Trains.com

23 years to complete rail tunnel ? ( its not in US )

2036 views
11 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Sunday, October 4, 2015 4:06 PM

Wizlish
That sound a bit like those trains in the North American Joint PTC project that featured zero length in block...  Wink  Glad to see it wasn't just programmers who could forget stuff...

I get the impression from the IRJ story that the "24 trains per hour" were the peak capacity for both bores together; 12 trains per hour presumably with CBTC in each bore.  I do not know if that is assuming passenger trains running at the stated 125 mph speed... which would cut down the effective 'dwell time' of even a long consist to a few seconds each.

I guess I agree, especially since this line handles both freight and passenger trains. Perhaps the freights are 'fleeted' and/or run at night. Where are our European correspondents when you need them? Confused

  • Member since
    October 2014
  • 1,644 posts
Posted by Wizlish on Saturday, October 3, 2015 11:02 PM

Kevin C. Smith
The PRR stated that the peak capacity of each Hudson River tunnel was 72 trains/hour (or one every 41.5 seconds).

That sound a bit like those trains in the North American Joint PTC project that featured zero length in block...  Wink  Glad to see it wasn't just programmers who could forget stuff...

I get the impression from the IRJ story that the "24 trains per hour" were the peak capacity for both bores together; 12 trains per hour presumably with CBTC in each bore.  I do not know if that is assuming passenger trains running at the stated 125 mph speed... which would cut down the effective 'dwell time' of even a long consist to a few seconds each.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: MP 32.8
  • 769 posts
Posted by Kevin C. Smith on Saturday, October 3, 2015 8:14 PM

MikeF90

One quote from the article: "The tunnel will allow the number of trains to be increased from four to 24 per hour ..."

Could this be a misprint?  I'm thinking 'per day' might be correct.



I was idly paging through and old Railway Gazette online dating from the construction of Grand Cental Terminal and it stated that the NYC was upgrading the Park Avenue approach tracks to handle a train on each one every 3 minutes (or 20/hour). The PRR stated that the peak capacity of each Hudson River tunnel was 72 trains/hour (or one every 41.5 seconds).

"Look at those high cars roll-finest sight in the world."
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Friday, October 2, 2015 8:50 PM

Link says costs over $1.25B US dollars of over 5 times original cost estimate.  And we think only USA subject to cost over runs.

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Southwest US
  • 12,914 posts
Posted by tomikawaTT on Friday, October 2, 2015 7:56 PM

If you replace a single track with heavy grades and curves with a shorter double track tangent, a six-fold increase in capacity is well within the realm of possibility.

Also, consider the JR-Central Chu-O Nishi Hon Sen, parts of which are single track with curves and heavy grades.  It carries only two local and one express passenger trains per hour in each direction.

Part of the confusion stems from the idea of, "What is a train."  Americans tend to think in terms of a mile and a half of freight cars ambling along behind the motive power.  In most places, trains are much shorter - and much faster.

Chuck

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Friday, October 2, 2015 6:48 PM

One quote from the article: "The tunnel will allow the number of trains to be increased from four to 24 per hour ..."

Could this be a misprint?  I'm thinking 'per day' might be correct.

The Wikipedia article goes into more detail about the 'environmental issues'. Apparently the contractor used a sealant that was toxic and it seeped into the water table. Oops. Sounds like a very challenging tunnel to build, like the very unheralded Inland Feeder aqueduct project; that one took 12 years to complete.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • 964 posts
Posted by gardendance on Thursday, October 1, 2015 5:57 AM

Napoleon didn't start the war.

Patrick Boylan

Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Calgary
  • 2,047 posts
Posted by cx500 on Thursday, October 1, 2015 12:48 AM

The article refers to twin bores, so there is also a second tunnel parallel to the one in the picture.  I don't recall if the article said indicated if they were being bored concurrently or consecutively.

But the time lag is minimal; the Channel Tunnel between England and France had something like 200 years between the first tentative starts and the final completion!  One or two wars intervened, of course, starting with Napoleon.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:47 PM

Looking at the picture, that is one wide tunnel.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:34 PM

Buslist
blue streak 1

Sweden has taken 33+ years to complete a rail tunnel for  200 Km passeger and freight bypass.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/europe/swedens-hallandsas-rail-tunnel-finally-completed.html?channel=537

its 23 not 33 and work was suspended for 8.

That is still 15 years of activity to complete the project.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:03 PM

blue streak 1

Sweden has taken 33+ years to complete a rail tunnel for  200 Km passeger and freight bypass.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/europe/swedens-hallandsas-rail-tunnel-finally-completed.html?channel=537

 

 

its 23 not 33 and work was suspended for 8.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
23 years to complete rail tunnel ? ( its not in US )
Posted by blue streak 1 on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 2:48 PM

Sweden has taken 23+ years to complete a rail tunnel for  200 Km passeger and freight bypass.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/europe/swedens-hallandsas-rail-tunnel-finally-completed.html?channel=537

Corrected my typo

 

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy