Beyond The Terminal Trap

Penn Station is the busiest rail hub in America—and still runs like a dead-end. Trains pile in, sit, reverse, and clog the works. Meanwhile, cities that retooled their core stations for through-running—where trains pass straight through instead of terminating—moved more people, more reliably, for less money.

New York can do the same. We don’t need to bulldoze neighborhoods to add more stub-end tracks. We need to stop operating like it’s 1910.

The Core Problem (and the Simple Fix)

Stub-ends force long dwells: unload, switch crews, reverse, dispatch. Those minutes stack up into lost capacity, blown schedules, and stressed riders. Through-running flips the math: trains arrive, open doors, and continue. Shorter dwells = higher throughput on the tracks we already have.

This isn’t theory. It’s how Philadelphia, Paris, Tokyo, and London broke their own terminal bottlenecks—and why New York’s $16.7B plan to expand a stub-end terminal is a spendy detour from an obvious solution.

Philippe Crist put it plainly: “Imagine you could drive your car to the edges of a city but never through it. That’s what we do in New York with trains. It’s nuts.”

Why the $16.7B Stub-End Expansion Misses the Point

The Railroad Partners claim more terminal tracks will cure congestion. It won’t. More gates at a cul-de-sac don’t turn it into a street.

• Capacity per dollar: Terminal expansion might nudge peak throughput ~40%. Through-running can more than double it—mostly by cutting dwell, not pouring concrete.

• Operational waste: Stub-ends monopolize platforms and interlockings with turnbacks and midday yard runs. Through-running keeps equipment moving and frees the core.

• Hidden costs: Bigger terminals need more storage, more staff, more layovers. Through-running slashes midday storage needs and redeploys crews to service—not idling.

And the southward expansion’s footprint is brutal. Block 780 would be razed—church, homes, small businesses—so we can enshrine the same old inefficiency. New York can add capacity without erasing neighborhoods.

Proof From Elsewhere (and Nearby)

Philadelphia’s Center City Commuter Connection linked two rival terminal systems with a 1.7-mile tunnel (opened 1984). The result: fewer trains and crew hours to provide the same coverage, and a revived Market East district. Through-running didn’t require endless new lines; it squeezed more value from what existed—and catalyzed growth.

Tokyo runs the most complex network on earth across multiple operators. It works because they embraced incremental through-running: multi-voltage trains, shared protocols, negotiated labor rules. If Tokyo can harmonize that tangle, Penn’s three operators can, too.

Paris built the RER by threading suburban lines through new core tunnels and running frequent, metro-like service. Different agencies, different power systems, one regional logic. The payoff: direct rides, massive ridership, and a region re-stitched.

London’s Thameslink started small—reopening an old tunnel—proved demand, then scaled in phases. Today it’s 24 trains per hour through the core. Lesson: start, show the win, earn the next phase.

The Real Barrier Isn’t Steel. It’s Silos.

Penn Station’s geometry is workable. The blocker is governance: Amtrak, NJ Transit, and the MTA optimizing for their own yards, rules, schedules, and territories.

Paul Lewis (Deutsche Bahn E.C.O.): in Berlin you see one network, one ticket—despite 41 operators.

New York needs the same rider-first mindset.

Create a Penn Station Through-Running Authority

Give a single entity the mandate and teeth to run the core like one railroad:

• Unify the timetable. One slot plan, rational line pairings, shared dispatch.

• Resolve labor rules. Cross-territory crews, cross-training, and clear operating protocols.

• Own capital planning. Approach tracks, platforms, yards—funded and sequenced to serve the integrated plan, not three separate wish lists.

“Working groups” haven’t delivered run-through. A true authority can.

Addressing the Usual Objections

“But the columns!”

Some columns will need work for targeted platform widenings. That’s fine—and can be phased. We don’t need a full teardown to get 80% of the benefit.

“Where do we store trains?”

Through-running reduces storage demand at the core. Use outlying yards (Secaucus, Queens, the Bronx) and clean/turn trains where space is cheap. Keep Penn for movement, not parking.

“Reverse-peak demand is lopsided.”

Schedule for reality. Pair lines with similar volumes, short-turn some services, and ramp frequencies where demand exists. Tokyo and Paris do this every day.

A Phased Plan That Starts Paying Off Fast

Stage 1: Operational Wins (12–24 months)

• Standardize platform interface where feasible; tighten dwell targets.

• Pilot cross-running between NJT and LIRR/MNR on limited patterns using dual-power or multi-system equipment.

• Stand up integrated scheduling and dispatch software; publish an integrated slot diagram.

• Advance shared fare media so the system acts like one network to riders.

Stage 2: Targeted Capital (2–5 years)

• Unclog approaches: selective interlocking rebuilds, headway-cutting signal upgrades, a few high-leverage connections near Sunnyside/Secaucus.

• Incremental platform widenings where passenger flow constrains dwell.

• Procure/retrofit rolling stock for cross-system compatibility.

Stage 3: Scale and Optimize (5–10 years)

• Expand through-patterns across the peak; add mid-distance runs linking New Jersey to Queens/Long Island.

• Continue yard decentralization and crew flexibility; refine the slot plan.

• Grow the thing in phases—Thameslink-style—so riders feel each win and momentum snowballs.

Why This Matters Beyond Trains

Through-running is a mobility upgrade, a climate strategy, and an equity policy in one move.

• Time back for riders. Shorter dwells, fewer transfers, more reliability.

• More jobs within reach. One-seat rides unlock reverse-commute and cross-region trips—big for Newark, Queens, and beyond.

• Less highway pressure. More rail capacity off-peak and peak means fewer car trips and lower emissions.

• Real estate that serves people. Stations with frequent, direct service attract homes and jobs without razing blocks to store trains.

The Question We Should Be Answering

At a 2021 hearing, Rep. Seth Moulton asked NJ Transit’s CEO: what happens to Penn’s capacity if NJ Transit trains run through to Long Island and vice versa? In Boston, a study found through-running operations showed an eight-fold capacity increase at South Station, another terminal Amtrak intends to expand despite community opposition. 

That’s the question. Not “how many more stub-end tracks can we bolt on,” but “how do we turn Penn from a terminus into a network?”

Choose Integration

Across four world capitals and one Philly tunnel, the pattern is clear: through-running works when leaders choose it—and align institutions to deliver it. New York’s “too hard, too expensive” line is a policy choice, not a technical fate.

Create the authority. Start the pilot. Fix the chokepoints that matter. Build support by showing results. And stop pretending the only path to capacity is a wrecking ball.

Penn Station should serve the region it anchors. Through-running is how.