Do not expect any more Amtrak trains New Rochelle - New Haven for a long time in the future. MNRR is not going have its whole 4 main tracks available for years. Each drawbridge replacement will cause mostly 3 tracks across present bridges when replacement construction is proceeding and for several time during construction only 2 main tracks. At present the Walk bridge replacement has 3 main tracks in service and at future tiimes ( several times for months ) only 2 tracks.
So bridges needing replacement in no particular order of priority are Stratford, Westport, Cos Cob, . 5 - 8 years each for engineering, EIS, Construction, and most importantly money we can expect it may 2050 before MNRR can handle more trains both NYG and Amtrak trains.. The lift bridges are going to be 2 track eack to allow for continued service in case one bridge malfunctions. That requires the 2 north tracks to be off set to the north for the middle lift tower(s). The far north track will occupy new ROW and the inside north track will occupy the space that the present outside track is now in place over the bridge.
What I dont see in any of this is who in the private sector is going to invest all of this money? One of these proposals mandates the private operator invest in corridor infrastructure a minimum of $1.2B, that's billion, in private money every year for 50 years. On top of their operating costs and these folks expect that this private group will make their money back on just trackage charges. Oh, and dont forget they will reduce trackage charges to commuter agencies to the marginal costs. I think these folks must be from Colorado and are smoking.
matthewsaggieWhat I dont see in any of this is who in the private sector is going to invest all of this money? One of these proposals mandates the private operator invest in corridor infrastructure a minimum of $1.2B, that's billion, in private money every year for 50 years. On top of their operating costs and these folks expect that this private group will make their money back on just trackage charges. Oh, and dont forget they will reduce trackage charges to commuter agencies to the marginal costs. I think these folks must be from Colorado and are smoking.
OPM other peoples money
It is easy to spend other peoples money
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDIt is easy to spend other peoples money
Frankly, the article may be little more than a promo for a dubious scheme, given the author. Just sayin'.
blue streak 1Do not expect any more Amtrak trains New Rochelle - New Haven for a long time in the future. MNRR is not going have its whole 4 main tracks available for years. Each drawbridge replacement will cause mostly 3 tracks across present bridges when replacement construction is proceeding and for several time during construction only 2 main tracks. At present the Walk bridge replacement has 3 main tracks in service and at future tiimes ( several times for months ) only 2 tracks. So bridges needing replacement in no particular order of priority are Stratford, Westport, Cos Cob, . 5 - 8 years each for engineering, EIS, Construction, and most importantly money we can expect it may 2050 before MNRR can handle more trains both NYG and Amtrak trains.. The lift bridges are going to be 2 track eack to allow for continued service in case one bridge malfunctions. That requires the 2 north tracks to be off set to the north for the middle lift tower(s). The far north track will occupy new ROW and the inside north track will occupy the space that the present outside track is now in place over the bridge.
A thought occurred to me today: what with the seemingly ever increasing use of tunnel boring machines, just maybe the logical replacement for NEC drawbridges would actually be tunnels?
ORNHOOA thought occurred to me today: what with the seemingly ever increasing use of tunnel boring machines, just maybe the logical replacement for NEC drawbridges would actually be tunnels?
Boring the entire NEC route? I have no ideas how deep each of the rivers are that have drawbridges used in crossing them and I don't know how deep a tunnel has to be under an active river to be safe from the potential of water incursion - considering grades that would be necessary to go from ground level to tunnel level the expedient would be to bore a tunnel the entire length of the NEC.
ORNHOOjust maybe the logical replacement for NEC drawbridges would actually be tunnels?
In order to work you would have in excess of 30-35'drop and then rise at each river crossing. All the approach on both sides would be in trench well below local sea level. The issue is not so much the potential for leakage through the tunnel structure but runoff into it, with all the fun of storm surge added when the hurricanes intensify. Then there is the question of either diverting traffic while the tunnels are built, or redirecting the line to one side 'as completed' -- a true high-speed service really favoring a 'flyover' height solution instead of a buried one, especially when the consequences of even an unexpected foot or two of water in a high-speed tunnel are considered.
At least some of the ground to be traversed -- I am thinking in particular of Portal at the Hackensack estuary -- is ghastly to contemplate tunnelling through. You'd need to freeze the ground, grout intensively, or have very good slipforming of well-defined wall structure to make the trick work. I believe Gateway under the Hudson was designed to run deep enough that the tidal differences that so alarmingly affected the PRR tunnels will not be a factor; while the rivers north/east are less dramatic I believe the Connecticut in part has periodic flooding that would greatly increase the 'works' needed to keep water out.
Meanwhile there is the issue of launching and recovering the TBM at what is essentially submarine depth. On many of the current projects it appears that there is little value in recovering the (very expensive even if the Boring Company experiments succeed!) machine for re-use; this might be different for progressive re-use at other sites on the NEC... but I'd have to see it costed-out.
BaltACD...the expedient would be to bore a tunnel the entire length of the NEC.
I think they call it hyperloop.
BaltACDconsidering grades that would be necessary to go from ground level to tunnel level the expedient would be to bore a tunnel the entire length of the NEC.
ORNHOO blue streak 1 Do not expect any more Amtrak trains New Rochelle - New Haven for a long time in the future. MNRR is not going have its whole 4 main tracks available for years. Each drawbridge replacement will cause mostly 3 tracks across present bridges when replacement construction is proceeding and for several time during construction only 2 main tracks. At present the Walk bridge replacement has 3 main tracks in service and at future tiimes ( several times for months ) only 2 tracks. So bridges needing replacement in no particular order of priority are Stratford, Westport, Cos Cob, . 5 - 8 years each for engineering, EIS, Construction, and most importantly money we can expect it may 2050 before MNRR can handle more trains both NYG and Amtrak trains.. The lift bridges are going to be 2 track eack to allow for continued service in case one bridge malfunctions. That requires the 2 north tracks to be off set to the north for the middle lift tower(s). The far north track will occupy new ROW and the inside north track will occupy the space that the present outside track is now in place over the bridge. A thought occurred to me today: what with the seemingly ever increasing use of tunnel boring machines, just maybe the logical replacement for NEC drawbridges would actually be tunnels?
blue streak 1 Do not expect any more Amtrak trains New Rochelle - New Haven for a long time in the future. MNRR is not going have its whole 4 main tracks available for years. Each drawbridge replacement will cause mostly 3 tracks across present bridges when replacement construction is proceeding and for several time during construction only 2 main tracks. At present the Walk bridge replacement has 3 main tracks in service and at future tiimes ( several times for months ) only 2 tracks. So bridges needing replacement in no particular order of priority are Stratford, Westport, Cos Cob, . 5 - 8 years each for engineering, EIS, Construction, and most importantly money we can expect it may 2050 before MNRR can handle more trains both NYG and Amtrak trains.. The lift bridges are going to be 2 track eack to allow for continued service in case one bridge malfunctions. That requires the 2 north tracks to be off set to the north for the middle lift tower(s). The far north track will occupy new ROW and the inside north track will occupy the space that the present outside track is now in place over the bridge.
You wouldn't even need those tunnels. Do what China has done, build viaducts, and high clearance bridges over these areas where available.
SD60MAC9500A thought occurred to me today: what with the seemingly ever increasing use of tunnel boring machines, just maybe the logical replacement for NEC drawbridges would actually be tunnels? You would even need those tunnels. Do what China has done, build viaducts, and high clearance bridges over these areas where available.
You would even need those tunnels. Do what China has done, build viaducts, and high clearance bridges over these areas where available.
Residents would love a 'viaduct' 50 - 75 or 100 feet in the air running for miles and mile all up and down the NEC - residents through the area are so understanding of structures being built to obstruct their 'views and vistas'.
BaltACDthe expedient would be to bore a tunnel the entire length of the NEC.
Oddly enough, that was going to be my proposal for the Miami-Key West-Havana-San Juan route.
ORNHOO BaltACD the expedient would be to bore a tunnel the entire length of the NEC. Oddly enough, that was going to be my proposal for the Miami-Key West-Havana-San Juan route.
BaltACD the expedient would be to bore a tunnel the entire length of the NEC.
I don't think people understand the number of navigable bodies of water that the NEC crosses - nominally at a level is not that much above mean high water of the body - a level that requires a movable bridge for water traffic to be able to pass through the area the bridge crosses.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.