Talk:Babylon Branch

Merge

I oppose the merge of Babylon Branch into Montauk Branch. These are two different services and it would be confusing if the two services are on one page. Also, "Montauk Branch" as a route should be discussed primarily in that article. I'm against having a separate page about the Montuak route as unncessary, since there are sufficient links to City Terminal Zone and Babylon Branch as I originally set the station table up. Tinlinkin 09:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

They are not two separate services. "Babylon Branch" trains run along the Montauk Branch from Jamaica to Babylon; the ones labeled "Montauk Branch" by the LIRR are simply those that continue beyond Babylon (as well as the very few that use the Central Branch). --NE2 09:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, but I gather the LIRR wants to make it clear that the two portions have separate service patterns, and also don't want to print a big timetable with a lot of wasted space. (Since a lot of the locals on the Main Line go to Huntington, I think that's why the LIRR justifies the Port Jeff branch with a big timetable and the classification of Main Line stations from New Hyde PArk to Hicksville as Port Jeff trains. The same goes with the Hempstead Branch.) For that reason alone, I think users expect separate articles. I don't like the whole terminology of "lines", "branches", "services", and "routes" with the LIRR, and I get frequently confused with the whole shebang. But since services are identified with the branches they serve, I expect all the represented services would have separate articles. That said, I concede there is technically no "Babylon Branch of the LIRR". Tinlinkin 10:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I've reversed my position and I now support merging the Babylon into the Montauk. Since the only difference between the two is service patterns, the Babylon Branch article would be redundant in other aspects with the Montauk Branch article, and it's not necessary to view two separate articles. I thought about the way City Terminal Zone is set up, and I like the way the routes are delineated. Services can be delineated similarly. And my change of heart also came after the succession box discussion. So this means I also support merging Ronkonkoma Branch into Main Line (Long Island Rail Road). I will work on the station tables and you can complete the mergers. Thanks. Tinlinkin 05:11, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Argh, I now oppose the merge. I've rewritten the articles to make it clear that the Babylon Branch is only a service and that the Montauk Branch is both. It might in fact be a good idea to split Montauk Branch (service) and Montauk Branch (line). --NE2 14:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

OK. Services and lines of the LIRR don't mix. I've also seen that you've suggested splits for MBTA lines. I guess it's all about reducing confusion or ambiguity, isn't it? Tinlinkin 18:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The MBTA has an added level of the railroad company; here it was always just the LIRR (and sometimes a competitor for a little while). But the lines and services are the same on the MBTA. --NE2 18:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Some Babylon branch stations with access to Montauk on weekends?

I looked at some schedules online once and I noticed (looking at the Freeport branch for example) that there are trains that go on that branch and continue on into the Montauk branch, one terminating in Patchogue and the other in Speonk. Those happen in the morning and afternoon, respectively, on weekends only. If that is the case, then maybe some of those stations that see service to those terminals need to be included on the Babylon branch page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.117.20.134 (talk • contribs).

Is this a diesel train that operates local through all stations on the Babylon and the Montauk? I think I have seen that once on timetables (or maybe I'm thinking about the Port Jefferson line). Some electric trains operate express between Freeport and Babylon, and you would have to transfer to a diesel train at Babylon. I would classify this service for Freeport as Babylon Branch service due to it being electric service and the transfer. The infoboxes mention Montauk Branch anyway (for reasons other than service). Tinlinkin 13:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it could be diesel because the website shows no evidence of transferring at Babylon on those trains (meaning that they could stop at stations like Freeport in the same trip without transfer). I could be wrong, but I'm thinking that is what it is. 71.249.233.190 20:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no such train on weekends. One way you could check is by looking at the Babylon Branch timetable. On weekends, Babylon Branch electric trains are the 6100 series trains (you can see what the train number is by looking at the bottom of the column), while Montauk weekend diesel trains are the 8700 series. No 8700 series trains make any stops St. Albans thru Lindenhurst. There is only one Montauk branch desiel train that makes "all local stops" and that is the 3:26 am NEW YEARS EARLY MORNING only train, that leaves Penn Station, stops at Jamaica, Rockville Centre, then all stops to Speonk. But that train only runs one day a year. On rare occasions (such as severe disruptions or bad weather) a Montauk train will make select stops along the Babylon Branch, but these are very rare occourances. Cluefinder42 (talk) 00:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Babylon Branch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140907052709/http://lirr42.mta.info/stations to http://lirr42.mta.info/stations
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110106043505/http://www.trainsarefun.com/lirrphotos/LIRR%20Station%20History.htm to http://www.trainsarefun.com/lirrphotos/LIRR%20Station%20History.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:34, 13 July 2017 (UTC)