Apologies for going light on the content today, but I’ve had a very busy Monday. Submitted for your enjoyment is this short video I shot with my camera inside the East Side Access project on Friday. It’s not my finest attempt at videography: I scan too fast at one point and accidentally hit the shutter early. Check it out anyway for a sense of the project.
For more on my trip to the TBM launch box, check out Friday’s post on that very same topic.
26 comments
Would someone please explain why ESA seems always associated with extending LIRR to Grand Central? Can’t it equally extend NJ Transit there as well? And Metro North to Penn? Or am I missing something?
It’s not a link between Grand Central and Penn; it’s a link between the LIRR and Grand Central via Sunnyside. I guess you could technically extend NJ Transit to GCT and Metro-North to Penn but the routes would be inefficiently circuitous. I’m not sure of the details on that end though.
Thanks for clarifying. However, why can’t Penn and Grand Central be connected? That way LIRR trains could enter Penn, then reverse direction and enter GC via a left turn up Park avenue. This would give full connection of all 3 rail lines to both stations.
To get from Penn to GCT underground, you’d have to navigate around the West Side IRT, the BMT Broadway Line, the IND Sixth Avenue line, the East Side IRT, the 7 train and the shuttle as well as Water Tunnel No. 1. It’s a cost and engineering nightmare.
Yes, but aren’t there already LIRR tracks from Penn to Long Island that go under all the avenues and subways east of Penn (under 33rd street approximately)? Can they build a spur track off these that goes north under Park Avenue to link up with the ESA tracks that already go just a few blocks away at 37th street? Or are these tracks at totally different depths to make it impossible?
Try selling it to Park Avenue office buildings. Also there isnt enough room on the east side of Penn to put in the ramps to anywhere. Only a Communist Government, that would round up and execute NIMBYs for “enemy of the state”, could get it done, or a congressional bill wiping out 50 years of environmental “judicial review” BS laws (anyone can sue pretending to be the government/EPA/DEP to stop anything). China has no nonsensical environmental laws which allow 1 group to drain $10s of millions of a project budget in a war of attrition to stop the project. You wouldn’t have electricity or running water if EISes existed in the 1800s.
According to this site, there was something called “Alternative G” that made the Penn-GCT connection as part of the ARC project.
http://www.newpennstation.org/site/connection
http://www.nj-arp.org/arc2.html
It’s true that one of the recommended components to the ARC project was an underground connection from Penn Station to Grand Central. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t part of the final ARC project that started moving before Christie cancelled it.
I know Amtrak has also proposed connecting the two stations as part of the Super HSR $117b plan they made for the NEC. But such a tunnel would be a difficult endeavor, making a 90 degree turn under some of the most expensive commercial property in the United States, underneath the City’s oldest subway line would be an engineering marvel.
Even if that engineering marvel cost $3 billion for less than a mile of track, it would be worth it. It would increase the capacity of NJ Transit, and allow direct access to the east side, where supposedly everyone wants to go.
However, let’s not forget some extra added cost not being considered. NJT would need it’s own set of tracks at GCT. Let’s not making it seem as if ESA is just giving track access to GCT for LIRR. No because if that was the case then this project would likely finish in 2014. The real nuts and bolts is the fact that deep under the place four tracks, two platforms on two different levels with a mezz in the middle is currently being constructed.
If you want to build NJT it’s own set of tracks there and it can get paid for then I say go for it, but I would bet that those new tracks being build in the bedrock cost about $3 billion by itself.
Metro-North to Penn inefficiently circuitous? Really? I mean, really?
Anyway, there are no plans to use ESA for anything other than the LIRR. The idea of having two different systems use the same station is completely foreign to the East Side. There are plans to extend Metro-North to Penn after ESA opens, which are a completely different matter.
Why is all this so ridiculously big? It all just looks really way more expensive than necessary…
The size and the expense aren’t really related. But they’re digging out four tunnels in that space. They can’t do that with a pick axe and a shovel.
The launch box being used to launch the Queens Bored Tunnels will become part of a permanent structure (part of a follow-on contract), so the size was partially determined by future use needs, not just what was needed to launch a TBM. However, Ben is correct in that the TBM’s do need space. Typical TBM trailing gear is over 300′ long, so you need the space to set up.
It looks like each TBM could make a tunnel to fit two tracks. Why are their dimensions so large?
They can’t. They’re 22 feet in diameter. That’s not large enough to make a two-track tunnel.
are they trying to get double stacks in there?
No, that can’t fit. After the tunnel lining panels get installed, the tunnels will be ~20′ internal diameter. Then you add the track sub slab and its 19′ from the top of slab to top of the inside of the tunnel. As for double track tunnels, that wouldn’t work with the curves. The loading gauge of the new tunnel might be good for a rail car slightly larger than a bi-level commuter rail car.
From JRTR, on the unrelated issue of slab vs. ballasted track:
For the record, the difference in cross-sectional area is on the order of 15%, not 30%.
You also have low profile ladder tracks like the LR55. They can slightly enlarge the loading gauge, or at least the max height of the rail car.
Alon, In the sweet by and by, all the tunnels on the NEC will need to be rebuilt or replaced. New tunnels in Baltimore a.s.a.p., new Hudson crossing, new tunnel under the Potomac down the way, and surely some other stuff.
Do you know if they are they planning to build these tunnels a little larger to handle the Horizon Fleet (or their replacement cars) so that eventually all Amtrak coaches can be used on any long distance train in the system?
Of course I meant tunnels big enough for the Superliners, the double decker coaches used out West.
You think they are going to rebuild all these tunnels, just to find outdated oversized rolling stock through them? Sounds like an expensive proposition.
In general, I have no idea. I doubt they’re insane enough to rebuild everything for Superliners. The loading gauge in the Northeast is Plate C at several places where there are no plans for replacement; the Superliner requires Plate F.
The FRA’s B & P report mentions that the new tunnels will be built for Plate H, allowing double-stacked containers and trilevel autoracks. But the Union Tunnels are still Plate C, with no immediate or long-range plans for replacement.
Looks like the starter tunnel here was built from concrete rather than being blasted out of the rock.
That’s a must when dealing with ground that soft and wet at the starting point. Notice the retaining walls in the background.