Amtrak back to Grand Central

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.

AmtrakerBx

Train Attendant
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Messages
44
Today....a tugboat pushing a barge filled with stone hit the RR bridge

over the Harlem river during a snow storm. The Bridge is out until

a complete inspection is completed. All Empire service is now out of Grand Central Terminal, instead of Penn Station.
 
Sounds like something that happened a few years ago, too bad Amtrak can't return there regularly for service. (Unless the Alternative in Access to the Regions core, to relieve congestion between NY and NJ which would build a second tube and/or extend service to Grand Central).
 
Viewliner said:
Sounds like something that happened a few years ago, too bad Amtrak can't return there regularly for service.
Actually it was only last year that a barge full of NYC Subway cars (Red Birds), headed for dumping off the coast, hit the Spyyten Duyvil bridge. Amtrak service was diverted into GC at that time also, until everything was checked out.
 
Viewliner said:
Sounds like something that happened a few years ago, too bad Amtrak can't return there regularly for service. (Unless the Alternative in Access to the Regions core, to relieve congestion between NY and NJ which would build a second tube and/or extend service to Grand Central).
As much as I would love to see Amtrak at GC, they moved everything over to Penn for consolidation and make it easier for corridor transfers.
 
Well if the cross-town connector was built, then you wouldn't loose the ability to transfer to a NE corridor train. After stopping at GC, the train would merely continue across Manhattan to Penn Station.
 
Amfleet said:
It wouldn't be worth it though to stop at GC and Penn unless you ruled through GC right into Penn, but then your right back to the current situaion.
Well I don't think that every Empire train needs to stop at GC, however I do think that it is worth it for some trains to stop at both places. Grand Central still is a major station here in NY. Hundreds of Thousands of people move through it every day.

The idea of not needing to ride two subway trains just to reach the east side of Manhattan would be quite appealing. It's that very reason that the LIRR is building its Eastside Access project.

So I do think that the market would be there for some trains to make two stops. In fact were the cross-town connector in place, I would even like to see select NEC trains stopping both at NYP and GC. Heck even Boston gets two stops on the NEC, yet it sees far less passengers than does New York. If there is a market that can support two stops in Boston (technically three with Rt. 128), then there should certainly be a market here for two stops. :)
 
Ya your right. Boston, in my opinion, doesn't even need two stops, but we do. Route 128 serves the high-class suburbs were most commuters live. It is also home to some industrial parks. That station does very well. I have always wondered why Amtrak doesn't stop in Queens or another suburb before Penn.
 
I think that if Penn was just rebuilt in the Post Office building life would be better. I would love to see something similar to the rendering Trains made a few months ago.
 
battalion51 said:
I think that if Penn was just rebuilt in the Post Office building life would be better. I would love to see something similar to the rendering Trains made a few months ago.
Well it would make life nicer if Penn were improved, :D but that would have nothing to do with having Amtrak serve the east side of Manhattan. Plus thanks to Jackie O, we've already got a lovely station just sitting there waiting for Amtrak to come home. :)
 
Don't forget former Sen's Moynihan and D'Amato. It was the former's pet project and the latter got a good deal of the initial funding back in '96.
 
Amtrak service between New York City and Albany will relocated to Grand Central Terminal this weekend because the Spuyten Duyvil Bridge was seriously damaged Friday by a wayward barge, authorities said.
Here's a follow-up story to the tugboat accident from 1010 WINS News.
 
Amfleet said:
Ya your right. Boston, in my opinion, doesn't even need two stops, but we do. Route 128 serves the high-class suburbs were most commuters live. It is also home to some industrial parks. That station does very well. I have always wondered why Amtrak doesn't stop in Queens or another suburb before Penn.
There was some talk a couple of years ago of having Amtrak stop somewhere in the Bronx, near where it runs next to the #6 train. Besides those modes, there would also have been some sort of connecting shuttle bus running over the Whitestone Bridge to LaGuardia Airport.
 
On trains.com it says that 200 series trains are using Grand Central but trains 48-49 and the other non 200 trains are using a 27 mile detour. Where is that detour? I know the area well and can not figure it out. Are they going to the Bronx via the Hellgate then using the Oak Point connection? That would involve a back up move, wouldn't it?
 
CincyTrains,

It would be my guess that Amtrak is indeed running down to Mott Haven Junction on the Metro North tracks. Then returning north on Metro North's New Haven division to reach the interlock at New Rochelle. That's the only detour that I can think of, that comes close to 27 miles.

Based upon my knowledge of those tracks, it would indeed have to involve one backup move. The real question is where are the making that backup move. At Mott Haven it is possible to transition from the Metro North Hudson line to the combined New Haven/Harlem line, via a short curved track that constitutes the top of the wye at Mott Haven. There is no such wye connection at Shell interlocking in New Rochelle.

So the question is, do you tie up Metro North's very busy combined main line right before the East River bridge by stopping to reverse directions? Or do you run backwards on the Oak Point line all the way to either Sunnyside Yard or Penn? I'm guessing that they are running backwards on the Metro North line, as it's the shorter distance.

Now had they listed a shorter distance on the detour, then I would have figured that they were using a newly built freight line that runs around the bottom of the Bronx. This line, which opened maybe two years ago, branches off Metro North's Hudson line just before Yankee Stadium. It then runs on a concrete roadbed/low-level bridge, about two feet off of the shoreline, out over the East River.

This line then curves back onto land at the southern tip of the Bronx, and head back to the north into Port Morris yards. The problem here is that, as far as I know, you are still left with a backup move onto the Hell Gate Bridge from the Port Morris yards.
 
That is the Oak Point connection, the freight line in the Bronx.I have found out that they are using the Mott Haven wye and the New Rochelle interlocking. So my next question is do you think they are running a engine on both ends, a totally backword move all the way to New Rochelle, or back to back engines and run them around the train at New Rochelle which would delay something in that area? You are correct about Mott Haven they can use that connection which is equivalent to a Lionel piece of 0-27 in terms of sharpness so there is not a problem there.
 
Amtrak service between New York City and Albany was again operating out of Penn Station Wednesday morning, five days after a wayward barge seriously damaged a Harlem River bridge and forced trains to run out of Grand Central Terminal.
You can read the full story from 1010 WINS News.
 
Cincytrains said:
I have found out that they are using the Mott Haven wye and the New Rochelle interlocking. So my next question is do you think they are running a engine on both ends, a totally backword move all the way to New Rochelle, or back to back engines and run them around the train at New Rochelle which would delay something in that area? You are correct about Mott Haven they can use that connection which is equivalent to a Lionel piece of 0-27 in terms of sharpness so there is not a problem there.
According to the quote below from a story by Railpace HotNews, Amtrak was indeed running around Mott Haven and then using a runaround move at New Rochell, in an effort to reach Penn. You can find the story here, but you must scroll down to read it. I can't directly link to the start of the story.

48-Penn Station via Mott Haven/New Rochelle runaround move
So to answer your questions Cincytrains, it would indeed appear that Amtrak ran around the curved top of the wye at Mott Haven. This would orientate them properly for the run up to New Rochelle. Once at New Rochelle they could pull into what I guess is track #5, I'm not really sure, but there is an extra track on the right side of the north-bound platform.

The two express tracks at New Rochelle do not platform here. Only the local tracks have platforms. The southbound side is a single sided platform, while the northbound side is a center island between the northbound local track and an extra track that runs for a short distance north of the actual station.

This would permit a runaround move with out really blocking the mainline, other than during the actual move for the engine. Otherwise all blue flag work would occur off of the main on this side track.
 
Amtrak continues to take steps to mitigate the impact of a service disruption on the Empire line between New York Penn Station and Albany resulting from the closure of a critical railroad bridge.
Here's Amtrak's press release on the matter. It includes a complete schedule of what trains Amtrak ran and which ones they annulled.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top