CSX River Line (West Shore) Double Tracking?

I recently read a blurb about CSX being on the verge of splurging a fortune to upgrade infrastructure, and revamp some things that need revamping as the operation settles from it's post-merger growing pains.

One of the items I was surprised and delighted to see was a plan to double track the West Shore, due to the volume of traffic. Anyone hear anything about that?

Dieter.

I guess if that's going to happen, then CSX is certainly going to be running more trains than the handful they are now. They really would be spending a fortune considering the amount of bridges and overpasses that would have to be replaced with double track spans.

The single track spans that I am sure of:

Overpasses over West and East Henrietta Rds.
Overpass over I-390
Overpass over Rte 96 in Pittsford
Overpass over Gulf Rd in Pittsford
Overpass over Marsh Rd
Overpass over Rte 31F (is this single or double?)

The "Ballantyne Bridge" over the Genesee is a 2 track span, but doesn't the LAL own the south track? If so, that's a problem, too.

That would be great, but it seems like a lot of obstacles to contend with.

I think the project specified is the River Sub (CR River Line) and not the West Shore in western NY.

Didn't they already start working on the River Line last year?!?

Supposedly they are going to re-install some of the double track on the western part of the B&A, either between CP-187 & CP-176 or between CP-171 & CP-150.

LCJ is correct - The West Shore segment along the Hudson. Sorry about that, I should have said Jersey City <> Selkirk. There's a lot of traffic on there now, and they anticipate more.

I also heard that there was thought being given to re-tracking the unused side of State Line Tunnel on the B&A.

Dieter.

Wasn't the River Line 4 and/or 3 tracks through most of NJ at one time in the past? I would think that would negate the need for replacing bridges, etc. at least in NJ.

Doug

I think there is a clearence restriction on the abandoned north bore of the State Line tunnel in Caanan, NY. Without any additional work, no double stacks or auto-racks could traverse through there.

Since the majority of the freight trains between Selkirk and Worcester are either auto-racks or intermodal trains, this may be an operational bottleneck anyways, unless some work is done on the clearence of the old bore.

The north tunnel at State-Line would just need to be excavated.

CSX Conductor is correct.

Clearances on the West Shore at the Fort Montgomery tunnel and bridges around JC were remedied by excavation. You can't beat such a cost effective solution. Why raise the bridge when you can lower the river?

I assume the same would be done at State Line, lest they risk bringing the roof down on their heads.

So, anybody else hear about the line south of Selkirk being retracked?

Dieter

CSX Conductor wrote:Supposedly they are going to re-install some of the double track on the western part of the B&A, either between CP-187 & CP-176 or between CP-171 & CP-150.

I heard the same rumor ... way back in 1999! Guess I'll believe it when it happens.

Regarding the State Line Tunnels: (going from memory) the abandoned bore is the original tunnel, dug in 1841. The tunnel used presently was dug in 1912 when NYC improved the line. In the steam era, it was double track.

The last time I hiked through the abandoned bore, I noticed countless bolts driven into the rock at the top of the tunnel on the west end ... mute testimony to the instability of the rock at that location.

Given how short the tunnel is, if they're gonna put a second track through there, why not just daylight it ... or does daylighting + a new auto bridge make non cost effective?

* JB *

Agent at Clicquot wrote:
Given how short the tunnel is, if they're gonna put a second track through there, why not just daylight it ... or does daylighting + a new auto bridge make non cost effective?

CSX does EVERYTHING on the cheap. Penny-wise and pound-foolish; that's their way.

A lot of their present troubles come from "deferred maintenance" everything from trueing locomotive wheels to failing to clean/maintain roadbed and ballast.

Agent-

Quick related story. A friend told me he was looking at some property in Canaan New York, and was told by the realtor that a railroad tunnel went beneath part of it. My ears went up, and I asked if I could come along.

Long ride.

We get there, there's over a foot of snow. Ever been there? The road is a dirt road, looks like a very nice area to live in, don't know where you would work or where you would get your groceries. We were told most people go to Stockbridge for anything they needed.

Anyway, the land was the next lot in from the lot over the west portals. It was mostly up an unusable hill with one level, cleared area. We looked around, and speculated that at the elevation, the cost of drilling for water would be a pain, and depending on what trajectory the tunnel went beneath the property, you might not be able to drill at that location at all!

There was too much snow, and private property posters around to go looking for the east portals from where we were, plus, we had a lady realtor in tow.

OK, point of this is, you asked why not rip the portals and open the track to the sky? Between the road over the top and the number of lots and angling of said lots, I think it would be nearly impossible to make a cut there without getting a community riled up.

Dieter.

State Line Tunnels are on & Albany, not the River Line... somehow connected to the River Line question you were asking?

The CSX and Conrail terminology can be confusing.

West Shore Branch- the segment of the West Shore that goes around Rochester from Fairport to Chili.

River Line - the segment of the old West Shore that runs from New Jersey to Selkirk.

-otto-

Dougster wrote:Wasn't the River Line 4 and/or 3 tracks through most of NJ at one time in the past? I would think that would negate the need for replacing bridges, etc. at least in NJ.
Doug

The River Line (NYC West Shore from Weehawken to Selkirk) was four tracks from WE (West End of Weehawken Tunnel) to Dumont MP 13. From there, it was double track the rest of the way, including the tunnels. When passenger traffic was halted in the early 60s, the line was single tracked with sidings and the steel was sold for scrap. The tracks were centered in the tunnels to permit higher clearance, eliminating the need to keep the Put. Division on the other side of the river for high and wide shipments to the New York vicinity.

Its pretty busy today, with up to 30 trains a day. A third track was added from CP 7 to CP 10 in Teaneck a few years ago because of backups heading into the NJ yards. I remember making it over the road in five hours and outlawing at CP 7 waiting to get in the yard. I wonder if it is any better today?

i live in the area. i dont see much sitting around 7-10 as i used to before htey double tracked it from 7-5.