Brooklyn and Queens have more residents than Manhattan yet have only a single dedicated subway service connecting them, the maligned G Train. All of the other lines run to and from Manhattan. Providing a circumferential mass transit link between the two boroughs would reduce travel times and boost ridership on all subway routes connecting to the new line. Fortunately, there is an existing right of way, the Bay Bridge Branch, which provides a circumferential route. The line is owned by a public entity, the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) and is only used for a few freight train trips per day operated by the New York and Atlantic Railway (NYA).
While the proposal contemplates different transportation modes, buses, light rail and conventional rail, the latter is the superior option. First, freight trains can use the same track as the passengers use so a third track along the entire route would not be required. Second, conventional rail does not require physical separation between freight trains, providing significant construction savings.
Passenger Infrastructure
Although the MTA assumes third rail electrification, the line should use overhead catenary wires instead. The line was electrified with this technology in 1927 although it was removed in 1968. This would simplify a future extension to the Bronx which uses the same catenary. Third rail is not as efficient as catenary at higher speeds and all new construction conventional rail lines use catenary for that reason. Two passenger tracks would the entire length of the line and have numerous crossovers to allow late night single track operations for maintenance and to allow freight trains to access customers.
The line should construct a passenger railcar storage yard at 65th St and convert space under the Bay Ridge Air Rights buildings into maintenance facilities. The yard is owned by the city of New York and only half it is is used.
Each station should have platform screen doors to prevent people from falling on the tracks. This would also discourage people from hopping on passing freight trains which would be relatively easy from a high platform and due to slow speeds. Freight cars are slightly wider than passenger cars and if operated at higher speeds, they will jostle around and scratch the platform edges.
While the proposal states all platforms would be high level, the MTA should use island platforms in as many locations as possible to save money. While some freight railcars such double-stack cars are too wide for high platforms, the NYA operates throughout Long Island next to high platforms without any problem, they do not operate wider railcars due to other clearance issues nor do their trains operate at higher speeds. Only three stations would require NYA trains to run adjacent to platforms at Avenue I, Avenue H and Flatbush Ave.
Almost all stations would be built within the existing right of way and at grade. However, the line passes under Broadway Junction via four single-track tunnels. While it may be tempting to skip this station due to perceived challenges building underground, it is too busy, hosting more than 100,00 passengers per day. I propose retaining track 1 for freight service only and using tracks 2 and 4 for passenger service. Track 3 would become an island platform between tracks 2 and 4 and would only require digging small openings to the train doors. Platform screen doors would be required. The line would connect via stairs and elevators directly to the IND platforms and the IND mezzanine.
Freight infrastructure and operations
The NYA is well-versed in operating on lines with lots of passenger trains. The LIRR dispatchers can give NYA crews as little as 15 minutes to serve a local customer. NYA uses the Bay Ridge Branch to connect to their railcar float at 65th St Yard, allowing cars to be barged to New Jersey instead going north to Albany to cross the Hudson River. The NYA also uses the line to serve local customers in the Brooklyn Army Terminal and Brooklyn Marine Terminal and serve five trackside customers between Broadway Junction and 2nd Ave. Per the MTA, the NYA makes one! round-trip per day on the Bay Ridge Branch.
While the NYA uses a single track along much of the corridor, the MTA claims that one, preferrable two exclusive freight tracks are required along the entire corridor to accomodate future freight growth. The MTA claims that a cross-harbor freight tunnel would increase the number of freight trains to over 21 per day. First proposed in the 1920's, this tunnel has never been financially feasible and is unlikely to ever be constructed. Even if it was built, most of that new freight traffic would have to operate during offpeak hours if it wanted to go east of Jamaica or north of Hellgate Bridge because the high passenger volume precludes freight service during peak hours. The largest US freight railroads have large portions of single track along their busy main lines so the MTA's assumption that the NYA cannot operate with one track is a costly falsehood.
Between the Lower Montauk Branch and Broadway Junction, I propose two freight tracks on the east side of the passenger tracks. The freight line would narrow to one track through the East New York Tunnel under Broadway Junction. South of that tunnel to Ralph Ave, two freight tracks would be retained on the east side. Freight customers Agristar and M&M would retain dedicated sidings and M&M’s siding would have increased spacing or even a wall to ensure the materials from the top-loading cars do not spill onto the passenger trains. Access to those customers would be only during offpeak hours which is how the NYA serves many of its other customers today. Between Ralph Ave and 62nd St, there is only space for two tracks so freight trains and passenger trains would have to share space for about 3.25 miles. Since the line is owned by the LIRR, they could only dispatch the NY&A’s approximately single daily freight train during off-peak hours. From 62nd St to the 65th St Yard, there is space for two freight tracks.
North of the Lower Montauk Branch, the line is called the Fremont Industrial track and owned by CSX. Built to accomodate two tracks, the line has one track today. Between one and three daily roundtrips are made to the NYA's Fresh Pond Yard on the Lower Montauk Branch. Since the Fremont Industrial track crosses over the Lower Montauk Branch via a bridge and there is no direct connecting track, the freight track must stop just south of the bridge, detach the CSX locomotive, and the NYA locomotive must then attach to the freight train and reverse back into the Fresh Pond Yard.
This is a time-consuming interchange which is not compatible with passenger trains. I propose acquiring the Fremont Industrial track between the Lower Montauk to Hellgate Bridge from CSX and rerouting most freight trains via the Harold Interlocking to the western end of the Lower Montauk Branch in Long Island City. While this is a longer route and would require freight trains per day to mingle with passenger trains during off peak hours, there are just 1-3 freight trains per day. The freight trains could also operate slightly faster on the higher quality passenger tracks and would not have to reverse into Fresh Pond Yard, saving CSX and NYA a significant amount of time and effort. NYA's curve has radius of 300', requiring specialized locomotives to handle the curve and lubricators to reduce noise so retiring it from most manoevers would likely be welcomed.
One operator per trainset
Both the LIRR and Metro North Railroad (MNR) suffer from high operating costs. While some of that cost relates to different inspection and maintenance standards for conventional rail compared to subways or buses, much of it is due to having two or more crew on board. In addition to an engineer driving the train, both the LIRR and MNR use one or more conductors to check tickets, just like the first passengers trains did in the 1830s. Most urban railroads have replaced conductors with faregates and deploy some inspectors to randomly verify people have tickets. Since most passengers would likely be traveling only a few stops, it would be difficult for conductors to check tickets before people arrived at their next stop. Operating trains with engineers alone would reduce operating costs to allow more service.
Rolling stock
The MTA falsely assumes that conventional rail is slower than light rail, likely relying on sluggish performance by their existing LIRR rolling stock. This project would take advantage of new federal rules allowing lighter-Euro spec rolling stock with high acceleration. Each railcar should have at least three doors to speed up loading and unloading. The MTA proposes longitudinal seating like on the subway and due to the short distances, the trainsets do not require restrooms. Initial trainsets should be about 510’ long but expandable to longer lengths. Phase I would require 18 trainsets for revenue service and 4 spare trainsets.
Travel time and timetable
The MTA calls for trains running every five minutes, 12 trains per hour. Running this frequency all day long would reduce transfer times between the subways, reducing travel time to make the service more attractive. I propose running that 12 trains per hour frequency between 6 AM and 11 PM. Overnight, trains would run every 15 minutes or 4 trains per hour to allow passenger trains to operate on one track and freight trains or maintenance to occur on the adjacent track. While the MTA estimates a 45-minute long trip, I estimated that a high-performance trainset could make the 14.8-mile trip in about 35 minutes, averaging 25 mph, more than 8 mph faster than the subway’s average speed.
Conclusion
By abandoned some misconceptions about conventional railcar performance, need for a dedicated freight track and better understanding how freight rail actually works, the Interborough Express could be a model for how to build a faster, cheaper transit project.
