Abandoned Rhode Island railroad tunnel could be reused

fogg1703 wrote:

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:I don't know how often they take the NEC shortcut back home from Attleboro these days or if the schedule has them going Central Falls-E. Providence-Seekonk-Attleboro and then reversing back the way they came.

Have they ever utilized these trackage rights? I had no idea they existed, had to look on the PW websites route map. Are they much like the Middleboro secondary rights to Newport, they have them by never use them?

They use them. I don't know if it's very often these days now that the brand new track connection in E. Providence between branches makes it much easier to cover that run without a reverse-a-thon. But it was a fairly regular occurrence for them to go overhead from East Junction down the NEC. George Bennett Hwy. has got to be white-knuckle driving for both cars and crews at rush hour, so they need the backup route as a contingency and may still use it in reality when time slot and conditions are unfavorable. It's not a big deal for a 1-a-day to run overhead in South Attleboro in one direction only on an as-needed basis. They can fit that in between passenger slots and it's still less freight traffic than anywhere else Mansfield-Davisville.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:There's 1 large customer in Attleboro literally sandwiched between the NEC, E. Junction Branch, and the former MBTA layover yard with 3 sidings full of tank cars connected to the branch side. So they do go literally to as far to the end of the line as they can without physically touching the NEC

That is Teknor Apex, a longtime CSX customer. PW also delivers ballast and equipment to the MBTA here at East Junction. According to the CSX route map, CSX has trackage rights to the state line, however Metals USA in Seekonk is PW served.

Huh...didn't know that was a CSX customer. The sidings are all on the E. Junction Branch. I thought CSX had no customers south of Attleboro Jct. and that state line was akin to vacant Canton Jct.-Mansfield...held by them but totally unused forevermore. I guess Conrail gerrymandered the fine print to keep that one when they sold off the rest of the East Providence trackage to P&W in the 70's.

FOR THOSE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE LOCATION OF THE TUNNEL OR ITS HISTORY PLEASE GO TO MY WEB SITES FOR PHOTOGRAPHS, MAPS, ETC. --

http://sites.google.com/site/rrstationsofprovidence

http://sites.google.com/site/rhodeislandrailroads

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:Huh...didn't know that was a CSX customer. The sidings are all on the E. Junction Branch. I thought CSX had no customers south of Attleboro Jct. and that state line was akin to vacant Canton Jct.-Mansfield...held by them but totally unused forevermore. I guess Conrail gerrymandered the fine print to keep that one when they sold off the rest of the East Providence trackage to P&W in the 70's.

Not sure how/when the particulars went down with Teknor Apex, but CSX was lucky enough to keep them a very active customer even after production shut down at the Oak Hill Ave faciltiy when that specific business segment was sold off in 2008ish. Teknor uses it currently to unload additional cars for its cramped Pawtucket and some for its Leominster facilties. In fact during the CR merger years, the Attleboro jobs technically terminated in Hebronville to faciltiate switching at Teknor.

I live just up the street from the old junction of the P&W's Riverside branch trains used to have to switch onto the line running to Seekonk/Rehoboth before the Dexter street bypass track was built. The relocation cleared the way for the Southernmost part of the P&W ROW (which used to go to Wilkes-Barre Pier on the Providence River) to be used for a new road which just opened last year.
For many years now (even prior to the change of location of the Junction) it has been common practice for P&W to run PR-1 with a locomotive at each end so turning on the end of the branch is not an issue.
In my observations of the line PR-1 always goes out and back along the same P&W trackage and does not loop back down the NEC.

As far as the speculation about the "NEC II" High Speed rail plan all the current route proposals have it coming no farther South into R.I than Woonsocket so speculating about re-using the East side tunnel for that purpose is a moot point...

v8interceptor wrote: As far as the speculation about the "NEC II" High Speed rail plan all the current route proposals have it coming no farther South into R.I than Woonsocket so speculating about re-using the East side tunnel for that purpose is a moot point...

No, the latest plan changed the route from Woonsocket to Providence.

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/453/325/Amt ... rridor.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

bostontrainguy wrote:

v8interceptor wrote: As far as the speculation about the "NEC II" High Speed rail plan all the current route proposals have it coming no farther South into R.I than Woonsocket so speculating about re-using the East side tunnel for that purpose is a moot point...

No, the latest plan changed the route from Woonsocket to Providence.

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/453/325/Amt ... rridor.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I stand corrected.
However the plan in that document calls for the new R.O.W to enter Providence from the West and then follow the exissting NEC R.O.W North to Boston so incorporating the tunnel we are discussing does not seem feasible...

v8interceptor wrote:

bostontrainguy wrote:

v8interceptor wrote: As far as the speculation about the "NEC II" High Speed rail plan all the current route proposals have it coming no farther South into R.I than Woonsocket so speculating about re-using the East side tunnel for that purpose is a moot point...

No, the latest plan changed the route from Woonsocket to Providence.

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/453/325/Amt ... rridor.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I stand corrected.
However the plan in that document calls for the new R.O.W to enter Providence from the West and then follow the exissting NEC R.O.W North to Boston so incorporating the tunnel we are discussing does not seem feasible...

Well in general the new HSR ROW would follow the existing NEC by essentially upgrading the existing 2 tracks for 220mph operation and building a new single track on each side of the ROW for Regionals and MBTA runs.

I don't know if the Providence-Attleboro segment of the PVD-BOS section of the NEC has been targeted by Amtrak for a similar "upgrade". It's very curvy and (as F Line noted) a soon-to-be chocking point traffic wise with future additional P&W freights, RIDOT commuter trains, and any added non-HSR Amtrak service. At the same time though I don't know how they'd even get the new HSR to the old PW&B tunnel without another "Big Dig" type construction project + a ton of $$$. But that bridge will be crossed when we get to it. One way or another something will have to be done.

NH2060 wrote:

v8interceptor wrote:

bostontrainguy wrote:

v8interceptor wrote: As far as the speculation about the "NEC II" High Speed rail plan all the current route proposals have it coming no farther South into R.I than Woonsocket so speculating about re-using the East side tunnel for that purpose is a moot point...

No, the latest plan changed the route from Woonsocket to Providence.

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/453/325/Amt ... rridor.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I stand corrected.
However the plan in that document calls for the new R.O.W to enter Providence from the West and then follow the exissting NEC R.O.W North to Boston so incorporating the tunnel we are discussing does not seem feasible...

Well in general the new HSR ROW would follow the existing NEC by essentially upgrading the existing 2 tracks for 220mph operation and building a new single track on each side of the ROW for Regionals and MBTA runs.

I don't know if the Providence-Attleboro segment of the PVD-BOS section of the NEC has been targeted by Amtrak for a similar "upgrade". It's very curvy and (as F Line noted) a soon-to-be chocking point traffic wise with future additional P&W freights, RIDOT commuter trains, and any added non-HSR Amtrak service. At the same time though I don't know how they'd even get the new HSR to the old PW&B tunnel without another "Big Dig" type construction project + a ton of $$$. But that bridge will be crossed when we get to it. One way or another something will have to be done.

All of the versions of the plan I have read stated that the track curvature of major portions of the existing NEC North of NYC will not support 220 MPH operations and that is the primary reason that the new ROW is being proposed. The most recent revision states that Boston to Providence operations will be at 150 MPH maximum speeds.

v8interceptor wrote:The most recent revision states that Boston to Providence operations will be at 150 MPH maximum speeds.

They were just up here testing at 165mph on parts of that stretch. Again if they do manage to go slightly south of the existing station and go through that tunnel they could turn north and head ALMOST perfectly straight all the way to Sharon . . . even almost Canton when the curve in Sharon is eased. That and the Kingston, RI stretch are the two Acela raceways right now and would provide a good 160mph test bed for future high-speed rail service.