I think what stands out most in Blue Streak's three points above is that there is no contingency plan and no contingency route through NYC if something should happen to these tunnels. And if there is a major catastrophe both the vehicle tunnels, the Lincoln and Holland tunnel could be endangered, too. The Poughkeepsie Bridge, seventy something miles north of the city, is no longer available making Castelton about 130 miles out the next crossing available for rail. So two tracks in two separate tunnels is all there is to play with, gamble with. The plan Christie shut down did not include Amtrak but was a two track stub end station which would barely be usable for commuter services with no storage or loop. It looked for for diggers but not a real feasible operating plan. But because Christie said no to the plan is not reason to not do anything. Urban planners and other strategic planners have harped for years on the needs of replacing the tunnels as well as Portal Bridge out in the NJ Meadows (which has a replacement program finally underway...but think what a waste that would be if it only got trains to Secaucus!) Boardman's statement of 20 more years isn't strong enough, it should go further saying that because there is maybe 20 more years left for the tunnels planning has to start now, no more debating and waiting. We have had several natural disasters which if they reoccur could wipe the tunnels out before then. If a plan isn't in place soon, Amtrak will not be the one which suffers, but all of New York City, New Jersey, and southern New England will be dealing with major transportation and economic problems. But why does he have to say that when it is so apparent on its own merits?
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Some adverse points have merit.
1. The engineering studies that predicated the limit should be posted for review. Granted the studies may not be detailed, They may be random point tests ?
2. Storm times & surges need to be figured for probably each 6" of storm surges. Another Sandy ?
3. Contingent plans need completed especially for one or two tunnels being closed for a very long period.
I just report the facts as I see them, I am not Fox News. I am not a fan of Christie but his reversal on this project has been a positive. I don't bash him because he has done so much to himself he doesn't need it. I am from NJ originally so I know the politics and the BS. on both sides of the political spectrum and business cards. I enjoy traveling through there and visiting but know full well it is a great place to be from.
CMStPnP I think our society is moving away from "unquestioned" large infrastructure projects. If you can make a business case for a project and assemble a constituency it will get funding. Look at the CREATE program in Chicago. As unsexy as it is, it got funding and it is producing results. … The issue I have with the tunnels project is he hasn't put a project timeline together, has not listed pros and cons, has not looked at alternatives, hasn't done a whole lot, IMO. He just blurts out that these tunnels need to be replaced and we need to do it ASAP. Where is the business case on paper supporting his comments? There isn't one. No brainer or not, I think the public deserves better than that if they are going to pay close to $7-8 Billion for this project. Thats a lot of money to spend for just two underwater tunnels and it raises suspicions there could very well be a less costly alternative..
I think our society is moving away from "unquestioned" large infrastructure projects. If you can make a business case for a project and assemble a constituency it will get funding. Look at the CREATE program in Chicago. As unsexy as it is, it got funding and it is producing results.
…
The issue I have with the tunnels project is he hasn't put a project timeline together, has not listed pros and cons, has not looked at alternatives, hasn't done a whole lot, IMO. He just blurts out that these tunnels need to be replaced and we need to do it ASAP. Where is the business case on paper supporting his comments? There isn't one. No brainer or not, I think the public deserves better than that if they are going to pay close to $7-8 Billion for this project. Thats a lot of money to spend for just two underwater tunnels and it raises suspicions there could very well be a less costly alternative..
Fascinating. I could follow your reasoning if this was a brand new project being suggested. But it's not. It's Boardman saying what we all know: The tunnels are 100+ years old. They will need serious work to last longer or maybe it's not possible to make them last "forever".
I replaced the roof on my house a while back. It was old, original to the house. Well over 25 years old. There was no need to figure alternatives or do lots of studies to see if maybe the shingles could last another x years. The fact that the roof was old and starting to leak was enough. So I bit the bullet and replaced the roof.
I have no idea if Cassatt, the man behind the tunnels, himself expected the tunnels to last for 100 years. Most things need serious rebuilding when they reach 100 years of continuous use, or actually long before. Rebuilding our interstates seems to happen at a much more frequent rate, for instance.
Yea, I'd like to see the plan for how to make them fit for another 100 years. I think that will come. Plans like that aren't developed in a vacuum or overnight. The key is that whatever is being planned for additional tunnels is a separate need and will do nothing much to help with the existing, aging tunnels.
Those that can't comprehend the obvious deserve being devoured by it.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
dakotafred This is another test of whether we are serious about remaining a leading country or want to fall behind even our European friends. They've got plenty of money to keep up their infrastructure -- not least of all because we've been doing the heavy lifting for their defense going back to 1941. Who is building high-speed rail lines and projects like the Chunnel? Not the United States. We can't even keep up our 50-year-old Interstate highways and bridges, not to mention water and sewer lines back East that are so much older than that. I'm all for being a force in the world. If we abdicate that role, somebody less friendly to our values will surely fill the breach. But if we allow ourselves to fall apart at home, we will just as surely lose the prosperity that allows us to be that force -- along with so much else.
The problem I have with boardman and his comments is he has proven to be quite inconsistent over time. For example, I applaud his moves to standardize Amtrak equipment but then I question if he will stick to it vs accepting anything a state with money proposes to him. Time will tell. I think he is going to go against his earlier stance on standardization if he is tempted enough with a money or project. We'll see though.
henry6 Sorry, but I've been following this story for the past several years and my information is accurate. The Fed government program was agreed to and signed by Christie then when the shoveling began he pulled the plug. He is most certainly a Tea Party member if only because he has pulled union contracts away from school teachers, stopped spending for police departments, etc.without legislation or negotiations. If he isn't a Tea Party member then either he or tne Party doesn't exist. If you want more proof log onto NJ.com and go through the newpapers of NJ files back several years.
Sorry, but I've been following this story for the past several years and my information is accurate. The Fed government program was agreed to and signed by Christie then when the shoveling began he pulled the plug. He is most certainly a Tea Party member if only because he has pulled union contracts away from school teachers, stopped spending for police departments, etc.without legislation or negotiations. If he isn't a Tea Party member then either he or tne Party doesn't exist. If you want more proof log onto NJ.com and go through the newpapers of NJ files back several years.
I'm not a Christie fan and I'll never vote for him but your views of him are definitively one sided to the extent I cannot accept them as accurate. Reads more like rumor mongering from a source with an axe to grind. Also, I know a little about politics, my Grandfather helped run Milwaukee County under the long ago Lawerence Timmerman administration. My Father was also pretty heavily involved in the Milwaukee area Rotary Club. I can pick out a political hatchet rumor in a paragraph as most people can pick out a fourescent orange jacket in a crowd. It's pretty easy.
Would recommend you open your mind more and dig more into what or who is spreading these rumors because carrying them around in your head as truth doesn't do you any good health wise, IMO.
CJtrainguy Reading Conquering Gotham about the engineering struggles when the tunnels were built, I am amazed they have lasted this long, with the number of daily trains going through. There was very real questions as to whether the tunnels would hold up at all when first built, due to the flexing. And replacing/rebuilding their capacity should be an absolute no-brainer. Not just for the local area, but for the country. In no way will the currently proposed additional tunnels replace the existing tunnels. The real need is probably more like 6 or 8 tracks going under the Hudson.
Reading Conquering Gotham about the engineering struggles when the tunnels were built, I am amazed they have lasted this long, with the number of daily trains going through. There was very real questions as to whether the tunnels would hold up at all when first built, due to the flexing.
And replacing/rebuilding their capacity should be an absolute no-brainer. Not just for the local area, but for the country. In no way will the currently proposed additional tunnels replace the existing tunnels. The real need is probably more like 6 or 8 tracks going under the Hudson.
CMStPnP However I would mention that engineering wise the Hudson River Tunnels are not fixed but instead float and flex, without being taken out of service for an extended period of time I can see at some point a failure happening. Still, is it 20 years away? 30 years away? Need some details on how that timeline was arrived at.
However I would mention that engineering wise the Hudson River Tunnels are not fixed but instead float and flex, without being taken out of service for an extended period of time I can see at some point a failure happening. Still, is it 20 years away? 30 years away? Need some details on how that timeline was arrived at.
Dakguy201 The problem with this thread all along has been the acceptance of Boardman's statement without any critical questioning with regard to its validity. Has anyone knowledge of the origin of the 20 year estimate?
The problem with this thread all along has been the acceptance of Boardman's statement without any critical questioning with regard to its validity. Has anyone knowledge of the origin of the 20 year estimate?
Agree, Boardman has extensive experience in government and knows he is more likely to get action/ reaction if he creates a crises as our government reacts more to crises (made up and real) than it would otherwise. However I would mention that engineering wise the Hudson River Tunnels are not fixed but instead float and flex, without being taken out of service for an extended period of time I can see at some point a failure happening. Still, is it 20 years away? 30 years away? Need some details on how that timeline was arrived at.
Definitely agree Americans need to employ CRITICAL THINKING skills vs jumping on the band wagon. I am an advocate of requiring at least one critical thinking course in a High Schools required courses. Would reduce the sheeple in this country and lead to better government IMO. Probably would also reduce the ridiculous political conspiracy theories one political party likes to promote against the other.
henry6 Christie first endorsed the tunnel, signed the papers and proclaimed it a great endeavor. His cancelling the project was more political than practical as he wanted to prove to the Tea Party and Conservatives he was no ordinary Republican. I don't think he really understood why he was right in doing so.
Christie first endorsed the tunnel, signed the papers and proclaimed it a great endeavor. His cancelling the project was more political than practical as he wanted to prove to the Tea Party and Conservatives he was no ordinary Republican. I don't think he really understood why he was right in doing so.
None of that is true and quite honestly I have my doubts the Tea Party is even a political force in New Jersey, if it was NJ taxes would be a whole lot lower than they are and Republican governors would be elected with more frequency.
Instead I will stick with reality on planet Earth vs a political conspiracy theory in your head from goodness knows what source. This is just how the mainstream media reported the decision:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"The federal government has earmarked $3 billion for the tunnel project, with another $3 billion being funded by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and the final $2.7 billion coming from the state of New Jersey. Christie said the federal commitment is capped at $3 billion and required that any costs above $8.7 billion be absorbed by the State of New Jersey. According to the governor, cost overruns are estimated to be in a range from more than $2 billion to over $5 billion."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sounds quite reasonable to me that a NJ Governor should be concerned with the above. Railfans probably not as I stated before............no rail passenger project is too expensive for railfans.
Dakguy201 oltmannd Yes and yes! Putting an "expiration date" on the existing tunnels is a pretty smart move. It puts some heat on getting new tunnels started. Even if there are ways to extend the existing tunnels life, and there probably are, doing it under traffic would likely be a complete disaster. The problem with this thread all along has been the acceptance of Boardman's statement without any critical questioning with regard to its validity. Has anyone knowledge of the origin of the 20 year estimate?
oltmannd Yes and yes! Putting an "expiration date" on the existing tunnels is a pretty smart move. It puts some heat on getting new tunnels started. Even if there are ways to extend the existing tunnels life, and there probably are, doing it under traffic would likely be a complete disaster.
Yes and yes! Putting an "expiration date" on the existing tunnels is a pretty smart move. It puts some heat on getting new tunnels started. Even if there are ways to extend the existing tunnels life, and there probably are, doing it under traffic would likely be a complete disaster.
Look at the daily and weekly delay reports for NJT and Amtrak and how often the wires, ice, third rail, etc. in the tunnels cause a problem of somekind or another. It the tunnel's could be replaced by last Tuesday it would not be soon enough!
oltmannd Boardman is their to make it happen and probably their best man to do it, too. Yes and yes! Putting an "expiration date" on the existing tunnels is a pretty smart move. It puts some heat on getting new tunnels started.
Boardman is their to make it happen and probably their best man to do it, too.
Yes and yes! Putting an "expiration date" on the existing tunnels is a pretty smart move. It puts some heat on getting new tunnels started.
henry6Christie and Cuomo and their contingents, along with many other Atlantic coast governments and planners, understand the importance of two tracks and a tunnel under the Hudson between NJ and New York City now and in the future. Boardman is their man to make it happen and probably their best man to do it, too.
FWIW the tunnels appear to be the same kind of construction as London's subway tunnels, some of which are decades older.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
CMStPnP Additionally, replacing the tunnels with the current plan does not prevent flooding of the new tunnels if another storm happens equal to Sandy
Additionally, replacing the tunnels with the current plan does not prevent flooding of the new tunnels if another storm happens equal to Sandy
Source ?
But, all that withstanding, Christie and Cuomo and their contingents, along with many other Atlantic coast governments and planners, understand the importance of two tracks and a tunnel under the Hudson between NJ and New York City now and in the future. Boardman is their man to make it happen and probably their best man to do it, too. He has been appointed and served under Republicans for years in many positions, so they evidently trust him enough to listen to what he says. If Congress, under the current do nothing, don't spend a dime, anti public needs pall, doesn't do anything they will be to blame for chaos in transportation for both freight and passengers on the East Coast. As I said earlier, this is not just an Amtrak issue nor a regional commuter issue but also a freight issue. NS and CSX I think know they have to come to the plate with ideas and cooperation so they don't get shut down either by congestion or confiscation. We're not running choo choo trains nor the Lionel set under the Christmas Tree here, but facing real transportation problems connecting New England and Eastern NY to the rest of the country and vice versa. As for a "MUST HAVE at taxpayer cost", it is that and more:it is a must have at any and all cost before it costs more than just dollars and cents.
One more thing I think the decision to cancel the tunnels by the Christie administration was a sound decision based on the financial interests of the State of New Jersey. Interestingly the same reason Wisconsin Governor Walker also cancelled the Talgo to Madison project which again was financially risky for the Wisconsin Treasury. BTW, politically speaking, Obama's HSR project is administered by a appointed Republican (Ray LaHood) not a Democrat. What happened in Wisconsins case was Ray smartly wrote provisions into accepting the HSR funds that specific timetables had to be met along with specific equipment and speed metrics, if any of them failed the HSR grant would become a loan. Of course Governor Walker saw that as a risk. Very similar to Chris Christie and the tunnels project, no provision in the project plan to handle cost overruns for the project and when Governor Christie asked it was implied heavily the participating states would be liable for any overruns. Very few under river tunnel projects run by government agencies finish on time or on budget. So IMO, Governor Christie had a valid point to step in and protect his state financially just like Governor Walker did. Both Governors performed their fiduciary responsibility as they saw it.
Very few railfans read the financial details of a rail project instead they see the project and it becomes a MUST HAVE at any taxpayer cost. I am pretty sure with our country's debt levels that kind of thinking should be left in the past where it belongs as it's not going to find a lot of support outside the readership of Trains Magazine.
schlimm Sorry. The point was to think of alternatives since it sounds unfeasible (and incredibly costly) to build more tunnels at the existing point to gain the needed capacity for the future. So the bypass idea would provide the growth capacity while the existing tunnels could be relined, perhaps
Sorry. The point was to think of alternatives since it sounds unfeasible (and incredibly costly) to build more tunnels at the existing point to gain the needed capacity for the future. So the bypass idea would provide the growth capacity while the existing tunnels could be relined, perhaps
Replacing the tunnels probably will not happen in the current political environment. I would even state that despite Boardman's public pleas, he is not going to get a multi-billion dollar project of this size going without substantial backing........which I do not think is there. He also has other fires to attend do like renewal of LD equipment, replacement of HSR trainsets. In my opinion Boardman should be more of a realist on large financial projects like this.
Additionally, replacing the tunnels with the current plan does not prevent flooding of the new tunnels if another storm happens equal to Sandy (which wasn't on the scale of very large to begin with). How do you sell that stupidity to the public. The replacement should be able to withstand an intermediate level Northeeastern Storm without a major service disruption, IMO. It should not be just a preservation of the status quo. I would think we are a more advanced country than that.
So this is another case of railfans getting in the way of rail issue advancement, IMO
The Port Of New York and New Jersey Authority has to assume some authority and work with Amtrak, MNRR, LIRR, NJT, PATH, MTA, CSX, NS, et al and come up with a comprehensive and all inclusive 5, 10, 25, 50 year plans for accommodating freight and passenger rail traffic through the Tri State area. Yes, the Amtrak tunnels are on life support and just fixing them by patch will not give them a longer life. And just that pair of tracks is not enough for today much less tomorrow or many tomorrows to come. So, at least one new pair of tracks, if not two pair, are needed and the present replaced in place. Run arounds and by passes should be part of the intercity traffic both freight and passenger. Commuter traffic and rapid transit traffic has to be dealt with separately but side by side with inter city passenger and freight traffic tracks. (Right now the only all rail routes into New England from the south and west US is via Castleton Bridge for CSX and Mechanicsville to Hoosic Tunnel for NS. Thus there is a lot of run through freight traffic on the West Shore of the Hudson (CSX) or through Binghamton, NY for NS/Pan Am.) One of the questions would be whether the Poughkeepsie bridge is reclaimable along with the former rights of way to help move some of the through freight traffic away from NYC allowing for ROW use for rail passenger needs. There is no one project which will cure everything but a whole region to be looked at for a legion of projects. The real problem in the end will not be what has to be done or should be done but rather how to deal with the fiefdoms of politicians.
Point 1 is a non-starter based on New York City as a traffic point and the obscene cost of right-of-way acquisition. Point 2 is probably the best approach, but it will also be expensive. Point 3 looks good but boring new tunnels on Manhattan Island is going to be difficult. Extending the Subway is politically unfeasible. Point 4 would help with NJ Transit's traffic but I don't know how many PATH passengers connect to or from Amtrak.
That i your point of view, and you are entitled to it. I would not only wish to increase capacity for the existing business but also grow new business.
1. High-speed bypass of New York City
2. Innovative methods to save, preserve, and strengthen the existing two tunnles.
3. Two new Amtrak Hudson River tunnels or extending 14th Street subway to Secaucus. Or both.
4. Lengthening PATH platforms and other changes to increase capcity
A New York bypass is not a viable alternative from either a political or identified market point of view. Let's get back on topic.
blue streak 1 Looks like this thread has drifted off topic. Alternate routes for HSR and bypasses either need to go to the old thread or establish a new one. This is about the old tunnels and consequences of the shut down. IMO this thread needs to address reasons for statement of time limit use, including transcript, short term fixes, how to get funding for additional tunnels, does this mean that tunnels cannot be used after the 20 years ? , etc
Looks like this thread has drifted off topic. Alternate routes for HSR and bypasses either need to go to the old thread or establish a new one.
This is about the old tunnels and consequences of the shut down. IMO this thread needs to address reasons for statement of time limit use, including transcript, short term fixes, how to get funding for additional tunnels, does this mean that tunnels cannot be used after the 20 years ? , etc
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
The conversations concerning tunnels under the Hudson, both existing and new, cannot be either Amtrak or NJT but have include both. This is because of history, geography, and available financing and land. It has to be a joint or cooperative effort because of the scarcity of these resources. Perhaps the only way around NYP would be to extend the Shore LIne across the Bronx and upper Manhattan to utilize the George Washington Bridge and connecting with the Corridor near Secaucus. But I still feel that is not a cost effective need to begin with, that at least another pair of new tunnels and repair or upgrade of the present pair are imperative.
Blue Streak,
Thanks for bringing sanity back to this discussion.
The idea of a high speed line bypassing New York is to get the Boston - Washington rail proportion closer to what are the NY - Boston and NY - Washington proportions. Again, New Haven - New Rochelle is the big problem NY - Boston. This is new businss for rail. Going via Maybrook and then south through West Trrenton should be no more than 500 miles total, and with high speed, 150mph top, not 125, five hours should be competitive. And 3:20 Boston - Philadelphia, even more.
The bypass idea was only in reference to the new, HSR line if it ever gets built. Building totally new, higher capacity tunnels sounds unlikely, politically.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.