• NEC Future: HSR "High Line", FRA, Amtrak Infrastructure Plan

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

  by Greg Moore
 
afiggatt wrote:
Greg Moore wrote:Careful, we know new North River Tunnels for NJT will be built. They will move some traffic going into Penn Station by directing it into a new station just north and deeper than Penn. But they currently have no plan to connect them to Penn Station.
The report does state, under alternatives to be evaluated in the next phase of the Master Plans, that additional capacity will be needed for NYP with new tunnels under the East and Hudson Rivers - this is in ADDITION to the NJT ARC tunnels.
Correct. I just didn't want anyone confusing the call for additional tunnels to NYP to be confused with the current ARC plan. I think it's a huge failing of the ARC plan to not include a way into NYP.
  by Jtgshu
 
Well, don't forget that some of the same realities that the fellas designing and building the ARC (or MTT or whatever its called this week) tunnel would be faced by those building a new tunnel for Amtrak into NYP.

Some of the biggest problems are the bulkhead on the hudson river (that the original 1910 tunnels simply cut through), the #7 (i think it is) subway line ROW, and of course, the water tunnel, not to mention restrictions to distrubing existing infrastructure and utilities. They wanted to include a connection to NYP, but the grades required just weren't feasible.

I was surprised to see a few things in the document, and i can only hope that maybe even half of the projects get built. but there are some MAJOR projects which are going to need to be done sooner or later, no matter what else on the wish list gets built or doesnt' get built. (the Baltimore tunnel, major draw bridge replacements, etc)
  by JoshKarpoff
 
afiggatt wrote: Not living in NYC, I do wonder whether a direct train to JFK is worth spending the considerable bucks to do so. Isn't a LIRR train to Jamaica station and then the Air Train to JFK reasonably efficient? (Not having taken it myself).
What they're really talking about isn't a whole new rail line straight to JFK, but extending the existing line that terminates at Atlantic Terminal (formerly Flatbush Terminal) in downtown Brooklyn through to Penn. This line already connects to Jamaica Station, which has a connection via the AirTrain to JFK. The MTA has been using a midtown Manhattan, one-seat trip to JFK as an excuse for what is really just opening up more direct capacity on the LIRR into Manhattan. Not to say that a one-seat rail connection from midtown Manhattan is a bad thing; it's not. Air travel needs to be better integrated into our mass transit infrastructure all around. This link, in combination with MNRR/ PANYNJ's plan to connect Stewart International Airport in Newburg into the mass transit system via a spur off the Port Jervis Line and the new Tappan Zee bridge rail line, will help to integrate NY's long distance air travel with regional rail, for a holistic approach to travel. I'm still waiting to see when they'll ever build a mass transit connection to LGA.

As an electrical engineer specializing in public infrastructure work, if this plan and the other transportation plans that are being tossed around actually get funded, I feel like I'm looking at a good 40 years worth of well paid, socially useful work ahead of me that I can be proud of.
  by jtr1962
 
JoshKarpoff wrote:
afiggatt wrote:I'm still waiting to see when they'll ever build a mass transit connection to LGA.
Not necessary. If we start building a decent local and HSR rail system, the need for the mostly domestic flights which originate from LGA will pretty much disappear in 10 or 20 years. What few are left could be handled by Kennedy or Newark, especially considering the long-term trend for air travel is sharply down. Best long term plan is to just shut down LGA and use the valuable coastal real estate for much needed housing in Queens ( and maybe extend the N line to serve that population ). Pilots hate LGA anyway. They say it's like landing on an aircraft carrier.
As an electrical engineer specializing in public infrastructure work, if this plan and the other transportation plans that are being tossed around actually get funded, I feel like I'm looking at a good 40 years worth of well paid, socially useful work ahead of me that I can be proud of.
Agreed 100%. This type of infrastructure is exactly what should have been built up over the last 30 years. Given the tepid attitude towards rail of the last few administrations, I never thought I would see this in my lifetime. Let's just hope future administrations continue to see the need to invest heavily in mass transit, and also give increased incentives for the denser living arrangements which make mass transit more viable.
  by Suburban Station
 
JoshKarpoff wrote:What they're really talking about isn't a whole new rail line straight to JFK, but extending the existing line that terminates at Atlantic Terminal (formerly Flatbush Terminal) in downtown Brooklyn through to Penn. This line already connects to Jamaica Station, which has a connection via the AirTrain to JFK. The MTA has been using a midtown Manhattan, one-seat trip to JFK as an excuse for what is really just opening up more direct capacity on the LIRR into Manhattan. Not to say that a one-seat rail connection from midtown Manhattan is a bad thing; it's not. Air travel needs to be better integrated into our mass transit infrastructure all around. This link, in combination with MNRR/ PANYNJ's plan to connect Stewart International Airport in Newburg into the mass transit system via a spur off the Port Jervis Line and the new Tappan Zee bridge rail line, will help to integrate NY's long distance air travel with regional rail, for a holistic approach to travel. I'm still waiting to see when they'll ever build a mass transit connection to LGA.

As an electrical engineer specializing in public infrastructure work, if this plan and the other transportation plans that are being tossed around actually get funded, I feel like I'm looking at a good 40 years worth of well paid, socially useful work ahead of me that I can be proud of.
As a Philly resident a one seat ride to JFK would make the train to NYP a worthwhile option to get to JFK (Which has flights nobody else has)
  by travelrobb
 
TREnecNYP wrote:You realize that you just said hourly acela service would be supported, right? That's a pretty big damn leap from a few years ago when there were no "luxury" options with amtrak.
I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand your point...
  by TREnecNYP
 
afiggatt wrote:
Greg Moore wrote:Careful, we know new North River Tunnels for NJT will be built. They will move some traffic going into Penn Station by directing it into a new station just north and deeper than Penn. But they currently have no plan to connect them to Penn Station.
The report does state, under alternatives to be evaluated in the next phase of the Master Plans, that additional capacity will be needed for NYP with new tunnels under the East and Hudson Rivers - this is in ADDITION to the NJT ARC tunnels. The track schematics show as long term projects, two new Hudson tunnels and 2 new East River tunnels, the East River tunnels to also provide direct access trains to JFK. This along with the expanded platform capacity for NYP - beyond the current NJT NYPE project - is what causes the hefty $12.5 billion figure for the Penn Station New York Capacity Improvements category. This would make for 6 Hudson River Tunnels to NYP & connected extensions and 6 East River tunnels. By 2030 or 2040 or whenever.

Not living in NYC, I do wonder whether a direct train to JFK is worth spending the considerable bucks to do so. Isn't a LIRR train to Jamaica station and then the Air Train to JFK reasonably efficient? (Not having taken it myself).

Yea, they are thinking of making a pair of new tunnels directly into the NYP alignment, leaving its trajectory from nj right before the empire line ramp, as well as making tracks 1-4 through tracks, possibly also excavating below grade to expand the number of tracks and yard area. Just 4 more tracks, 2 platforms serving, would do the trick i think. This combined with hell gate stuff would put like a 25% capacity increase, and remember, many amtk trains terminate/originate at nyp so its not like all of it is going to waste with 2 and 3 track sections to the east. Might just give LIRR and NJT the breathing room they need as well till their own projects are complete (GCT/ARC)

- A
  by TREnecNYP
 
travelrobb wrote:
TREnecNYP wrote:You realize that you just said hourly acela service would be supported, right? That's a pretty big damn leap from a few years ago when there were no "luxury" options with amtrak.
I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand your point...
I think my point was pretty damn clear...

Not since PRR has there been a "luxury" train on the corridor as an option as far as i know, even towards the end the BWL was a shadow of its former self and at the very end it was just a named amtk train nothing otherwise special. It is major progress that expensive rail travel can compete with other modes of transportation, even just cheaper rail options. Think about high speed rail boston to chicago, sleeping cars on the acela...... It really isn't too far fetched.

- A
  by Jishnu
 
TREnecNYP wrote: Yea, they are thinking of making a pair of new tunnels directly into the NYP alignment, leaving its trajectory from nj right before the empire line ramp, as well as making tracks 1-4 through tracks, possibly also excavating below grade to expand the number of tracks and yard area. Just 4 more tracks, 2 platforms serving, would do the trick i think. This combined with hell gate stuff would put like a 25% capacity increase, and remember, many amtk trains terminate/originate at nyp so its not like all of it is going to waste with 2 and 3 track sections to the east. Might just give LIRR and NJT the breathing room they need as well till their own projects are complete (GCT/ARC)
So you then believe that these new tunnels will be done before the ARC and ESA projects are completed so as to give relief to LIRR and NJT? Amazing!!!
  by Jtgshu
 
Jishnu wrote:
TREnecNYP wrote: Yea, they are thinking of making a pair of new tunnels directly into the NYP alignment, leaving its trajectory from nj right before the empire line ramp, as well as making tracks 1-4 through tracks, possibly also excavating below grade to expand the number of tracks and yard area. Just 4 more tracks, 2 platforms serving, would do the trick i think. This combined with hell gate stuff would put like a 25% capacity increase, and remember, many amtk trains terminate/originate at nyp so its not like all of it is going to waste with 2 and 3 track sections to the east. Might just give LIRR and NJT the breathing room they need as well till their own projects are complete (GCT/ARC)
So you then believe that these new tunnels will be done before the ARC and ESA projects are completed so as to give relief to LIRR and NJT? Amazing!!!
I was thinking the same thing - HUH? Yet another fun post....

I repeat again, the SAME issues NJT has been faced with its alignment of its new tunnels would be faced by Amtrak with any new tunnels they would build. They simply cannot build any new tunnels next to the current ones, they are going to have to go deeper like NJT is.
  by morris&essex4ever
 
Will the future Moynihan Station just be an expansion of the current Penn Station but not separate like the one under 34th street for the ARC tunnels will be?
  by neroden
 
afiggatt wrote:So no comments on a official Master Plan document that has a map on page 24 which shows proposed new lines to Concord, NH, restoration of the Lackawanna cutoff to Scranton PA & Binghampton NY
There is no "p" in "Binghamton". But I realized that Amtrak made the spelling mistake in their report!
  by neroden
 
Jtgshu wrote:Some of the biggest problems are the bulkhead on the hudson river (that the original 1910 tunnels simply cut through), the #7 (i think it is) subway line ROW, and of course, the water tunnel, not to mention restrictions to distrubing existing infrastructure and utilities. They wanted to include a connection to NYP, but the grades required just weren't feasible.
No, the grades were perfectly feasible, since I've seen engineering plans for them. If I remember correctly, the underpinning was deemed to be too expensive. (There is a LOT to underpin between the Hudson River and Penn Station.)
  by neroden
 
djlong wrote:What I find most interesting is, buried WAY deep in the lsit of improvements, they're talking about "undertaking a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed North-South Rail Link". (Linking Boston's North and South Stations)

I thought this project was deader than dead.
Not even close. Massachusetts simply stopped spending any money on anything a while back. It's still mentally a top priority among planners and advocates.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 70