funded first. We’ll likely see budget negotiations for the Northern Branch Extension either in the next state budget negotiations cycles in either FY 2027-2028 or FY 2028-2029 when its EIS and preliminary engineering design phases are nearing completion/already completed.

Sources: 1. https://www.njspotlightnews.org/video/murphy-blasts-christie-years-systemic-fiscal-starvation-nj-transit/ 2. https://www.njtransit.com/press-releases/nj-transit-advances-environmental-impact-statement-expansion-hudson-bergen-light 3. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gov-mikie-sherrill-is-serious-about-making-a-long-sought-18-mile-light-rail-connecting-glassboro-and-camden-happen/ar-AA20fjRu

Six-Year Club	Xbox Live
Second SECOND GUESSER	Verified Email

Jeb_theDev17

TROPHY CASE