• The East Side Access Project Discussion (ESA)

  • Discussion of the past and present operations of the Long Island Rail Road.
Discussion of the past and present operations of the Long Island Rail Road.

Moderator: Liquidcamphor

  by jlr3266
 
The FEIS plan was still based on using the existing Lower Level of GCT for the ESA service. For many reasons, some even engineering related, the current scheme are for the deep caverns with no connection to the MNR levels.
  by STrRedWolf
 
jlr3266 wrote: Sat Oct 08, 2022 11:35 pm The FEIS plan was still based on using the existing Lower Level of GCT for the ESA service. For many reasons, some even engineering related, the current scheme are for the deep caverns with no connection to the MNR levels.
Yeah, lovely. And I'm going to assume the grade would be too steep to pull it off.

Enough's enough. I'm laying down more track.
  by Jeff Smith
 
Wolf, at one point, debris was being removed by rail using Brokeville engines. I am unsure if the had a ladder for it.
  by MNCRR9000
 
A last minute hurdle could delay the MTA’s long-stalled $11.6 billion East Side Access project to bring Long Island Rail Road trains into a new station beneath Grand Central Terminal.

Transit officials have insisted since 2014 that the new station — dubbed “Grand Central Madison” by Gov. Kathy Hochul — will open before the end of 2022. But a crucial safety approval from the federal government could push back that timeline to March 2023, piling onto years of delays.

The 2022 completion date is already 11 years later than MTA officials planned in 2001, when construction first began on the project.

In a letter obtained by Gothamist, the MTA last month told the feds a mandatory safety feature that automatically prevents trains from entering the wrong tunnels would not be installed on time, and asked for an exemption to the requirement.

The safety technology will not be in place on the MTA’s trains “before LIRR’s commencement of its East Side Access passenger service and the opening of the Grand Central Madison tunnels,” the MTA’s letter reads.

The request was the subject of a sparsely attended hearing by the Federal Railway Administration on Monday.
https://gothamist.com/news/key-safety-a ... ss-project
  by workextra
 
You all rode for 100 years w/o PTC you don’t need it, it’s just as safe.
This is the dilemma that was created when congress shoved this down every railroad throat.

However.. if LIRR does obtain a PTC waiver to operate MODERN-PTC equipped equipment in/out of ESA.
Every mainline steam operator out there should be suing the shit out of the feds for not placing a carve out/waiver for all locomotives built before 1970. And all modern built replica steam locomotives.
Guarantee nothing will happen. And the feds will give the waiver. To 1 and not the other.
  by ExCon90
 
I can see the need for some sort of protection. Everybody knows there are certain overhead bridges which won't clear double-stacks, yet every once in a while a stack train will be routed on that track and provide entertainment for YouTube, but nobody gets injured. If a train destined to NYP is mistakenly routed to (what--GCM?) there's a good chance the engineer will realize the misroute in time to stop his train before damage is done, but the consequences of an actual beheading of multilevels would be monumental. I'm wondering whether overheight detectors at critical points within HAROLD could be installed sooner than the necessary changes to PTC (which I've always felt stood for Panic Time in Congress) and whether that would suffice.
  by workextra
 
The biggest mistake with a EAS misroute would be a diesel or Amtrak getting sent into ESA. There is traditional advanced warning.
You have white arrows that illuminate in conjunction with the normal signal aspects which indicates your heading to ESA.
You will Pass at least 2 before you reach the point where’s you’d be a situation.

ACSES is intact so inferior that is is not capable of distinguishing between EMU class type so as far as PTC in concerned all LIRR EMUs and DE/DMs are “PTC” wise the same Train. So PTC likely won’t stop an M3 or DE from going into ESA.
It’s only providing protection against stop signal violations and overspeed violations.
Im sure some PTC guru will Correct me.
But the primitive ACSES is not the same more advanced interoperable system the class 1s use.
  by NaugyRR
 
I think workextra has a good idea, it's basically the same system they use at Woodlawn in Metro-North territory to keep Harlem trains from visiting New Haven and losing third rail power. Granted that scenario is more forgiving than the example of an Amtrak or bilevel train, but it still works pretty well. The UK's been using their 'feather' route indications for years with great affect.
  by JBKingEsq
 
I doubt the FRA is going to exempt the nation's busiest passenger railroad, within the nation's busiest interlocking, from having PTC. Just seems a bit unlikely.
  by eolesen
 
Nah, they'll get the exemption if there's a clear horizon on when the work will be finished. This is planned, it's just delayed like everything else due to chip and hardware supply chain issues.

You have to think about this through the eyes of the administration that will be doing the approving: They've just authorized billions for passenger and commuter rail infrastructure, and still have nothing tangible to show for it.

Approving a brief waiver and allowing ESA to open up is progress Biden and Mayor Pete can use as a backdrop to future infrastructure plans like Gateway.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

  by Head-end View
 
workextra wrote: Sat Nov 19, 2022 9:28 am The biggest mistake with a EAS misroute would be a diesel or Amtrak getting sent into ESA. There is traditional advanced warning.
You have white arrows that illuminate in conjunction with the normal signal aspects which indicates your heading to ESA.
You will Pass at least 2 before you reach the point where’s you’d be a situation.

ACSES is intact so inferior that is is not capable of distinguishing between EMU class type so as far as PTC in concerned all LIRR EMUs and DE/DMs are “PTC” wise the same Train. So PTC likely won’t stop an M3 or DE from going into ESA.
It’s only providing protection against stop signal violations and overspeed violations.
Im sure some PTC guru will Correct me.
But the primitive ACSES is not the same more advanced interoperable system the class 1s use.
Workextra: Why would M3 trains be prohibited from East Side Access?
  by workextra
 
HEV, I haven’t seen any official restrictions on M3s in ESA, but it’s been frequently said by the “powers that be” which is not me. That the “M3s can’t make the grades”, which are 4-4.5% at some point.
My opinion: is that I find this “BS” because the M1s were supposed to service ESA if they didn’t take 50 years to complete it. All the earlier rendering shows M1/M3s in ESA. I doubt the grades changed between now and then.
I would like to see m3s in there though.
  by EdwardHand
 
Per Special Instructions no M3.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
  • 1
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 76