Trains.com

PBS Gateway Project Video

1283 views
7 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 5,557 posts
PBS Gateway Project Video
Posted by CMStPnP on Saturday, October 23, 2021 2:46 PM
  • Member since
    October 2014
  • 729 posts
Posted by Gramp on Saturday, October 23, 2021 11:18 PM

Unfortunately something's probably gonna have to break first before action is taken. Remember when the interstate bridge in the Twin Cities collapsed?  Suddenly a new bridge showed up.

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,269 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:11 PM

To get a traffic signal installed at an intersection frequently riquires a fatal accident. 

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 5,557 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, October 26, 2021 9:22 AM

My only opinion on this video is I am happy they went with the 4 track approach and the new bores instead of trying to refresh the old bores.    Sometimes the cheaper approach is the dumber approach and I think this project is an example of that.   BTW, as they mentioned in the video the project is not 100% dependent on Federal money and I read somewhere it has already started officially.    So they must be anticipating the Federal Money is a given.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 17,961 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, October 26, 2021 10:52 AM

CMStPnP
My only opinion on this video is I am happy they went with the 4 track approach and the new bores instead of trying to refresh the old bores.

It's not 'either-or'; refurbishing the "old bores" is still a key priority.  Amusingly not much has changed since the years I was discussing this in Port Authority meetings well before the ARC project: the 'reason' is that no meaningful remediation of any of the deflicted structure in the north and south North River Tunnels can be done under traffic safely.  I am far from alone in knowing how to cost-effectively remediate one of the bores in a matter of weeks (and increase practical speeds at the west portals!) once traffic can be diverted while the removal, passivation, and reconstruction are under way.

(And without massive delays or graft, too.)

The thing I find irritating about the current crap alternative is that it is longer and slower to provide no reduction at all in actual NEC running time.  All the early Gateway designs involved high-speed grading and curvature permitting fast acceleration out of Penn Station into high-speed flyover to additional track capacity up to Newark.  Instead we have an enormous outlay to bring the line right out in the same place with the same curve to the south on the Jersey side, probably to facilitate everything going through that renamed Secaucus Junction plant.  This to me is as wack long-term as the Memphis airport light-rail connection, which wound up with a $4 billion price tag for a 40+ minute trip time from downtown.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 10,520 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Wednesday, October 27, 2021 7:51 PM

I shutter every time I look at the construction timeline.  I hope against reality that one of the old tubes does not have to be closed before the new bores are in full operation.  What is being stated as for service after the new bores are in service is that no additional rush hour service will be started until one of the old bores has been completely rehabbed ? 

Is that in anticipation of the possibility that the old bore not yet rehabbed might have to be shut for several weeks for emergency repairs ?  Has anyone heard how the weekend shutdowns of one bore or the other is progressing ?  Any unexpected problems or delays ?

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 5,557 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Thursday, October 28, 2021 12:54 PM

blue streak 1
I shutter every time I look at the construction timeline.  I hope against reality that one of the old tubes does not have to be closed before the new bores are in full operation.  What is being stated as for service after the new bores are in service is that no additional rush hour service will be started until one of the old bores has been completely rehabbed ?  Is that in anticipation of the possibility that the old bore not yet rehabbed might have to be shut for several weeks for emergency repairs ?  Has anyone heard how the weekend shutdowns of one bore or the other is progressing ?  Any unexpected problems or delays ?

I agree in part with OVERMOD, rethink the whole design.    Understood there is an investment in the existing station in the Billions but think of the time gained on the schedule of straightening out the station approaches with a newer and more direct route into  Manhattan from the South. 

I think as they are the bores are way too short and should extend farther inland on the New Jersey side before rising to the surface.    Sell some of that freed up real estate and get the bore openings farther from the shore line.

Enter the rail bores in Newark, New Jersey, straighten the curves underground and stay underground until the station in Manhattan, increase the speeds in the tunnel bore significantly.   Would also construct a 4 track bore or set of bores vs 2 track.  

Across the East River I think we are pretty much screwed with the location of Sunny Side Yard and the Long Island Railroad facilities.     Though the tracks could remain undergroud a little longer before Sunnyside yard to gain distance from the East River.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 17,961 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:22 PM

CMStPnP
Across the East River I think we are pretty much screwed with the location of Sunnyside Yard and the Long Island Railroad facilities.

The premise here... and it was a premise for many of the 'second spine' alternatives from Manhattan looking east... is that every train WILL stop in Manhattan every time, and that operation within several miles of the station stop at restricted speed, provided the restricted speed is consistent and can be 'accelerated to' quickly, constitutes only a minor, and 'manageable', portion of overall HSR trip time.  Rebuilding access from the east portal area as far as Harold could be done comparatively easily, but there is still restricted geometry from there onto the Hell Gate approaches whether or not tilt can be enabled.

I was never able to find a way to line up a cost-effective approach for the second-spine alternatives that do not have to 'curve' from New England near the New York station area -- for example the route via Hartford or the line using the 'outer' trans-Sound bridge completing the 'bypass' Interstate route around NYC congestion, or my beloved Orient Point Bridge route.  Spending billions to allow high speed close to Penn Station is more than a bit risky until we're sure, really sure, that our training program is Bostian-free.  So an approach under the Hudson from the south and west really doesn't need to be particularly fast: much more important is good reliable CBTC on extremely short headway combined with fast and reliable switching to separate inbound traffic by arriving track, or combining outgoing traffic quickly into its common bore(s).

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