Third of a Series: Proposals for Princeton and Philadelphia. Henry Posner III is a man on a mission. He is actively promoting the concept of an inexpensive way to test a rail line to find out if it could be a good candidate for a new passenger rail start. He is Chair of the Board of Rail Development Corp. (RDC). He and Nate Asplund, President of Pop-Up Metro, LLC, and Ida Posner, RDC Vice President Strategic Planning and Development, have proposed several applications for their concept, in addition to operating a demonstration of their train in rural Pennsylvania. Rail transit veteran Tom Hickey has also developed proposals.
I described their Pop-Up Metro concept and its operation in the first article in this series and then in the secong installment examined Pop-Up Metro’s proposal for a full-service weekday schedule to West Chester, Pa. from the end of the line currently operated by SEPTA at a newly opened station at Wawa. In this article we will look at two other proposals for similar service: Princeton, N.J., and along Philadelphia’s waterfront.
Princeton “Tiger Train”
Princeton is a historic town midway between New York and Philadelphia. A famous battle was fought there in 1776 as part of Gen. George Washington’s campaign to oust British troops from New Jersey’s capital at Trenton and surrounding areas. The town is also home to Princeton University, where Posner was a member of the Class of 1977. The Northeast Corridor (NEC), built by the Pennsylvania Railroad and now owned by the U.S. DOT and operated by Amtrak, bypasses Princeton. Instead of serving the town directly, a branch of the railroad runs for less than three miles from Princeton Junction, where New Jersey Transit’s trains to and from Trenton stop, as do a few Amtrak trains. For a long time, the branch to and from Princeton has been known as the “Dinky,” and NJ Transit now officially calls it the “Princeton Dinky.”
The tiny branch, beloved by Princetonians and railfans everywhere, is under threat, though. The line, which has not operated through service to any other point on the NEC for decades, runs as an isolated shuttle. It uses Arrow III electric multiple-unit (EMU) cars built in the late 1970s, before NJ Transit was established, and rebuilt by ABB Traction in1993. There is nothing “multiple” about NJT’s operation; it is run with either a single car or a married pair. While “Arrow” cars still run on the railroad’s Gladstone Branch and to a more-limited extent on other lines, including the NEC itself, plans call for them to be retired within the next few years and replaced.
There have been several alternatives proposed, including point-to-point light rail, or even a paved busway. There is also Pop-Up Metro’s proposed Tiger Train: a plan to run the Dinky with battery-operated trains like the ones the company uses for a demonstration project in Rockhill Furnace, Pa. The company not only proposes to operate on the existing Dinky line, but would also like to extend the operation to downtown Trenton, although the equipment currently in use would not be allowed on a busy line like the NEC. that operation would need to use tracks located elsewhere.
Posner gave a presentation about the Tiger Train proposal to the Lackawanna Coalition in June 2023. I heard the presentation and reported the event for the Railgram, the Coalition’s newsletter: “In his presentation, Posner complained about several aspects of the current Dinky service: decreasing ridership; a schedule oriented toward travel to New York, not to Trenton and points south; ‘low focus on the local market;’ and periodic service suspensions he says ‘reflect low priority’ in NJ Transit’s statewide system. He provided examples of long waits at Princeton Junction for trains to Trenton, where riders going to Philadelphia have additional waiting time. He noted that, since 2016, NEC ridership increased by 12.7%, while ridership on the shuttle dropped by 13.5%. Posner says his plan, based on joint ventures, focuses on ‘Emerging Networks in Emerging Markets.’ One such ‘Emerging Market’ is Princeton, where he proposes the ‘TigerTrain.’ He already has the train: a battery-operated unit in orange-and-black livery (also Princeton’s ‘Tiger’ colors), which is currently making demonstration runs in Pennsylvania.” Trains would run four times an hour, rather than today’s less-frequent schedule. The reaction from the attendees at the meeting was positive.
Posner first proposed the Tiger Train in 2021. In an Aug. 16 posting that year, Krystal Knapp reported in the Princeton Planet: “The train being demonstrated in Rockhill Furnace just so happens to be able to operate on NJ Transit rail lines, and is the proper height for the agency’s platforms at train stations like the ones in Princeton and Princeton Junction. In other words, the train could be an alternative to replace the Dinky, the shuttle that runs between Princeton and Princeton Junction, the train that NJ Transit has said will soon become obsolete. A transit study is under way about the future of the Dinky, which could be replaced by other train equipment or a bus.” Three days earlier, the Planet ran an OpEd from Save the Dinky, a local advocacy group, and the New Jersey Association of Railroad Passengers (NJ-ARP), urging decision-makers to keep rail service, rather than paving the line and turning it into a road, and including suggestions for saving the service.
Nate Asplund told Railway Age that not much is happening with that project at the present time, but it can still be implemented: “The project can commence, but it has not had that much advancement in comparison with many others.”
Philadelphia Waterfront
Pop-Up Metro also has a proposal to run similar service along the Delaware River waterfront in Philadelphia’s Old City, and indications are that it has been well-received. Sandy Smith of Philadelphia Magazine reported in January 2025 that such an operation is now under consideration: “The Delaware River Waterfront Corporation (DRWC), the quasi-public agency that manages the waterfront’s public attractions, now has a question for you: ‘Would you ride a ‘Pop-Up Metro’ up and down the Delaware riverfront?’ Pop-Up Metro is the name of the company that approached the DRWC with a simple proposition: We can deliver the waterfront transit line you’ve long wanted quickly and for less money.”
Smith also reported a potentially positive development for the proposal: “The company is even willing to help adopters clear the regulatory hurdles needed to operate passenger transit on lightly used freight lines like the one on Columbus Boulevard. And the good news here is that the Philadelphia Belt Line Railroad (PBL), which owns almost all the trackage the DRWC wants to use, is a partner on this project.”
The report quoted Asplund: “Getting transit and passenger rail going in the United States is lethargic … It costs billions, it takes decades, and it’s not working … If there’s a line out of service, like the PBL section on Delaware Avenue (Columbus Boulevard), we say, ‘Listen, we can put the Pop-Up Metro kit on your track and not disturb your operation.’ For lines still in service, Pop-Up Metro works out temporal separation of light passenger and main line railroad service. For unused lines, it leases the track from the railroad and the Pop-Up Metro package to its operator for a period of up to three years initially.”
The line would run on lightly used freight tracks from the Race Street Pier (two blocks north of Market Steet) south to beyond South Street, which has become a major food and entertainment location. Streetcars once ran on the line, as recently as the mid-1990s. At that time, the operation was known as the Penn’s Landing Trolley, and it ran with historic cars that once ran on other Philadelphia streets. The current prosed service would run in the same place, along the PBL.
Asplund said the initial operating segment will be 1.01 miles long, but he hopes it will expand later. He told Railway Age: “This line will really help provide mobility for tourists and residents along the waterfront. It’s within the efforts of the DRWC, which is designed to develop the Delaware River waterfront and doing a great job. They’re breaking up the mobility challenge. They held a series of outreach events in 2024 and early 2025, with surveys for stakeholders on the waterfront. To date, they’ve gotten more than 4,000 responses, with an 88% positive reaction to putting rail service back on the waterfront. They have done a great job of providing that conduit and their support on that project.”
According to Asplund, DRWC is the project sponsor, PBL is the infrastructure provider, and Pop-Up Metro will provide the equipment, platforms, and other assets needed to run the service. He said the company is targeting a startup sometime in 2026. He also mentioned that Carnegie-Mellon University (where Posner teaches courses as an adjunct) is partnering with the other parties to demonstrate that the rail project creates “civic innovation.” The team was awarded a National Science Foundation (NSF) Phase I grant and has applied for a $1 million Phase II grant. Asplund credits Katherine Flanigan of Carnegie-Mellon’s civil and environmental engineering group for her efforts in support of the project. “It’s really going stellar.,” he said. “We’re advancing this, and we’re confident that we’ll get the NSF grant. It connects the communities, is low cost, can be deployed in a matter of months, not decades, and what people need to get going again.”
Asplund also referred to Pop-Up Metro’s recent merger with U.K.-based rail and transportation design firm TDI, which he said “has really added to our capabilities to offer light rail and very light rail (VLR) transit in America and the U.K.” TDI is working on battery-electric VLR transit vehicles that seat 56 riders.
A Proposal for “Connecting the Dots”
Thomas R. Hickey, who has been promoting the initiative to run a Pop-Up Metro service between SEPTA’s new station at Wawa and the line’s former terminal at West Chester, as we featured in the previous article in this series, has been a fixture on the Philadelphia transit scene for decades. His career included a stint as General Manager of PATCO (Port Authority Transit Corp.), which runs the PATCO Speedline between Center City and South Jersey. After this article first appeared, Hickey contacted me with a proposal to connect the potential waterfront line to PATCO. Hickey calls his proposed project the Penns Landing Connection.
He mentioned the Penns Landing Trolley, which ran from 1982 to 1996, but had a drawback. He said “The Penn’s Landing Trolley ran as a stand-alone operation, moving people up and down along the riverfront, but made no connection with any other rail service, limiting its utility for visitors. Security was also a problem, with the [streetcar] collection frequently vandalized.” The historic Philadelphia cars are now running at the Electric City Trolley Museum in Scranton.
Hickey believes that connecting the proposed waterfront line to other transit, specifically PATCO, would improve its utility. He said: “DRPA, PATCO’s parent organization, set a high priority on improving access to the Camden and Philadelphia riverfronts. DRPA also planned to build a World Trade Center office complex at the foot of Callowhill Street and wanted to connect it to the SEPTA rail network for workers. PATCO collaborated the Philadelphia Belt Line Railroad to investigate the feasibility of restoring the Penn’s Landing Trolley but with an extension to SEPTA and/or PATCO, taking advantage of DRPA assets in place.” DRPA is the Delaware River Port Authority, and Callowhill Street would be the northern extent of the proposed line.
One of the components of Hickey’s proposal is Franklin Square Station on the PATCO line. Franklin Square is in the northeast quadrant of the city and was one of the areas reserved for parkland in William Penn’s original design for Philadelphia. Hickey told me: “Franklin Square Station was built in 1926 as part of the of the original Bridge project but it was never opened except for brief periods in the 1930s, 1950s and 1970s. PATCO proposed to reopen the station and use it as the transfer point for commuters and visitors to the waterfront.”
PATCO recently reopened Franklin Square station for the first time since the Bicentennial celebrations in 1976, and Hickey’s plan would use it to connect to the proposed waterfront line that would be run as a Pop-Up Metro operation. On April 27, Hickey verified that he had inspected the site of the proposed line and confirmed that the Pop-Up Metro equipment now in use would work on the line he now proposes. He added that his proposal would finally make use of a trolley terminal that has been sitting unused for 99 years.
When the Delaware River Bridge (now the Ben Franklin Bridge) was built in 1926 between Philadelphia and Camden, it included a provision for a trolley terminal, which Hickey says would be used as part of his plan: “The bridge was originally built to accommodate six vehicle traffic lanes, two rapid transit tracks (which PATCO uses), and two streetcar tracks for Public Service trolleys from Camden (which were converted to additional vehicle traffic lanes). New Jersey trolleys could not run on Philadelphia streetcar tracks, however, so a five-track terminal was constructed beneath the Bridge Plaza at the foot of the bridge in Philadelphia. PATCO proposed to to connect the Bridge Plaza Terminal to Franklin Square Station via a pedestrian tunnel under Fifth Street and retain one track for the Penn’s Landing Trolley. PATCO proposed using the other four tracks to display historic trolley equipment occasionally rotated in Penn’s Landing service.”
According to Hickey, some of that space could be used for his proposed operation.” The accompanying diagrams show how Hickey believes this could be accomplished. He added that his proposal would finally make use of a trolley terminal that has been sitting unused for 99 years.
While the bridge was built to replace the ferries that carried passengers across the river, the boats have returned to a limited extent: a line that runs for tourists in the summer. With Hickey’s proposal, the revived Pop-Up Metro line along the waterfront could connect to other transit, which would enhance transit mobility in the local area.
Hickey concluded by saying: “I think a Pop-Up Metro demonstration connecting Penn’s Landing with Franklin Square would be taken more seriously than another stand-alone operation for tourists. Furthermore, the extended option would attract the interest and deep pockets of DRPA.”
At this writing, Hickey is engaged in talks with Posner and Asplund about adding his proposal to theirs.
Core Benefit
It seems that technology is almost always viewed as a positive, often because it encourages development. Still, it is not always clear how much technology an organization needs to deliver on its core benefit proposal. Pop-Up Metro’s core benefit appears straightforward, and the company has promoted it for several years.
As things stand now, it is expensive and time-consuming to get a new rail transit start running in the U.S. Under certain circumstances, the Pop-Up Metro plan can save time and money by getting a new service going on a temporary basis, and then getting ridership counts during the experimental period—information that decision-makers can use when considering making such an operation permanent. Stated differently, the plan makes it possible to conduct a beta test with riders and ridership counts, often for less than the cost of a study conducted by a consulting firm.
There are limitations on where the Pop-Up Metro model is valid, but it has the potential to move new services toward actual operation in certain places, and for low cost. I will look further at the benefits that the plan can deliver in the next article in this series.
Pop-Up Metro developments will be presented at the 2025 Railway Age/RT&S Light Rail Conference in Pittsburgh, Oct. 1-2.
