SYSCO in Yaphank

There is so much opposition to this tunnel too. If it were built, it would make Long Island an alternate route to I95. Just think, if the traffic is backed up because of an accident which requires I95 to be closed somewhere between the NYC bridges and tunnels, and the hypothetical entrance to the cross sound tunnel, all the drivers on I95 would just use LI as an alternate route. The LIE, Northern State, and Southern State parkways are all used to the max as it is with just inner island traffic using them. Imagine how much more traffic would be on the roads if it were an alternate route to I95. A lot of people realize that, to one extent or another. So, you have a majority of the Long Island residents opposed to this tunnel, compared to a small local community opposing a freight spur or rail traffic. I don't think this tunnel will ever be made.

RPM2Night wrote:There is so much opposition to this tunnel too. If it were built, it would make Long Island an alternate route to I95. Just think, if the traffic is backed up because of an accident which requires I95 to be closed somewhere between the NYC bridges and tunnels, and the hypothetical entrance to the cross sound tunnel, all the drivers on I95 would just use LI as an alternate route.

You may be confusing the rail-freight cross harbor tunnel plan (nominally Jersey to Brooklyn), with the Cross Sound vehicular tunnel plan (nonimally from the current end of the SOB (135) Expressway in Syosset north to Westchester.

Oh yeah, I did mis-read that. lol my bad. Oh well, I'll leave that up there anyway. haha.

Interestingly, I just got back from Beantown, and a little too late to catch the last ferry out of New London. From my point of view, the cross sound tunnel is much needed!

It, of course, is also a pipe dream.

Jay

jayrmli wrote:The Cross Harbor Tunnel is somewhere between a fairy tale and a pipe dream. If it were ever going to happen, it would have been built a long time ago.

First to think about building it was the Pennsylvania Railroad. The same company with pockets deep enough to build Penn Station, the Hudson and East River Tunnels and the Hell Gate Bridge. If they couldn't do it, no one could.

Next was the Port Authority. They were actually created to build the tunnel. They never did it either, but were able to build some of the most successful capital projects in the tri-state area. But, not the tunnel.

Now, it's left to a couple of delusional politicians to carry the torch. Actually, just one (Nadler). My guess is it remains a bunch of hot air.

Jay

Well I did say I was going out on a limb, so I might as well crawl to its end and hang off - if this fairy tale to pipe dream tunnel ever gets built, the SI to Brooklyn proposal seems to be the better plan.

SI to Brooklyn seems like it would be a shorter tunnel. This tunnel would connect the LIRR Bay Ridge line with a rehabed SI North Shore RR ROW to Arlington Yard, the NYCT and bridge to NJ, which would make NY&A or its successor the logical choice for operations. What might make this tunnel more appealing is if MTA joined to have its own level in this tunnel which would allow the SI subway to connect with the rest of the system through Brooklyn. Even if the freight does not pan out as planned, the subway connection would still give saving by reducing the need for express busses and ferries with resuling traffic, pollution and maintenance (bridges, roads and busses & ferries themselves) cost reductions. In another post (NYC Subway board?) it was stated that NJT had interest in leasing and rehabing the SI NSRR ROW to run trains to the ferry terminal to increase access to NYC - if subway connection was there as well, they might be more interested, even if limited to diesel service only.

As I said, dream or fairy tale, this tunnel is the only way rail freight will have a chance to compete with trucking.

Shorter tunnel distance wise is not always the best engineering wise.

The Narrows are deep and the tunnel grades would be too steep for a train to use (like to keep freight grades 2% or less, keeps the trains from pulling themselves apart)

You would have to start the tunnels farther from shore in order to pass under the narrows, that tends to get the locals upset.

Jersey City to Brooklyn is a longer tunnel, but the grades are better and the areas to put the portals are in not as populated areas.

If one looks at the proposed THE Tunnel, note how the tunnel lines swings south before crossing the Hudson. The grades in the new tunnel will be more train friendly then the steep grades in the PRR tubes serving Penn Station now.

Since we're pipe dreaming, it would be nice to extend that tunnel to Long Island and then allow freights to run at night from the Jersey Meadows to the Montauk Cut-off

jtunnel wrote:The Narrows are deep and the tunnel grades would be too steep for a train to use (like to keep freight grades 2% or less, keeps the trains from pulling themselves apart)

You would have to start the tunnels farther from shore in order to pass under the narrows, that tends to get the locals upset.

I believe the SI to Brooklyn tunnel was suppose to leave near the ferry terminal (St. George?) and both proposals were to enter Brooklyn at the 65th St Yard, so would the above, especially the grade, still be true? With the SI Yankee stadium, the tunnel would have to start further back on the SIRR NS ROW anyway?