Amtrak Gateway Tunnels - Freight Usage

A one tube freight bore would still need the emergency egress requirements of NFPA 130 standard. That would require a separate escape tunnel with access every 800 feet or less to main freight tunnel.

These tunnels would not be able to handle land barges. I would expect to reduce constructio costs that grades might be in the 1 - 2 % grade range. Allowable drawbar tonnage would be much less beind an electric motor.

west point wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:34 pmA one tube freight bore would still need the emergency egress requirements of NFPA 130 standard. That would require a separate escape tunnel with access every 800 feet or less to main freight tunnel.

Interesting. An escape tunnel would still be a lot cheaper than a whole second rail tunnel, but that does complicate things quite a bit. Are there any other technical solutions allowed for to avoid that?

These tunnels would not be able to handle land barges. I would expect to reduce constructio costs that grades might be in the 1 - 2 % grade range. Allowable drawbar tonnage would be much less beind an electric motor.

They would be designed for trains, not trucks or anything else. Huh? How would a 10,000HP electric locomotive be able to handle less tonnage than a 4400HP diesel locomotive of the same weight? At worse, they'd be about the same, at best, the electric potentially could handle quite a bit more. Tractive effort, however, tends to be determined by weight and powered axles, not horsepower, which determines speed. Nationwide, electric freight locomotives would be much faster, as they would be able to keep speed on hills and get heavy trains up to track speed faster, especially with DPU.

west point wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:34 pm A one tube freight bore would still need the emergency egress requirements of NFPA 130 standard. That would require a separate escape tunnel with access every 800 feet or less to main freight tunnel.

These tunnels would not be able to handle land barges. I would expect to reduce constructio costs that grades might be in the 1 - 2 % grade range. Allowable drawbar tonnage would be much less beind an electric motor.

It appears that NFPA 130 Standard does not apply to freight-only tunnels. The standard specifically provides that for freight and other excepted types it can be used as a guide, but is clearly not mandatory: "NFPA 130 - Standard for Fixed Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail Systems Scope

1.1 Scope.
1.1.1* This standard shall cover life safety from fire and fire protection requirements for fixed guideway transit and passenger rail systems, including, but not limited to, stations, trainways, emergency ventilation systems, vehicles, emergency procedures, communications, and control systems.
A.1.1.1 Vehicle maintenance facilities are not addressed by this standard because requirements for that occupancy are provided in other codes and standards. Where vehicle maintenance facilities are integrated or co-located with occupancies covered by this standard, special considerations beyond this standard shall be necessary.
1.1.2 Fixed guideway transit and passenger rail stations shall pertain to stations accommodating only passengers and employees of the fixed guideway transit and passenger rail systems and incidental occupancies in the stations. This standard establishes minimum requirements for each of the identified subsystems.
1.1.3 This standard shall not cover requirements for the following:
(1) Conventional freight systems
(2) Buses and trolley coaches
(3) Circus trains
(4) Tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion operations
(5) Any other system of transportation not included in the definition of fixed guideway transit system (see 3.3.63.1) or passenger rail system (see 3.3.63.2)
(6)* Shelter stops
A.1.1.3(6) A shelter stop is a location along a fixed guideway transit or passenger rail system for the loading and unloading of passengers that is located in a public way and is designed for unrestricted movement of passengers. A shelter stop can have a cover but no walls or barriers that would restrict passenger movement.
1.1.4 To the extent that a system, including those listed in 1.1.3(1) through 1.1.3(6), introduces hazards of a nature similar to those addressed herein, this standard shall be permitted to be used as a guide."

It would be great for the freight railroads to pitch in. Would love to see electrified freight trains again. Freight running into Sunnyside yard, and then to points north over the Hell Gate and points east on the LIRR lines. Probably will never happen.

No. Not going to happen. If their is to be freight, it should be in a Cross-Harbor tunnel. These new tubes are CLEARLY needed for the NEC.

I think the only way the Cross Town gets built is if it's dual utility for trucks + rail. It could probably pay for itself on truck tolls alone...

nyrmetros wrote: ↑Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:37 amIt would be great for the freight railroads to pitch in. Would love to see electrified freight trains again. Freight running into Sunnyside yard, and then to points north over the Hell Gate and points east on the LIRR lines. Probably will never happen.

Not possible. The clearance in NYP is lower than 15'6", I believe about 14'6" flat, the clearance through the East River Tunnels is about 14'6" flat, the existing North River Tunnels are 14'6" with chopped corners. 15'6" is the bare minimum to move Plate C freight, 286k would probably destroy the East River Tunnels (except for the fact that it won't physically fit through them). A cross-harbor tunnel would be at least 17'0" Plate F to feed NY&A, possibly 17'6" for TOFC to LI over the third rail or full Plate H at 20'2" if space to unload double stacks could be found somewhere in Brooklyn or Queens. Plate C freight could be hauled up Metro North to Cedar Hill (not sure if they've gotten up to 286k or are still at 263k).

It's probably been noted before, but the only freight to go through the North River Tunnels in modern times was the RBBX Circus Train, which was built to North River Tunnel (Amtrak/national passenger network) clearance standards for that move to Garden City, LI via NYP, and an Amtrak MOW train carrying ballast from NJ or PA or somewhere down there to the Shore Line that inexplicably went went through at some point a few years ago (why they didn't at least send it via CSX at Selkirk is baffling to say the least, if not just buy the ballast in CT).

Why pay another railroad when you can move the cars yourself?

Red Wing wrote: ↑Thu Oct 06, 2022 6:47 pmWhy pay another railroad when you can move the cars yourself?

To not move a train full of rock through the deteriorating North River Tunnels?

If moving said cars through the tunnel would be an issue, there is a whole department at Amtrak that are smarter than us about those tunnels that would have said don't do it.

How long ago ? Before Sandy?

west point wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 2:25 amHow long ago ? Before Sandy?

It was much more recently than Sandy.