New York High Speed Rail

[Guest]

Imagine getting from Buffalo to New York City in 2 and a half hours. It may become a reality. This is New York High Speed Rail. It will run from what currently is the Buffalo Exchange Street Amtrak Station to New York City's Grand Central Station. But Exchange Street will become Buffalo Regional Transportation Center. It will consist of four tracks with two island platforms. Stations are Buffalo. Rochester, Syracuse, Utica, Schenectady, Albany, then NYC Grand Central. It will between Buffalo and Schenectady,run on existing Amtrak tracks. After Schenectady, it diverges onto tracks just for the high speed line. The Albany station will be located alongside Interstate 87 and will operate next to existing freight tracks that run along the west coast of the Hudson River until it reaches the Paliasades Interstate Parkway and runs alongside it until it reaches Englewood Cliffs. Then it goes over the Hudson River and merges onto the Metro North Hudson Line tracks to get to Grand Central. That is the New York High Speed Rail I want.

 

[AlanB]

Another impossible dream; sorry!

First, Grand Central has next to no spare capacity for more trains (if it has any at all) and that would go to more commuter trains since the station is owned by Metro North.

Second, you can't string catenary wires in the Park Avenue tunnels, making normal electric HSR trainsets impossible to use.

Third, there is no way to cross the Hudson at the point you suggest and still be able to connect to the MN Hudson line. You can't build a bridge that is high enough to clear ships and yet still tie it into the MN line because of other bridges on the NY side.

Fourth, the run down the Hudson alongside the existing freight lines would not be straight enough for HSR.

So even if you had the money to build your dream, you still couldn't realize it due to the above limitations.

 

[Anderson]

Since this is actually a variant of a RL project, assuming that you dump the NYG diversion and the odd west-of-Hudson line suggestion, what would it look like if you basically ran this down the existing Amtrak line to NYP? Not saying it's doable, but I think there's something in the works in this vein, though I think the running times are at least a little bit slower.

 

[Guest]

Another impossible dream; sorry!

First, Grand Central has next to no spare capacity for more trains (if it has any at all) and that would go to more commuter trains since the station is owned by Metro North.

Second, you can't string catenary wires in the Park Avenue tunnels, making normal electric HSR trainsets impossible to use.

Third, there is no way to cross the Hudson at the point you suggest and still be able to connect to the MN Hudson line. You can't build a bridge that is high enough to clear ships and yet still tie it into the MN line because of other bridges on the NY side.

Fourth, the run down the Hudson alongside the existing freight lines would not be straight enough for HSR.

So even if you had the money to build your dream, you still couldn't realize it due to the above limitations.

Actually, Grand Central has a total of 67 tracks so you are wrong that it doesn't have capacity-way wrong. So Grand Central is by far the largest station in the United States so I even think Penn Station should close even though that will not happen. LIRR and NJ Transit are all being diverted to Grand Central. So Grand Central has far more than enough room for a high speed rail line.

 

[NY Penn]

The problem with Grand Central is not the number of tracks but the fact that the station throat is very congested. There is not enough capacity for MNR trains as it is during the rush hours.

 

[Anderson]

Another impossible dream; sorry!

First, Grand Central has next to no spare capacity for more trains (if it has any at all) and that would go to more commuter trains since the station is owned by Metro North.

Second, you can't string catenary wires in the Park Avenue tunnels, making normal electric HSR trainsets impossible to use.

Third, there is no way to cross the Hudson at the point you suggest and still be able to connect to the MN Hudson line. You can't build a bridge that is high enough to clear ships and yet still tie it into the MN line because of other bridges on the NY side.

Fourth, the run down the Hudson alongside the existing freight lines would not be straight enough for HSR.

So even if you had the money to build your dream, you still couldn't realize it due to the above limitations.

Actually, Grand Central has a total of 67 tracks so you are wrong that it doesn't have capacity-way wrong. So Grand Central is by far the largest station in the United States so I even think Penn Station should close even though that will not happen. LIRR and NJ Transit are all being diverted to Grand Central. So Grand Central has far more than enough room for a high speed rail line.

NYG has space in the station, but (serious question again) what does the available space look like on the tracks in/out of the station? If a bunch of tracks got ripped up here under the Penn Central, it's possible that at least some of those tracks are effectively "ceremonial" or organizational (that is to say, there's no practical way to use all 67 to their fullest).

 

[USrail21]

Guys, stop arguing, 67 tracks is a lot so you think Grand Central is small and even rush hour Metro-Norths would only cover 1/6-1/5 of all the tracks. Note: I estimated it.

 

[AlanB]

Another impossible dream; sorry!

First, Grand Central has next to no spare capacity for more trains (if it has any at all) and that would go to more commuter trains since the station is owned by Metro North.

Second, you can't string catenary wires in the Park Avenue tunnels, making normal electric HSR trainsets impossible to use.

Third, there is no way to cross the Hudson at the point you suggest and still be able to connect to the MN Hudson line. You can't build a bridge that is high enough to clear ships and yet still tie it into the MN line because of other bridges on the NY side.

Fourth, the run down the Hudson alongside the existing freight lines would not be straight enough for HSR.

So even if you had the money to build your dream, you still couldn't realize it due to the above limitations.

Actually, Grand Central has a total of 67 tracks so you are wrong that it doesn't have capacity-way wrong. So Grand Central is by far the largest station in the United States so I even think Penn Station should close even though that will not happen. LIRR and NJ Transit are all being diverted to Grand Central. So Grand Central has far more than enough room for a high speed rail line.

As noted by others, it's not the number of tracks that's the issue, it's that there are only 4 tracks in the Park Avenue tunnels. You can't move enough trains down that tunnel fast enough, as well as send trains back out to clear the platforms for more incoming trains. Because of that, during rush hour nearly every track is in use, simply because they have to park trains there until rush hour is over to get them back out.

As for the LIRR, they are building a brand new tunnel and a new station with 8 tracks & 4 platforms underneath the current lower level of the station. They are doing this in part because they don't have the capacity for more trains at GCT.

And New Jersey Transit isn't running to Grand Central for many years, if ever. There are currently no plans, or at least realistic plans backed by people with the money to make it happen, to connect NJT to GCT.

Of course, it's all academic anyhow, since we still have all the other problems that I noted to deal with and not a dime of money to even start building anything.

 

[AlanB]

Guys, stop arguing, 67 tracks is a lot so you think Grand Central is small and even rush hour Metro-Norths would only cover 1/6-1/5 of all the tracks. Note: I estimated it.

Your estimate is way off! One of our members here drives MN trains and he's said more than once that Metro North barely has any space left and they still need to get more trains into GCT. That's one reason that MN wants to run select Hudson line trains into NYP as well as select New Haven line trains into NYP. Yes, there are people that would like to arrive on the West Side, but its mainly about getting more trains into NY City, trains that they can't get into GCT.

 

[jis]

GCT just lost a bunch of the tracks that it used to have to the LIRR Concourse which occupies a good third of what used to be track and platform space at the lower level.

GCT also has the disadvantage of being a stub end station which inherently reduces its capacity. It does have loop tracks but they are highly speed restricted, not particularly helping with capacity. So anyone dreaming of GCT ever becoming a major interstate hub or even medium distance hub is just dreaming. But breaking is good provided one does not want to wake up.

 

[USrail21]

It is just one HSR line, won't make any problems

 

[AlanB]

Guys, stop arguing, 67 tracks is a lot so you think Grand Central is small and even rush hour Metro-Norths would only cover 1/6-1/5 of all the tracks. Note: I estimated it.

Your estimate is way off! One of our members here drives MN trains and he's said more than once that Metro North barely has any space left and they still need to get more trains into GCT. That's one reason that MN wants to run select Hudson line trains into NYP as well as select New Haven line trains into NYP. Yes, there are people that would like to arrive on the West Side, but its mainly about getting more trains into NY City, trains that they can't get into GCT.

I just went and pulled up the time tables from MN, for the weekdays. Between 7AM & 9 AM they have 77 trains inbound to GCT and only 25 outbound. That means that they've got 62 trains that have to go some place. Now I suspect that they manage to deadhead a few of them out, but again if you take a train from track 30 and send it out during the morning rush, you shut down every inbound track until that train has crossed. With trains coming in every about every 1.5 minutes, you don't want to shut things down for long and you cannot be doing so, or you would not be able to get 41 trains into GCT between 8 & 9.

During the morning rush, MN uses 3 tracks inbound and 1 outbound. That also reduces just how many trains you can send out.

Just to break things down further and show the problem that they have, between 7 & 8 they send 36 trains inbound and 15 outbound. Between 8 & 9 they send 41 trains inbound and because of that, outbounds drop to 10.

 

[AlanB]

It is just one HSR line, won't make any problems

HSR by its very nature makes problems. When you run fast, you need more clearance and that means fewer commuter trains can run.

 

[AlanB]

Now perhaps if you only wanted high speed arrivals during off peak hours they could accommodate that; but then half the reason for high speed is to get business people where they want to go. And that means arrivals during the peak hours, something that cannot be done at GCT.

And once again, you still have many other problems to overcome, not the least of which is that you have no clearance in the tunnels and even quite possibly in the station to hang catenary. No Cat; no HSR.

 

[USrail21]

You can't have more trains go to Penn Station. Penn station will be Amtrak only. All other trains in Grand Central. Too small 67 tracks, well, add more!

 

[AlanB]

You can't have more trains go to Penn Station. Penn station will be Amtrak only. All other trains in Grand Central. Too small 67 tracks, well, add more!

As I already noted, they are adding onto GCT. The LIRR is building a new, third level below the existing station. When that's done, it's expected that the LIRR will give up a few slots at Penn to Metro North.

As for GCT, about the only way to add more tracks would be to build an even more expensive 4th level and that's very unlikely. The existing GCT cannot be expanded without taking over the basements of existing buildings, something not likely to ever happen.

 

[USrail21]

Besides, no more with Grand Central, how about the other stations!

 

[USrail21]

Yeah, unless there is an extra track added just before Amtrak merges into Metro North Hudson Line, then watch the trains collide on the one available track.

 

[AlanB]

Yeah, unless there is an extra track added just before Amtrak merges into Metro North Hudson Line, then watch the trains collide on the one available track.

There won't be that many trains on the Amtrak west side line, such that the short stretch of single track can't handle it. However, if they do start getting congested, they can just restore the second track across the bridge to solve the problem.

The bigger and harder problem to overcome would be the single track for the last few hundred yards into NYP.

 

[Anderson]

Yeah, unless there is an extra track added just before Amtrak merges into Metro North Hudson Line, then watch the trains collide on the one available track.

There won't be that many trains on the Amtrak west side line, such that the short stretch of single track can't handle it. However, if they do start getting congested, they can just restore the second track across the bridge to solve the problem.

The bigger and harder problem to overcome would be the single track for the last few hundred yards into NYP.

I'm guessing that there's no "quick fix" here. Though it probably wouldn't work, would it be possible to "tighten up" the signal situation there to allow that section to be cleared more quickly?

 

[MattW]

At the risk of derailing this topic, now I'm curious about a few things with GCT. Looking at Rich E Green's map of GCT, I see what you mean about outbounds blocking every inbound track when originating from a higher-numbered track, but what about when originating from a low-numbered track, or would that create the opposite problem of an inbound blocking everything else as it'd have to cross all the way over? Is this a problem with any stub-terminal, or is GCT just inefficiently laid out right now, but could be improved?

 

[AlanB]

Yeah, unless there is an extra track added just before Amtrak merges into Metro North Hudson Line, then watch the trains collide on the one available track.

There won't be that many trains on the Amtrak west side line, such that the short stretch of single track can't handle it. However, if they do start getting congested, they can just restore the second track across the bridge to solve the problem.

The bigger and harder problem to overcome would be the single track for the last few hundred yards into NYP.

I'm guessing that there's no "quick fix" here. Though it probably wouldn't work, would it be possible to "tighten up" the signal situation there to allow that section to be cleared more quickly?

While I don't pretend to know all the ins & outs of that connection in Spuyten Duyvil I'd say that currently the biggest bottle neck would be getting Metro North dispatchers to clear the outbounds from NYP onto the Hudson Line. And I'm not suggesting that they wouldn't give some priority to things, after all their trains would now be coming off the West Side line. The issue is that you've got to cross over the inbound MN tracks to reach the outbound or northbound tracks. That could make things interesting to say the least.

But the single track section is very short, less than a mile I'd say, so it really comes down to better dispatching.

Not sure if there would be any way to build a flyover there to eliminate the problem, but I suspect not.

 

[AlanB]

At the risk of derailing this topic, now I'm curious about a few things with GCT. Looking at Rich E Green's map of GCT, I see what you mean about outbounds blocking every inbound track when originating from a higher-numbered track, but what about when originating from a low-numbered track, or would that create the opposite problem of an inbound blocking everything else as it'd have to cross all the way over? Is this a problem with any stub-terminal, or is GCT just inefficiently laid out right now, but could be improved?

You got it right, the inbounds crossing over to the lower number tracks do shut down at least some of the throat tracks. Yes, you can try to keep those inbounds headed to the lower number tracks on the middle two throat tracks, that would always leave inbound local track clear of interference. But still the math doesn't work as you just can't turn the trains fast enough on those lower numbered tracks to increase things by much. No matter what you need to use those higher level tracks, the very tracks that either trap the trains on the platforms or shut down all inbound traffic to clear the platforms.

Now I'm not a design engineer, but the only way that I could think of fixing things would be if you could build some sort of fly over/under tracks that don't require crossing at grade. Unfortunately the existing lower level tracks would most likely preclude any such modification even if there was money for such an expensive fix.

 

[jis]

Yeah, unless there is an extra track added just before Amtrak merges into Metro North Hudson Line, then watch the trains collide on the one available track.

There won't be that many trains on the Amtrak west side line, such that the short stretch of single track can't handle it. However, if they do start getting congested, they can just restore the second track across the bridge to solve the problem.

The bigger and harder problem to overcome would be the single track for the last few hundred yards into NYP.

I'm guessing that there's no "quick fix" here. Though it probably wouldn't work, would it be possible to "tighten up" the signal situation there to allow that section to be cleared more quickly?

There exists an easement to build a second track to join the LIRR yard leads, should traffic on the Empire Connection justify such. You can get to tracks as low as 9 or 10 from that side I believe. I do not have the track diagram handy to verify. New additional crossovers from the LIRR leads to the main throat at A Interlocking were put in in the last five years or so. I am not sure whether it feeds the entire southside laddre or only a part of it.

I believe 6 - 8 tph can be handled in each direction on the Empire Connection with some tight dispatching and a few signaling changes. We are far far away from hitting that at this point. Indeed congestion at A interlocking would probably limit that number to something a little bit lower.

 

[Guest]

It is just one HSR line, won't make any problems

HSR by its very nature makes problems. When you run fast, you need more clearance and that means fewer commuter trains can run.

The high speed trains will be restricted from going faster than 100 MPH on the Metro-North corridor.