Pony up for the NEC infrastructure

http://boston.dbusinessnews.com/shownew ... ewsid=4374

>>Boston - BOSTON - Plagued by continued underfunding of critical infrastructure needs, Amtrak's status as an important component in the New England regional transportation system is again threatened, said James T. Brett, president and CEO, of The New England Council, as he urged Congress to support the system as they debate an omnibus appropriations package this week.<<

Mr. Gunn knows where the bodies are; sorry bout that for those in flyover country (note: that includes this Member).

It is gratifying to note that most of the capital expenditures are being directed at this time towards NEC infrastructure. Like a good mass tranist man Mr. gunn has been most of his career, he knows that's where the bodies that need to be moved are.

To this 'adopted Midwesterner" who has occasion to get back to The Corridor for both visits and business, it is indeed notable that somehwere on the Amtrak system, people are actually using this conveyance to get from A to B, it provides "adequately satisfactory" service (can any higher rating truly be applied to the alternatives???), the users can travel on "their' schedule, and not somebody else's, and the fares, while hardly Rail Sale giveaway, are competitive with other transport (lest we forget, tolls are at least $13 each way, NY-Baltimore; can be done for $.75, if you literally have "all day").

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Mr. Gunn knows where the bodies are; sorry bout that for those in flyover country (note: that includes this Member).

I would think the heavily populated Chicago region is excepted from "flyover" status. I consider passenger rail to be relatively safe in the northeast, in several Chicago based corridors, and along the west coast.

Living here as I do and have for the past 35 years (I am from the Northeast), I wish I could share your optimism, Mr. HSR.

There is simply no Local initiative; four States give "token" support, three others give none at all. There is simply no way a "Midwest initiative" will start at Federal level.

As you note, the West Coast, at least intrastate California, is relatively safer. That is because, despite all the Teutonic rumblings from The Terminator, the "girlie men' choose to support a Local initiative - and likely bury its funding in an "Omnibus" spending bill.

Wash State and Oregon could decide "they're broke" and their Talgos will be parked getting tagged and broken windows.

Nuff said; just my thoughts.

Well, I suppose, Mr. Norman, that your region's Amtrak support is the weakest of the three I mentioned, but I would be surprised to see major cutbacks. I will be interested to see if Illinois follows through on initiating 110 mph service on the Chicago - Springfield route, after investing something like $100 million in upgrades.

Not only is Boston short of funding for infrastructure, they could have allocated what they have a little better. If only HALF of the Big Dig overruns had been available for the corridor.......

OTOH, Mr Gunn (and all the other Federal constituencies who are waiting on their Appropriations) need 218 House and 51 Senate votes. NEC states cannot get Mr Gunn from here to there.

He needs some of either east coast LD, flyover country LD, and/or West Coast to do the deed.

Next year, if DOT appropriation is not part of an omnibus, then this might matter. For now, it's the whole enchilada.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Mr. Gunn knows where the bodies are; sorry bout that for those in flyover country (note: that includes this Member).

John Perkowski

Well the NEC desperatly needs to be rebuilt fast especially the tunnels in NYC.

AmtrakFan

AmtrakFan wrote:Well the NEC desperatly needs to be rebuilt fast especially the tunnels in NYC.

The NEC has a number of major infrastructure needs that probably add up to billions. They include:

- replacement of aging drawbridges in Connecticut

- new Hudson River tunnels

- replacement of the PRR-era variable tension catenary

- new Baltimore tunnels

- refurbishment or replacement of at least a couple of the bridges in Maryland

According to the Department of Transportation Inspector General, Amtrak should spend less effort and time rebuilding Superliner long distance trains and divert this money to rebuilding the NEC. What a joke - rebuilding the Superliners is chump change in comparison to the NEC upgrades that need to take place.

There are plenty of places on the NEC that could be used for speed increases. Replacing the Pennsy catenary is a must if you want 150 mph operations. Just when will the Acela get down pat its 3 hr goal. That is MN's beef. Although, I believe the ex-NH is improving. For one thing, no more track outages in the Port Chester, Greenwich area. Between Bridgeport and New haven, I am concerned. That portion should be good for 90-110 mph. The three drawbridges east of OSB have to be replaced. Even, just replacing them could take off a few minutes off the schedule. Other than that, the ride east of NHV is fast and smooth. The little things make a big difference.

If for no other reason than "Tokyo Raid' (maybe even Fallujah) mentality, there could be benefit from identifying a section of the PRR Corridor (likely Trenton-New Brunswick; especially since, as I learned here at the Forum, there is no longer a speed restriction through Princeton) and doing what need be done to attain 150mph Acela operation.

Obviously, the Acelas are a "might bit fuller' over the PRR into NY than approaching the end of the run at Boston. This admittedly would be a publicity stunt to enable more to have a Disneyland Ride.

"Gee, why can't it be like that all the way????"

Well, any Congressmembers aboard (they do ride it, lest we forget) you know what to do; just say $2.2B instead of $1.2 in the next appropriate Committee hearing.

After all "critter", it's not your money; only OPIUM (OPM; other people's mone).

Gilbert B Norman wrote:...there could be benefit from identifying a section of the PRR Corridor and doing what need be done to attain 150mph Acela operation..

In my opinion, it is more important to do the bridges and tunnels that are
so vital to all of the NEC. The 150 MPH through Princeton Junction can
wait, it won't make that much of a difference.
It will make a huge difference if Amtrak were to lose one of the Baltimore
tunnels, New York tunnels or a major bridge in Connecticut.
Noel Weaver

Of course you are correct Mr Weaver, and in OUR world of pragmatism, that is how it should be.

But Members of Congress live in Fantasyland, after all what else does the term "Potomac Fever" imply. For many a year, there was a syndicated column with just that name originating with The Des Moines Register (not a bad paper, considering the market) describing the foibles of those folk WE choose to do our business there.

So, it might not be all that unwise to give 'em a little of what they have become accustomed - a Disneyland Ride!

Meanwhile, back on the East End, a now-retired Amtrak Locomotive Engineer (no prior RR engine service; an Electrician with PC/CR/MNR) I have known for some 45 years once had a suggestion; how about tunneling under the Connecticut River and eliminate
the S curves leading to the bridge on either side.

Oh well, haven't we seen proposals here to build a Greenport-New London bridge or tunnel?

During test runs, the Acela Express operated at 160+ mph on the stretch through Princeton Junction. How they determined that the variable tension catenary could support a max revenue speed of 135 mph, I know not.