Talk:River Line (NJ Transit)

Conrail hours

Somebody might want to check on the hours that Conrail can run freight. I think they've changed since this was written.TimeriderTech 18:50, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

List of rapid transit systems

Hi Jfruh - I included this in See Also because River LINE is linked to from the List of rapid transit systems article, which, by the way includes many links to light rail articles. To be consistent I think that the link should be in this article, or else you should remove River LINE and all of the other light rails from the List of rapid transit systems. Bhludzin 18:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I zapped the US light rail systems that were inappropriately on that list. I wasn't really part of the discussion that established it, but "rapid transit" was the wikipedia compromise term for heavy rail metro/subways. While rail categories are a bit squishy, there's no way the River LINE qualifies. --Jfruh 19:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

That was a major change! I don't think that was necessarily the solution. Are all of the systems that you removed on the List of light-rail transit systems? Besides, at the top of the List of rapid transit systems article it says: 'This is an alphabetical list of cities worldwide that have a rapid transit system, or a light-rail system with some elements of rapid transit.' Bhludzin 20:09, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Future extensions listed on NJT 2020 wishlist

Last I checked, both the Capitol Extension and the Delair Transfer station (and the West Trenton Extension, for that matter) were projects that NJT has made actual plans for, even if funding hasn't been secured yet. Respectfully, I think they should both be re-added to the article. --CComMack 04:35, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok i have no problem with it being re-added, if it's redone. In the form that it was in it's nothing more then a personal opinion. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Add The System Map

Add the system map. It seems like a clear cut case of "Fair Use". The maps are put out there for public consumption. No reason to withold them from a free pubic forum like Wikipedia.

The sources found so far are a bit unwieldly. The line goes down the Delaware River coast of New Jersey -- 50 miles. It'll be tough to turn these into a usable reference.

http://www.riverline.com/images/pdf/riverline_railmap.pdf

http://www.riverline.com/images/pdf/riverline_sched_jul2005.pdf

http://www.njtransit.com/images/rivfinishcolor0220.gif

http://www.kahrrealestate.com/River_Line_map.jpg

http://www.lightrailnow.org/images/snj-lrt-river-line-route-map.jpg

Bill D 00:26, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, well the PDFs would only work as external links, the nj transt image, would be the easiest to use on the coypright side, but it to big, theo other ones are just blah, hummm, might just have to make one when i get a chance, base if ot the NJT map or something, dont expect anything right away though. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm currently making an SVG map of NJTransit's routes. First I'm doing all the rail lines; after that I'll do the River LINE. Hopefully that will be done this weekend. lensovet 06:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

The route and stations are done; I just need to add station names. lensovet 17:09, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Yay! Map is now up. Comments can go either here or (preferred) on the map's talk page over at the Commons. Cheers! lensovet 07:32, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks great! Thanks for taking this on. My one suggestion is that it's not particularly clear which stops are rail transfer stations, even when the graphic is increased to full magnification. Also, it should be made clear that Walter Rand Transportation Ctr is a transfer stop to the PATCO Speedline. Strangely, there's no mention of that on the station page... --Jfruh (talk) 14:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Made those changes and also a few others ones. Take a look. lensovet 16:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks great. --Jfruh (talk) 17:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Using Railpace as a source

I notice that some speculative information about later service has been added, citing Railpace as a source. I'm tempted to remove this, for a few reasons. First, Railpace is often referred to as "Rumorpace" because it tends to speculate on things that turn out to be entirely or partially wrong. Secondly, everything I've heard when the idea has come up at the railroad.net forums is that while it would be a great thing to add later service during the week, Conrail is already running on a very tight schedule with their alloted time, and there isn't much they could cut out and still be able to offer service to freight customers on the northern part of the Bordentown Secondary. Thirdly, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and this is just speculation. Unless we're able to cite an official source in NJT or the Southern New Jersey Rail Group, I don't think it should be included. —LrdChaos 18:41, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

DMU first?

"It is the first light rail system in the United States (but second in North America after Ottawa's O-Train in Canada) to use these instead of more typical electric vehicles." Is this true only of modern light rail, or have there been no traditional streetcar or interurban lines to use DMUs? This should be clarified, as "light rail" is a somewhat ambiguous term. --SPUI (T - C) 17:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Using rail line templates for the station articles

Hi all, just wanted to tell you that we have a NJT-specific template for using on the station articles; it's {{NJT rail line}}. If you go to the template talk page, it has very detailed instructions on how to use it. Take a look at a sample edit to see how to convert the rail line template into the NJT rail line one. lensovet 22:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Article title: LINE vs. Line

We seem to be in an edit war that is creating multiple double redirects. Let's resolve this quickly. The main question seems to be what source should drive this decision: official naming or colloquial use. Please state your cases and let's get this decided quickly without warring. Alansohn 14:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I already started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#River LINE or River Line? --NE2 14:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

"5500 passengers per day"?

When the project was first floated and looking for support, NJT was projecting 14,000 passengers per day. As it became clear that this estimate was excessive they lowered their estimate to 5,500. So the ridership is less than half of what NJT originally projected.

Jaysbro 15:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

River Line riders need to be careful to avoid a $75.00 fine. River Line tickets must be brought at a River Line ticket machine at the station and validated at a second machine. Often instructions are illegible, confusing and even misleading. Any failure to follow them perfectly can result in a fine as NJT police officers ride the cars, check tickets and issue a summons to people who have not dotted every "i" and crossed every "t." This is true even when the machines are broken. It has entrapped a great many unwary people. Experienced riders will not have a problem (assuming the machines all work) but new riders do report feeling entrapped. John Rydberg

Street running portion

It seems like the article should mention the section of line that runs in traffic on Camden streets. Its very unusual (IMO) especially given that it otherwise acts a little like a commuter rail line and not a streetcar or light rail line, some of which do operate in traffic (e.g. SF Muni and Sacramento). No, it doesn't use FRA-blessed trains and rules, but unlike e.g. other US LRT operations, its not electrified, it doesn't run often (as in more than 15 mins between non-rush hour trips), its not double-tracked, etc. I did add "diesel" to the start to highlight that distinction. Jason McHuff 12:58, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

It's a diesel interurban, and since interurbans have practically gone the way of the dinosaur in some places, no wonder people think it a bit strange. 204.52.215.14 (talk) 17:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Logo

As noted by the {{BadGIF}} template, a .png or .svg is always preferred over a .gif or .jpg. Please do not revert the logo. --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 16:12, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Camden-Glassboro line

It appears that the only place the in-planning (but, I think, more or less assured to happen) Camden-Glassboro line is discussed on Wikipedia is in this article. Is that appropriate? As the article notes, there's no gaurantee that it will be branded as part of the River Line (or even operated by NJ Transit). Not sure if it merits its own article at this point, though. Perhaps a separate article for the Regional Transportation & Economic Development Initiative, which includes this line, BRT into other parts of South Jersey, and improvements to the Atlantic City Line? It's a maddeningly vague name to be sure, but it can be changed and/or split up as the projects progress, and having them grouped together (as the agencies actually implementing the changes are grouping them together) could at least solve the problem of having this orphaned paragraph in a hard-to-find place. --Jfruh (talk) 17:18, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Service Improvements

Are the service improvements listed still in effect? In particular, the 7-day late-night service seems to be a thing of the past. This calls into question the item and last paragraph about the late-night bus shuttle to Pennsauken.

Should this be considered a commuter train?

The River Line has basically the exact same service characteristics as the Denton A train or the Austin Metrorail and those are considered to be commuter trains. Yes, there is a street running section, but so does the South Shore Line. This just doesn't feel like light rail.Rckania (talk) 01:11, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

The River Line is categorized as light rail by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) and NJ Transit themselves. The major authoritative sources call it light rail and therefore so do we per WP:NOR. Personally, I don't think it feels like commuter rail given the numerous contrasts between it an NJ Transit's unambiguous commuter rail system and the very strong similarities between the River Line and NJ Transit's other light rail systems (the Newark and Hudson–Bergen systems). The only thing that really feels like commuter rail is the length compared to the compact NLR and HBLR systems, but there are light rail lines much longer in the US (like in LA). If anything it's most like an old interurban, in that it uses light rail equipment in a longer route between cities.

Regardless, my opinion doesn't particularly matter. We follow the sources, and they plainly state it's light rail. oknazevad (talk) 02:24, 31 October 2020 (UTC)