A Not-So-Capital Plan, Part 2:

The Future is Electric

December 16, 2024

Part 2 of a look at the MTA’s 2025-29 Capital Plan. Read Part 1 Here.

Metro-North’s M8 can run on catenary power (top) or on either over- or under-running third rails (shoe seen at bottom) [1].

Metro-North’s M8 can run on catenary power (top) or on either over- or under-running third rails (shoe seen at bottom)

Introduction

In major cities all across the globe, electric trains form the backbone of urban transportation. The benefits of electrification are simply too great to ignore. Electric trains accelerate faster, reduce overall journey times, and provide a higher-quality passenger experience than their diesel-powered counterparts, all while being cheaper to run and maintain. Electric trains are also a powerful tool for decarbonization: they can easily run on non-carbon fuel sources and produce no local pollution. It is rare that a single technology can reduce both pollution and costs while also actually improving service, but electric rail can accomplish just that. That is why the future of rail is electric around both the country and the world.

The New York region has significantly benefited from having a largely (but not completely) electrified commuter rail network as a foundation. But although the MTA's new 2025-2029 Capital Plan proposes spending $3.3 billion on new trains for both the Long Island and Metro-North Railroads, this major investment comes with no provision for the expansion of electrified service. Instead, the agency plans to double down on diesel, purchasing a new fleet of slow, unreliable, expensive, and dirty diesel locomotives and coaches. 

While this might seem like a cheaper solution in the short term, these cars will almost certainly cost more over their lifetime than would an ongoing project of electrification. Electric trains have much lower lifecycle costs than their diesel counterparts, and the peak traffic on most diesel lines already justifies the capital cost of electrification even without the environmental benefits. Worse, given that many of these new train cars could be in service until the 2080s, making the wrong decision now could stand in the way of electrification for decades. The MTA can no longer afford to maintain a siloed approach to planning, with rolling stock acquisition, fixed capital investment (like electrification), and service planning all existing as separate spheres. Instead, the region needs to be forward-looking and integrate all these fields and more into comprehensive plans that will improve service and reduce costs over the long term.

This status quo conservatism is not just related to electrification either. As ETA and others have argued in the past, greater New York's commuter rail is already designed to enable something that many other cities spend billions to achieve: a through-running regional transit system. Whether or not such a project is on the table in the immediate future, now is the time for the MTA to be proactive, laying the groundwork by purchasing trains that can operate anywhere in the region. Even if a through-running system never comes to fruition, these cars would offer significant benefits at almost no price premium. Ordering a large number of cars that can operate anywhere in the region would not only save a significant amount on maintenance, but would provide a tremendous level of operational flexibility, allowing trains to run wherever they are needed.

Ultimately, any capital plan is a vision for the future. New York may be blessed with a great transportation network to build upon, but that doesn't mean we can rest on our laurels. New Yorkers need and deserve something better than the status quo. This needn't be any form of a massive project; rather, it can be a step-by-step process of constant improvement, taking one piece at a time. To achieve that kind of vision, however, our capital plans need to integrate rolling stock procurement, infrastructure investment, and service design into a single, forward-looking plan.

Greater New York should be a beacon for the rest of the country, an example that demonstrates not only how to make mass transit work, but that mass transit works. ETA envisions a regional commuter rail system that, by the mid-2030s, will run through between core LIRR, Metro-North, and NJ Transit lines. This service would provide faster and more frequent service between the suburbs, Penn Station, Grand Central, and other destinations. Such a service can be more reliable with lower operating costs than today’s thanks to the purchase of a fleet of cutting-edge, 21st-century electric multiple units (EMUs). Achieving that goal requires us to stop following the path of least resistance today, and instead make the right decisions that will pave the way for a better future.

Commuter Rail Electrification

As ETA has argued in detail to the US Department of Energy, electric traction is by far the most beneficial rail propulsion technology, especially for high-frequency local operations like commuter rail. The German technical association VDE produced a recent study, which found that the tipping point at which full electrification provides a better return on investment than partial electrification with batteries or diesel traction, is about two 2-car trains per hour at the peak. Today, every unelectrified LIRR and Metro-North branch meets this standard at the peak except for the very tails of the lines between Ronkonkoma-Greenport and Speonk-Montauk. That said, as we’ll see below, even these sections would still benefit from electrification, which would allow them to use a common fleet shared with the rest of the system.

The MTA’s currently non-electrified branches. Map created by Kara Fischer.

The MTA should already be keenly aware of the benefits of electrification. It is part of the reason why the agency’s predecessor railroads began electrifying their lines all the way back in 1903. It is also why the agency expanded electrification in the 1970s and 80s, as suburban sprawl drove ridership growth around outer stations. Unfortunately, the MTA’s electrification program has since stalled. Instead, the new capital plan aims to purchase new diesel locomotives and unpowered coaches at high cost, making no mention of electrification.

The 2025-2029 Capital Plan does not break down the costs of the commuter rail rolling stock by type of car. However, we can impute them from the historic costs of the LIRR’s newest EMUs, the M9s, and the costs of diesel locomotives and unpowered coaches in the 2020-2024 Capital Plan. The M9s, which have had significant teething problems and were delivered late, averaged $4.22 million/car in 2023 dollars, a cost of $163,000/m. This is a significant premium over their predecessors, the M7s, which cost $121,000/m, as well as Metro-North’s M8s, which cost $112,000/m. And yet, the electric M9 is still much cheaper to acquire, operate, and maintain than the diesel locomotives and coaches the MTA is proposing. As far as we can tell, the combination of diesel locomotives, dual-mode locomotives, and unpowered coaches would cost, per length of passenger car, around $210,000/m for single-deck cars and $280,000/m for double-deckers, roughly proportional to seated capacity [4]. Put simply, diesel equipment not only offers worse performance, but costs significantly more to acquire.

Maintaining the diesel tails that exist at the end of the almost entirely electrified LIRR and Metro-North networks also comes with a significant price tag. Operating a small diesel fleet costs a disproportionate amount of money to maintain and requires separate, inefficient crew shifts to operate. On the LIRR, for example, one diesel crew shift might consist of a single one-way trip from Eastern Long Island to Penn Station over 2.5 hours, returning without paying passengers. Moreover, the poor acceleration inherent to locomotives and diesel equipment means longer run times, which increases operating costs, reduces ridership, and depresses ticket revenue by making service less appealing. By way of comparison, one of the MTA’s sibling organizations, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Administration (MBTA), has been reluctant to electrify any of its operations because doing so would require it to replace its all-diesel fleet with two separate fleets. This same logic should compel both the LIRR and Metro-North to undertake a rolling program leading to complete electrification, making strategic use of existing and in production diesel equipment as electrification is underway.

Third Rail and Catenary

One of the reasons the MTA has been reluctant to electrify the LIRR and Metro-North is that both railroads are electrified by third rail, except for the New Haven Line. As a result, the MTA has understandably planned electrification projects assuming the continued use of third rail. Unfortunately, third rail electrification is comparatively very expensive to build and maintain. Accordingly, it is extremely rare around the world to extend third rail installations in commuter rail systems in commuter rail systems these days—indeed, we are not aware of any current project globally. Instead, it’s far more common for rail operators to extend electrification via high-voltage, overhead catenary, and then procure dual-voltage trains [5], as was done, for example, in Hamburg.

There are two primary reasons to use overhead catenary instead of third rail for new electrification projects:

First, the construction costs of third rail are significantly higher. The LIRR has reported that the cost to electrify the Port Jefferson Branch, the busiest diesel line in the system, would be $18 million/route-mile. Likewise, the 2020-2024 Capital Plan projected a $32 million/route-mile cost to electrify the single-track Central Branch. In contrast, the University of Texas’s TRAIN center, working with the FRA, has produced a new report looking at the BNSF Southern Transcon, finding that it could be wired with catenary for approximately $3 million/route-mile, while a NEMA study has projected $2 million/route-mile nationwide to electrify using catenary [6]. While the LIRR is a busy railroad, meaning its costs will probably be near the upper end of this range due to the need to avoid disrupting passenger service, the Southern Transcon is the busiest intermodal freight trunk in the country. It runs 60 trains per day per direction, each pulled by 3–4 locomotives on average, whereas the Port Jefferson Branch only runs 20 trains per day per direction with a single locomotive (and even if the line ran peak service all day, it would still only run 35). What’s more, one of the major factors affecting the cost of electrification is power requirements. Since the Southern Transcon requires much more power, wiring it will likely be more expensive than the LIRR branches.

The reason for the cost discrepancy is that low-voltage electrification systems like third rail require dramatically more substations, because each one can only power a few miles of track. By contrast, a substation feeding high-voltage AC to an overhead wire can instead cover tens of route-miles each. More frequent substations and associated transmission (connecting the right-of-way to the substations, and the substations to the grid) drive the cost of new third rail far higher than new overhead wire.

A third rail substation on the LIRR Main Line.

Third rail systems require many more power substations, like this one on the LIRR Main Line [7].

The second reason new electrification should be done with catenary is reduced maintenance costs and complexity. With third rail, just about any track-level maintenance requires cutting power, and thus the work trains must run on diesel or batteries. By contrast, since overhead wire is out of the way of both equipment and workers, it can safely be kept powered on during many maintenance operations, reducing outages, saving time, and lowering costs. Overhead wire is also more compatible with track renewal machines, which automate ground-level track renewal (of rails, ties, and ballast) when there is no third rail in the way. Automatic renewal is both faster and cheaper to complete.

Furthermore, catenary is more resilient to flooding than third rail, simply by virtue of being much higher up. Flooding is a major concern for low-lying lines on the coast, such as the Hudson Line. Significant effort and funding is being spent to make the Hudson Line flooding resilient, and catenary would help significantly with this.

Fortunately, thanks to the wide availability of trains that can switch between third rail and overhead lines on the move, it is possible for the LIRR and Metro-North to electrify with catenary, even on lines whose inner sections use third rail. The MTA is already well-acquainted with this setup, as it has been used on Metro-North’s New Haven Line since the line was first electrified in 1907. 

The biggest concern with this approach is that the M8s, the current dual-voltage trains in use at the MTA, are too tall to fit through the 63rd Street Tunnel, used by LIRR trains to reach Grand Central Madison. Many off-the-shelf trains from around the world, however, would fit with room to spare. Consider the Class 319 in London, the first generation of rolling stock for that city’s Thameslink project. Thameslink connected catenary-powered lines north of London with third rail electrified lines to its south. The Class 319 has a maximum height of 12' 5" above the top of the rail with the pantograph lowered, which has remained the standard for new dual-voltage trains since. Thus, even though London platform heights are lower, similar trains could easily be raised to meet US platform standards while still fitting through the 63rd Street Tunnel. For example, the Class 700 Desiro suburban trains currently serving London have floors 44" above the top of the rail, while the Northeastern US standard is 51". A similar unit built for the US would then be only 13' tall. The Class 395 Javelins used on High Speed 1 for commuter services have a floor height of 4' 0.6" and would only need to be raised by 2.4" from its height of 12' 6.3". Given that the LIRR’s current M7 trains, which were designed to fit in the 63rd Street Tunnel, are 13' 3", these trainsets would have no trouble navigating New York’s tightest commuter rail tunnel.

The lower level of the 63rd Street Tunnel.

63rd Street Tunnel, lower level (LIRR level) in the under-river tube section [8].

To put the issue of electrification in context, the entire 155-mile railroad from New Haven to Boston was electrified in about four years from the start to the end of construction. This included wiring complicated facilities like the Southampton shops and the entirety of South Station. Thankfully, New York needs nothing on that scale: almost all its lines are already significantly electrified, and all of the region’s large shop facilities and terminals have either catenary, third rail, or both. With multiple lines to electrify and a rolling program, the MTA should be able to electrify all of its remaining lines within a 10- to 15-year timespan spending no more than a few hundred million dollars a year. This small investment will pay for itself, not just through long-term rolling stock acquisition and cost savings, but immediately in improved passenger service.

Station Upgrades

Modern rolling stock requires stations to have consistent platform heights. Uniform high platforms offer incredible benefits, including accessibility, faster boarding and alighting, a better rider experience, and rolling stock simplicity. The MTA’s own history points to the value of high platforms. During the 1960s and 70s, for example, when the LIRR purchased the then state-of-the-art electric M1 trainsets, it raised all the platforms in electric territory to a height of 48”. It completed installing high platforms beyond electric territory in the 1990s.

Metro-North has largely done the same on its stations, but there are a few gaps as some low-platform or very short high-platform stations remain. Since all of these stations exist beyond the end of current electrification, it is important to make sure that they are rebuilt at the same time as electrification.

Left: The low platform at Harriman station. Right: The low platform at Manitou station

Below: The high platform constructed by the MTA at Rye on Metro-North’s New Haven Line [9].

The remaining gaps include:

  • Breakneck Ridge, Manitou, and Appalachian Trail, which are all limited-service stops, and the first of which is already scheduled to get a high platform

  • Several stations on the Waterbury Branch in Connecticut

  • Several stations on west-of-Hudson lines

As nearly all of the remaining low-platform stations are in Connecticut or west of the Hudson, the MTA and Metro-North would need to work alongside both NJ Transit and Connecticut DOT to complete the installation of high platforms.

The M10: One Car for the Region

ETA strongly recommends that the MTA procure a single type of commuter rail rolling stock for future service, one which can run on all electrified parts of the region’s rail network and adheres as closely as possible to an existing international model. Following the MTA’s rolling stock naming system, this car would most likely be known as the M10. Trains that operate on multiple electrical systems have only a very small cost premium over rolling stock designed for a single system, to the point that the premium is not visible on Transit Costs Project’s international rolling stock cost database. This can already be seen on Metro-North itself, whose dual-mode M8s are cheaper than both the M7 and M9.

At the same time, ETA recommends against designing a new train. More often than not, large cities overspecify their designs, leading to large cost premiums such as those in Paris and Berlin. Smaller and more peripheral cities, conversely, such as those in Italy and the Nordic countries, tend to buy off the shelf and pay less, despite buying from the same European supply chains. Thus, the MTA should buy production trains made by major international vendors, modified only for modular elements such as the loading gauge and electrification. These include train models such as the high-floor Siemens Desiro/Mireo, Stadler FLIRT, Hitachi A-train, CAF Civity/Civia, or Alstom Aventra/Coradia. These standard trains can be made with the following specifications:

Left: A 12-car, high-floor EMU Stadler FLIRT Class 745 operating in Greater Anglia.. Right: A 12-car, high-floor, dual-voltage EMU Siemens Desiro City Class 700 [10].

  • A common fleet, able to operate under all electrification systems in the region and all current and future signal systems [11]:

  • 12 kV 25 Hz AC overhead line (Northeast Corridor (NEC) south of Hell Gate, North Jersey Coast Line (NJCL) north of Aberdeen-Matawan, SEPTA territory [12])

  • 12.5 kV 60 Hz AC overhead line (Metro-North Pelham to New Haven, Amtrak Hell Gate Line to New Rochelle, Metro-North New Canaan Branch)

  • 25 kV 60 Hz AC overhead line (Morris and Essex Line and NJCL beyond Aberdeen-Matawan, Amtrak New Haven To Boston)

  • 750 V DC overrunning third rail (the rest of electrified Metro-North)

  • 750 V DC underrunning third rail (electrified LIRR)

  • A maximum roof height of 13' 3" in order to fit in the 63rd Street Tunnel.

  • Modern performance specs, including a maximum speed of 125 mph [13], a peak power-to-empty AW0 [14] weight ratio of about 22 hp/short ton (18 W/kg), and an initial acceleration of at least 2.5 mph/s.

  • Modern passenger information screens, as described in Part 1.

  • Permanently-coupled units with open gangways between cars, allowing for free passenger movement. Ideally, units should be procured as 4 and 6-car length equivalent sets rather than today’s practice of married pairs. With married pairs, every train car contains one set of control equipment, most of which are rarely used. Sets of 4 or more cars not only result in fewer unused cabs, but give passengers more room in the cars, increasing capacity while simplifying movement between cars thanks to more open gangways. With these 4 and 6-car sets, one or two of them can be coupled into trains of 4, 6, 8, 10, or 12 cars, with each permanently-coupled set having one pantograph active  at a time [15]. If the MTA believes there are fire safety concerns with longer open gangway trains, then fire suppression systems as we outline in Part 1 should be added.

  • On-board cameras that train crew have access to, as explained in Part 1.

  • Built-in support for one- and two-person crews for trains up to 12 cars long. While labor conditions currently prohibit operating trains with such small crews, any new train will be around for decades, and new equipment should be able to meet modern operating standards should labor relations allow it.

  • A mean distance between failure (MDBF) matching that of the M8s; the 12-month harmonic average ending September 2024 is 712,000 miles (metrics.mta.info__mnr_meandistancebetweenfailures_m8.png) [16]

A Fallback Option, with Drawbacks

Ultimately, the only right path forward is full electrification of the MTA commuter rail network. It is not only the best answer for passengers and for the environment, but the most cost-effective approach, as well. 

In the interim, if the remaining diesel fleet reaches end-of-life before full electrification is complete, the MTA should under no circumstances order any more coaches or locomotives. For modern transit operations, locomotives and coaches are simply too slow and too expensive. Instead, all rolling stock orders going forward must be multiple units (MUs). There are a number of modern train families that can operate on alternative sources of power while maintaining interoperability with their EMU counterparts. These include dual-mode diesel-electric trains (DEMUs), dual-mode battery-electric trains (BEMUs), and even a combination: tri-mode BDEMUs. If there is a gap between when electrification is completed and new rolling stock is required, the MTA may want to consider one of these options, although they come with cost, performance, and space impacts.

One of the greatest benefits that MUs provide is distributed traction, which is a major reason that practically all urban and suburban electric railways around the world use EMUs. By placing motors throughout the train, distributed traction provides far higher rates of acceleration than a locomotive can provide thanks to the higher traction power it affords. By using EMUs as a base, DEMUs can offer the same performance as EMUs when running in electric mode, and BEMUs offer close performance. As an example, a DEMU Stadler FLIRT like the Class 755/3 can accelerate at 2.9 mph/s in electric mode and 2 mph/s in diesel mode [17]. In comparison, Metro-North locomotives like the P32 accelerate at only 0.262 mph/s in diesel mode and 0.195 mph/s in electric mode with a typical set in tow [18], an order of magnitude slower, while the pure-diesel Metro-North BL20 locomotive can accelerate a shorter train at 0.77 mph/s in diesel mode [19]. In both electric and diesel territory, dual-mode MUs will be able to accelerate significantly faster than locomotives, albeit with somewhat reduced performance on diesel territory compared to EMUs until electrification is completed. Thus, dual-mode MUs would enable faster journeys for riders and tighter scheduling around electric service, increasing capacity, just as pure EMUs would. And as soon as any new tracks are wired, dual-mode MUs would be able to immediately reap the benefits.

Because they are based on EMUs, dual-mode MUs would also provide a seamless transition to a full electric service once electrification is complete: all that would need to be done is to remove the batteries or diesel generators. For example, Britain’s Class 755 is a DEMU that is essentially the same as its Class 745 sibling, only with the addition of a diesel powerpack car allowing it to operate under its own power. This powerpack can be added to a Class 745, turning it into a Class 755. Models like some Stadler FLIRTs follow this approach with a separate diesel and/or battery power car [20]; others, like the Hitachi HTR412 Blues, use generators/batteries mounted in the cars’ roofs or undercarriages. Roof/floor-mounted ones are potentially removable, but leave the space wasted afterward, while powerpack cars add extra train length [21], but are more easily and fully removable. With the powerpacks detached [22], the dual-mode MU becomes a normal EMU. In contrast, with locomotives and coaches, the MTA would need to procure an all-new EMU fleet to replace them once electrification is complete. While the locomotives could likely be sold, the coaches likely could not, as most American commuter railroads use at least some low-level platforms.

Unlike locomotives, dual-mode MUs would be able to fit everywhere on the region’s commuter rail network, including into the 63rd Street Tunnel, the Atlantic Branch tunnel, and up the 3.5% grades into Grand Central Madison thanks to their increased traction. This would allow for a more unified fleet, so dual-mode MUs would be able to operate on the entire network, imposing fewer constraints on the system than the existing locomotives.

Among the available options, BEMUs are the most common. The current offerings, such as the Stadler FLIRT Akku, can be designed to offer a roundtrip range of 100 miles off-wire, allowing for trains to continue in service for 50 miles past the end of electrification regardless of weather [23]. This range is good enough for all east-of-Hudson Metro-North lines, and for all LIRR lines except the Montauk Line. If the MTA chooses to purchase BEMUs, it might consider electrifying the Montauk Line from Babylon to Speonk first, which would allow BEMUs to then continue to operate all the way out to Montauk.

Left: A Siemens Mireo Plus B BEMU. Right: A Stadler FLIRT Class 755/3 DEMU operating in Greater Anglia. The diesel powerpack can be seen in between the passenger cars [24].

The main drawback of dual-mode MUs is their expense. Stadler has sold FLIRT 3XL EMUs in Bremen for $104,000/m [25] and Hanover for $110,000/m [26], Austrian FLIRT Akku BEMUs are $249,000/m [27], and Chicago’s Metra’s FLIRT BEMUs are $197,000/m [28]. We do not have precise costs for DEMUs, but the joint Class 745 and 755 order is $152,000/m [29] and the tri-mode BDEMU HTR412 order is $151,000/m [30].

There are also significant operating and maintenance cost premiums for trains other than EMUs, and environmental costs of diesel. We don’t have precise data on operating costs, but the VDE study’s break-even point for overhead electrification takes that into account, as well as the environmental costs of diesel. Diesel engines, whether in locomotives or MUs, produce carbon emissions and release harmful particulates that exact health and environmental costs. In the long run, these environmental issues will require the retirement of all diesel equipment. Finally, dual-mode and tri-mode MUs are far more complicated and bring far higher maintenance costs than pure electric trains. The MDBF of diesel engines, for instance, is an order of magnitude lower than that of EMUs, resulting in more breakdowns in service and more money spent on maintenance. The VDE study takes these costs into account in its analysis recommending wiring if the peak frequency is at least two 2-car trains per hour.

Ultimately, electrification is the only truly effective choice for the region’s commuter rail networks. It not only is far more mature than dual-mode and tri-mode MUs, but also requires the lowest long-term operating and capital costs, all while enabling the highest quality of passenger service. Even in the best case, however, electrification will take time and, like any infrastructure project, may see delays. Thus, before ordering any new dual-mode MUs, the MTA should analyze the expected lifespan of its current fleet to see if it can last until full electrification. As electrification progresses, the oldest and worst-performing diesel locomotives and coaches can be replaced with EMUs. If there is a risk that the existing locomotives and coaches cannot operate adequate service during this process, the MTA could then consider procuring the M10 with an option for diesel, battery, or diesel/battery powerpacks that could be attached as needed to the existing M10 EMUs in the shop. Additionally, the MTA could also procure a few pilot dual-mode MUs in the initial M10 order to build institutional experience with their operation if deemed necessary. This would allow as few dual-mode MUs to be procured as possible, likely reducing rolling stock costs significantly while also avoiding the worst teething problems that any new dual-mode MUs might experience.

Conclusion

The future of urban, suburban, and regional rail transit is electric. Electric trains are not only better for passengers, better for the environment, and easier to maintain, but also cheaper to procure and operate over their entire lifecycle than diesel locomotives and coaches. The benefits of electric traction are simply too large to ignore. The MTA can no longer simply follow the status quo, largely maintaining the system it operates as it has since its creation. It needs to plan for a brighter future with faster, more frequent commuter rail trips carrying greater numbers of people. That means capital plans that integrate all facets of transportation, from rolling stock to infrastructure investment to service planning. And above all, it means implementing a reasonable plan to electrify the remaining part of its commuter rails operations as quickly and inexpensively as possible.

The rolling stock that the MTA purchases for Metro-North and the LIRR in the 2025-2029 Capital Plan could affect the shape of the region’s commuter networks for the next fifty years. It is critical that the trains we purchase today are capable of services that may seem difficult now, such as through-running of trains across the region. Indeed, even if the future that ETA advocates for never comes to pass, these trains will bring operational savings and performance benefits all on their own. Thankfully, today’s rolling stock industry is full of capable manufacturers building largely off-the-shelf train families that can easily and cost-effectively meet the region’s needs. In this, New York doesn’t need to pioneer a bespoke design; we simply need to let ourselves benefit from the prevailing design and engineering work of others.

Going forward, it is imperative to coordinate and integrate rolling stock procurement with infrastructure and timetabling, as done in top-performing transit systems around the world. With federal funding for transit now in question for the coming years and New Yorkers rightfully skeptical of transit governance, the MTA has an opportunity to demonstrate what good transit governance looks like. By making the right decisions on rolling stock procurement and electrification today, the MTA can set Greater New York on a path to become a model for cities across the country in the years and decades to come.

Acknowledgements

We wish to acknowledge the following ETA members who contributed to this report:

  • Alon Levy

  • Blair Lorenzo

  • Darius Jankauskas

  • Kara Fischer

  • Khyber Sen

  • Madison Feinberg

  • Robert Hale

  • William Meehan

Footnotes

  1.  Interstate Railfan, “A Metro North M-8 EMU arrives at New Haven,” (August 28, 2018, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Interstate_Railfan_-_A_Metro_North_M-8_Arrives_at_New_Haven.jpg).
    Dannel Malloy, “Third rail contact shoe on MNCR M8 car #9101,” (January 22, 2017, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:M8_railcar_-9101_contact_shoe,_September_2016.jpg).

  2. The Port Jervis line would require NJ Transit’s Main and/or Bergen County lines to be electrified from Suffern, NY to Hoboken, NJ. These lines run a combined 6 trains per hour at peak with approximately 5 cars that are either single or double deck.

  3.  The Pascack Valley Line would also need to be electrified by NJ Transit from the New York state line to Hoboken, NJ.

  4.  This comes from subtracting $4.22 million/car from the 2025-2029 Capital Plan, and dividing by the number of coaches to be replaced, assuming that locomotives are replaced at a proportional rate (the LIRR is replacing all rolling stock, for one). The budgets in the 2025-2029 Capital Plan are assumed to incorporate 16% cumulative inflation from 2023.

  5. By dual-voltage, we mean trains can run both on low-voltage DC third rail with shoes and high-voltage AC catenary with pantographs. These are also known as multi-voltage.

  6.  We plan to release a report in 2025 discussing international best practices used for cost-effective catenary installation.

  7.  MTA image (October 28, 2021, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_Cassel_Substation_(51636624849).jpg).

  8. MTA, “Concrete fill placement around the DFF’s in the WB1 tunnel that connects the Manhattan caverns to Sunnyside yard in Queen” (March 5, 2018, https://flickr.com/photos/mtacc-esa/25896641447/).

  9.  MTAEnthusiast10, “A Port Jervis bound train made up of Comet V coaches leaving Harriman station” (September 15, 2020, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=100191924).
    Daniel Case, “Manitou train station,” (June 17, 2017, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3416532).
    Pi.1415926535, “Rye station viewed from the rear of a Grand Central-bound New Haven Line train in July 2019,” (July 31, 2019, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rye_station_from_passing_train,_July_2019.JPG).

  10. SavageKieran, "Greater Anglia's 745010 'FLIRT' arrives into Colchester working a Liverpool Street - Norwich service" (February 20, 2020 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greater_Anglia_745010_Colchester.jpg).

    Foulger Rail Photos, "Thameslink Class 700 155 at Peterborough," (August 7, 2021, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Thameslink_Class_700_155_at_Peterborough.jpg).

  11. This includes the current ACSES signaling, but should also be future proofed for future retrofits for higher-capacity, automatic train operation (ATO)-capable, moving-block signaling systems, such as ETCS L2+ or the PTC-certified Siemens Trainguard MT CBTC, as well as the ETMS system used by freight railroads in the region. High-frequency regional rail systems like Paris’ RER, London’s Crossrail, Copenhagen’s S-Train, and Mumbai’s Suburban Railway are all using or currently moving to CBTC. Others like Thameslink and RRTS are also using ATO, but under ETCS L2.3.0d or ETCS Hybrid L3, respectively.

  12.  Ex-Reading territory is on a separate 12 kV 25 Hz electrical system.

  13.  Many newer NJT trains are already designed to run at 110–125 mph on the NEC, so at least 110 mph should be required. But 125 mph could be achieved in the future on NJT NEC express trains and ease scheduling conflicts with Amtrak trains. 125 mph also gives more flexibility for future improvements, such as LIRR Main Line catenary (the track geometry is very straight) and potential future bypasses on the NEC north and south of NYC. Furthermore, most international rolling stock comes in 100 mph or 125 mph variants, so 125 mph is a natural choice that will likely not cost more than 110 mph.

  14.  AW0 refers to the weight of an empty car. AW1 is the weight with crews and all passenger seats occupied (175 lbs per person). AW2 is AW1 plus standees at 3 sq ft per standee, and AW3 is AW1 plus standees at 2 sq ft per standee.

  15.  This reduces the number of pantographs in contact with the wire, meaning the wire and pantograph wear down less quickly and snag less frequently. Internationally, one active and one backup pantograph per trainset is common.

  16.  This is imputed as a harmonic average over the 12 months October 2023-September 2024 inclusive.

  17.  This is average acceleration from 0-40 mph.

  18.  This is calculated from measurements of a P32 from 0-80 mph in 3.4 miles in diesel mode, and 10-60 mph in electric mode. The P32 dual mode locomotive was carrying 7 full cars. Locomotives in third rail mode are also compromised since the gaps between third rails in interlockings are often longer than the distance the shoes on the locomotive can span, which interrupts traction power. Future dual mode locomotives like the SC-42DM Charger are meant to improve the electric mode, but would still be much closer to a diesel locomotive than an EMU.

  19.  This is calculated from measurements of a BL20 from 0-40 mph in 52 seconds in diesel mode, carrying a short 3-car train set on a slight downgrade in the rain.

  20.  For example, the Stadler FLIRT Class 755 DEMU uses a diesel powerpack, Metra’s Stadler FLIRT BEMU uses a battery powerpack, and the Stadler FLIRT Class 756 BDEMU uses a combined battery-diesel powerpack.

  21.  The platforms should either already be long enough, or need to be lengthened as some of the trains that operate on these lines are longer than the platforms.

  22.  In the Stadler FLIRT case of Class 745/755-like trains, diesel and battery powerpacks are modular and interchangeable with other FLIRTs designed to be compatible. Thus, the diesel powerpacks could potentially be sold, perhaps to places like NJT, the MBTA, or Chicago’s Metra, who just purchased Stadler FLIRT BEMUs. Bilevel Stadler KISSes, like Caltrain’s, including their upcoming BEMU KISS order, are not compatible, however.

  23.  Stadler’s website states a range of up to 150 km (~93 miles), in any weather that occurs in Germany, specifically in Schleswig-Holstein, where winter temperatures are about 1-2° F warmer than in New York. (https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/first-of-many-battery-trains-enter-service-in-germany/)

  24. Plutowiki, “Siemens Mireo von DB Regio auf dem Eisenbahnversuchsring in Velim,” (April 26, 2019, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DB_BR_463_001_Velim.jpg).
    Steve Knight, “The River Colne Viaduct, at Chappel & Wakes Colne, Essex, UK,” (June 26, 2021, https://www.flickr.com/photos/kitmasterbloke/51273200450/).

  25.  The Bremen order was €100 million / (16 * 87 m) / 0.69 $/€ = $104k/m (ordered in 2022).

  26.  The Hanover order was €320 million / (64 * 68 m) / 0.69 $/€ * 1.03 = $110k/m (ordered in 2018, manufactured between 2020-2024).

  27.  Austria’s FLIRT Akku BEMUs are €1.3 billion / (120 * 63 m) / 0.69 $/€ = $249k/m (ordered in 2023).

  28.  The small combined Metra order (8 2-car BEMUs base order, 8 2-car BEMUs with 32 extra cars for the option) amounts to ($154 million + $181.4 million) / ((8 * 2 + 8 * 2 + 32) * 51.5 m / 2) / 1.034 = $197k/m (ordered in 2024). However, the addition of the 32 unpowered cars makes these BEMUs quite underpowered.

  29.  Comparable EMU and DEMU orders like the Class 745 and 755 are generally purchased in a single combined order, so the cost premium is difficult to ascertain. The combined cost of the 63% EMU order (with the first trains entering service in 2019) is £600 million/(20 * 236.6 m + 14 * 65 m + 24 * 80.7 m) / 0.67 $/£ * 1.28 = $151k/m. 

  30.  Italy’s small tri-mode BDEMU HTR412 order is ($65 million/(7 cars * 86.08 m/car)) / 0.688 / 1.034 = $152k/m, with the first trains entering service in 2024.

  31.  If electrification takes longer than expected and the locomotives will not last that long, if the MTA decides to increase peak service on the diesel branches, if there are decarbonization laws, or any other potential reason.