Just curious , is the Alfred E. Smith bridge stilll double tracked?
yes
STEAM ON
/--OOO--:-oo--oo-
Railroad Forums
Alfred E. Smith Memorial Bridge
- Pertaining to all railroading subjects, past and present, in New York State.
Moderator: Otto Vondrak
If that's the one over the Hudson River, off Selkirk yard. yes. But what I heard from my buddy, who is conductor on B+A trains. He said that most traincrews wouldn't even dare to get on bridge while other train is already on the bridge.
It shakes so badly enough with one train. When the crew knew that train's coming or is about going on bridge, they would come to stop before the bridge.
I would have to take his words until someone present me the concrete facts/info...
ken
It shakes so badly enough with one train. When the crew knew that train's coming or is about going on bridge, they would come to stop before the bridge.
I would have to take his words until someone present me the concrete facts/info...
ken
I took a picture of this NYCRR travel poster that featured the bridge. My wife was repairing it for her workplace, The Yankee Peddler Bookshop in Rochester. There were two other NYCRR posters - one for California and one for New England. Let me know if you'd like me to post those as well. Really beautiful condition and brilliant colors.
This bridge has always moved around a great deal under traffic. I believe it's designed to do so. Have you ever stopped on a highway bridge while traffic is going over it? Yikes!
I'll bet Chief Troll could offer some tidbits about bridge design here.
I played on and around this structure as a kid growing up nearby. A few times I was inside the girders on the west end when a couple of trains went over. It was like earthquake city. Very frightening -- but the bridge stayed up nonetheless.
I'll bet Chief Troll could offer some tidbits about bridge design here.
I played on and around this structure as a kid growing up nearby. A few times I was inside the girders on the west end when a couple of trains went over. It was like earthquake city. Very frightening -- but the bridge stayed up nonetheless.
CP169 wrote:Just curious , is the Alfred E. Smith bridge stilll double tracked?Just to be correct here, this is actually the Alfred H. Smith Memorial Bridge, named in memory of the President of the New York Central who met an untimely death a few months before the bridge opened in November of 1924 (80 years ago this month!).
LCJ wrote:I'll bet Chief Troll could offer some tidbits about bridge design here.
Awright, Larry, you asked for it. The first time I crossed the Alfred H. Smith Memorial Bridge, in 1963, I walked from SK to SM and back spottting ties for renewal. It has a ballast deck with a concrete slab and curbs, and tie renewal is interesting, to get the ties in and around that darn curb.
Anyhow, trains passed while I was out there, and it didn't shake any worse than any other long railroad bridge I have been on with trains passing (and that's been many more than a few).
As railroad bridges go, it is a youngster. The design standards of the early 1920's for bridges carrying steam locomotives are very close to those used today. I think, IIRC, that the post-WWI NYC standard called for Cooper E-60 loads with steam impact, with the full load on both tracks. The present standard is E-80, but with diesel impact, so the steel members would be very close to the same size. Two trains of loaded 286,000 pound cars can meet on that bridge without getting close to the limiting stresses in the steel. The bridge does move a bit, but that is by design.
The New York Central at one time (1963 or so) had raised the maximum weight of a free-running car between Boston and Chicago/Cinci/St. Louis to 315,000 lbs. I think it has been cut back to 286,000 lbs now, out of concern over accelerated rail wear, and not the condition of the bridges. There was never a restriction against two trains operating on the bridge simultaneously, unless it was for passing wide loads.
Hey, Troll and LCJ,
Did you ever walk across the Bridge after the old wooden walkways were replaced with the metal grids? IIRC, all of the grid section ends were spiked down on timber except for one on the south side on the main span which was a banded connection. It had a little give to it, and the reaction of someone feeling that as they walked across for the first time was always amusing.
Did you ever walk across the Bridge after the old wooden walkways were replaced with the metal grids? IIRC, all of the grid section ends were spiked down on timber except for one on the south side on the main span which was a banded connection. It had a little give to it, and the reaction of someone feeling that as they walked across for the first time was always amusing.
I'm sorry I didn't get the name of the bridge right but, I'm sure glad I posted the subject. Your replies have been sooo informative. Thanks.
No big deal about the name. We all knew which bridge you meant.
On the question of "still double-tracked," my first inclination was not imagining it could be otherwise. The more I think about it though, as soon I've ever said something would/could never happen, it's likely to soon be reality.
I mean, how much difference could having a single track make for the schedules of traffic that uses that connection? Rationally compare that to the cost of maintaining a second track. Hmmm.
On the question of "still double-tracked," my first inclination was not imagining it could be otherwise. The more I think about it though, as soon I've ever said something would/could never happen, it's likely to soon be reality.
I mean, how much difference could having a single track make for the schedules of traffic that uses that connection? Rationally compare that to the cost of maintaining a second track. Hmmm.
Does anyone know if Hudson River Connecting RR still owns this structure?
The original arrangement was that HRCRR (a separate corporate entity) built and owned the asset, and NYC paid a flat amount for every piece of equipment that traversed it.
Still the case -- or is that history?
The original arrangement was that HRCRR (a separate corporate entity) built and owned the asset, and NYC paid a flat amount for every piece of equipment that traversed it.
Still the case -- or is that history?