Metro-North New Haven Line Penn Station Access

12 foot 7 I believe

DutchRailnut wrote:12 foot 7 I believe

Wow, that's lower than the than the North and East River Tunnels isn't it?

yes

and just for Giggles here is NY senate item.

Senator Kemp Hannon (R-Nassau) joins his Long Island Senate colleagues in urging the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) to reject a proposal which could reduce Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) service into Penn Station.

In a letter to MTA Chairman Joseph Lhota, Hannon and his Senate colleagues noted the MTA is currently considering a proposal to allow Metro-North Railroad to operate trains into Penn Station using the existing tracks currently shared by the LIRR, Amtrak and NJ Transit. Recent media reports stated Metro-North plans on building six new stations as part of its new access plan, yet there has been no information released on how this plan will be financed nor whether an environmental impact study has been conducted.

“To make room for the new Metro-North Trains, the LIRR could be forced to cut the number of trains it runs into Penn Station,” said Hannon. “The LIRR is already sharing ingress into Penn Station, and any reduction of service could have a devastating impact on commuters and other travelers. With only seven of Penn Station’s existing 21 tracks being allotted to the LIRR, any reductions would seriously impair LIRR operations and affect all LIRR riders.”

In order to ease LIRR congestion into Penn Station, the East Side Access Project is underway, which will bring LIRR trains into Grand Central Station. That project is far from complete, however, and congestion at Penn Station is a major concern. Even when the East Side Access Project is finally finished, the LIRR will still need to operate at Penn Station to meet a project significant increase in ridership over the next several years.

“I appreciate and support the MTA’s desire to expand services,” said Hannon. “But not at the expense of the LIRR’s ability to operate into Penn Station now and into the future. This proposal could have the effect of actually putting more riders into their cars on already over-congested roads, something we are trying to avoid at all costs.

http://www.newsli.com/2012/02/08/ny-sen ... -proposal/

...MTA is currently considering a proposal to allow Metro-North Railroad to operate trains into Penn Station using the existing tracks...“To make room for the new Metro-North Trains, the LIRR could be forced to cut the number of trains it runs into Penn Station,” said Hannon.

You know this says in effect that MTA is pretty serious about Metro-North Penn Station service.

But Dutch let me ask you a question. Wouldn't this expansion of service mean more work, more jobs for Metro-North people? Yet I keep getting the feeling that at least some Metro-North employees really don't want to see this happen. Is that true?

How do you feel about it?

Yes on more work, also yes on more people out of service, no need to get things more complicated.
It also gives MTA new reason to try to merge LIRR and MNCR despite having been told by Feds that they will not allow such a move.
LIRR and MNCR are seperate railroads created for two seperate needs, only reason MTA sees in merging is destruction of labor unions and their contracts.

morris&essex4ever wrote:

DutchRailnut wrote:12 foot 7 I believe

Wow, that's lower than the than the North and East River Tunnels isn't it?

Is that ultra-low clearance related to the segment they started building in 1969 underneath the IND 63rd St. line, then stopped? Intercity and ex-NH alt routings obviously weren't the future considerations way back when that they are today.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:

morris&essex4ever wrote:

DutchRailnut wrote:12 foot 7 I believe

Wow, that's lower than the than the North and East River Tunnels isn't it?

Is that ultra-low clearance related to the segment they started building in 1969 underneath the IND 63rd St. line, then stopped? Intercity and ex-NH alt routings obviously weren't the future considerations way back when that they are today.

Not sure it's really correct to say they stopped. The whole of the East River tunnel was constructed at that time, IIRC. The tunnels being built now connect to the East River tube at either end. I guess in a way there's a paralell to the building of the Steinway Tunnel in the early 20th century, which went unused until the IRT Flushing Line was built several years later.

For the longest they were showing a video on the screen near the Stationmaster's office GCT. It showed the tunnel sections being floated into place back in the early 1970s.

The dual-level idea was to eventually allow LIRR service either to (what was then planned as) the LIRR's own terminal at E.45th Street and 2nd-3rd Avenue or to GCT.

I guess they built them to conform to the M1s height and clearance. In hindsight it seems they should've allowed greater clearances but maybe there's other reasons why the designed them as they did?

DutchRailnut wrote:yes

and just for Giggles here is NY senate item.

Senator Kemp Hannon (R-Nassau) joins his Long Island Senate colleagues in urging the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) to reject a proposal which could reduce Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) service into Penn Station.

In a letter to MTA Chairman Joseph Lhota, Hannon and his Senate colleagues noted the MTA is currently considering a proposal to allow Metro-North Railroad to operate trains into Penn Station using the existing tracks currently shared by the LIRR, Amtrak and NJ Transit. Recent media reports stated Metro-North plans on building six new stations as part of its new access plan, yet there has been no information released on how this plan will be financed nor whether an environmental impact study has been conducted.

“To make room for the new Metro-North Trains, the LIRR could be forced to cut the number of trains it runs into Penn Station,” said Hannon. “The LIRR is already sharing ingress into Penn Station, and any reduction of service could have a devastating impact on commuters and other travelers. With only seven of Penn Station’s existing 21 tracks being allotted to the LIRR, any reductions would seriously impair LIRR operations and affect all LIRR riders.”

In order to ease LIRR congestion into Penn Station, the East Side Access Project is underway, which will bring LIRR trains into Grand Central Station. That project is far from complete, however, and congestion at Penn Station is a major concern. Even when the East Side Access Project is finally finished, the LIRR will still need to operate at Penn Station to meet a project significant increase in ridership over the next several years.

“I appreciate and support the MTA’s desire to expand services,” said Hannon. “But not at the expense of the LIRR’s ability to operate into Penn Station now and into the future. This proposal could have the effect of actually putting more riders into their cars on already over-congested roads, something we are trying to avoid at all costs.

http://www.newsli.com/2012/02/08/ny-sen ... -proposal/

This shows that besides finding the money for such an expensive project, the MTA would have to overcome oposition from LIRR advocates. Doesn't bode well for MN trains ever going into Penn.

Clean Cab wrote:This shows that besides finding the money for such an expensive project, the MTA would have to overcome oposition from LIRR advocates. Doesn't bode well for MN trains ever going into Penn.

Not all the Long Island state senators are objecting and that's balanced by the state senators from Westchester who are insisting this gets done. That equal access was promised to Metro-North when ESA was looking for additional funding in 2008. That they helped win support from upstate legislators by arguing it was a regional project that would eventually result in MNR getting access to Penn Station.

But Clean Cab you sound like you're pretty much against the whole idea, in fact like you're campaigning against it, trying to convince people it's a bad idea.

Do you really think it is a bad idea?

Just saying....

I'm in favor of this and any other project that means more trains and more people riding them. I only express my concerns about the huge amount of money it will cost and the many unanswered questions. It's a well know fact that Penn Station is currently handling as many trains as it can. Even some if LIRR trains go into GCT, that will not open up that many slots in Penn Station. I'm not saying its impossible, but the logistics don't seem to add up. I just don't think this idea has been carefully thought out enough. Remember, none of the M8s have run into Penn yet, and as has been discussed, MN currently doesn't have any equipment that can access Penn from the Empire Connection. When you talk about purchasing new equipment, it can take up to 5 years before they arrive. Safe to say it will be many years until this could ever begin to happen.

DutchRailnut wrote:12 foot 7 I believe

DutchRailnut, is that from top of rail? I think that number might be too low. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember seeing somewhere that the M-7s were at least 13' tall. I'll check when I get to work tomorrow, I have seen some of the original East River Tunnel drawings from the 70s somewhere in my office. Either way (sorry to continue off topic), if the MNCRR were to run through ESA (which would be unecessarily redundant, in my opinion) the tunnels would have to be tall enough to support catenary, which the tunnels are too low to support, anyway.

The fact is the expense involved wouldn't begin to touch what they're spending on ESA. I'd like to give them time to develop this some more and see how they would do it before I say it's too expensive or requires too much new equipment.

But I'm glad Clean Cab says he's in favor of it. I am too.

Look I ride the Hudson Line. When I go to New Jersey I usually drive. Going to GCT, taking the TS shuttle and then a downtown 7th Avenue train, going up to Penn Station, allowing time for the connection there, it just takes way too long.

Same thing with going to Long Island.

Connecting MNR into NYP would be a huge convenience. I really hope they do it. When Metro-North President Cannito told me two years running, "It will happen," I believed him.

He just didn't say when.

I'd love to believe what Peter Cannito said. But he's gone and MN is facing some tough choices to make with limited funds. Yes, MN trains into Penn would be much cheaper than the ESA currently being built. But keep in mind the funding for that was locked in many years ago. Aside from developing and purchasing new equipment for such service, there would need to be 6 new stations built on both the Hellgate and Empire lines, and they don't come cheap. When I see concrete plans and an allocation of funds in the MTA's capitol budget, I'll know the project is (pardon the pun) on track. Like I said, I do want this to happen. It's just that it many taken another decade or so.

The original 63rd Street Tunnel was built with an internal diameter of 18'-6", optimized to reduce mining and future ventilation costs. This dimension was achieved thanks to the "future" M1 fleet.

The new ESA tunnels are 19'-6" internal diameter. The extra foot covers the curves, etc. Top of Rail is 6'-2" below springline, so there is only 15'-11" at the crown of the tunnel. Less at the carbody sides. No room for catenary at the curves, even locked down. The ballpark to increase the new tunnels and modify the existing lower level to allow bi-levels exceeded $400 million.