MTA Open House for Perryville Yard

[TheOneKEA]

The MTA announced today that an open house will be held next Thursday, February 12th from 4pm to 8pm to allow the general public to comment on the proposed Perryville Yard near Principio Furnace in Cecil County. The announcement was posted at http://mta.maryland.gov/advisories/perr ... e-facility" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One comment that I have is that the plan doesn't appear to include a dive under from Track 1 to Track 4, which means that entering the yard from Track 1 at either end requires crossing Tracks 2 and 3, limiting the yard's ability to accept and dispatch train sets during peak periods. If one of the alternate plans showing a large yard and facility is selected then the lack of a dive under will make it less useful than it appears, in my opinion.

[ThirdRail7]

The MTA announced today that an open house will be held next Thursday, February 12th from 4pm to 8pm to allow the general public to comment on the proposed Perryville Yard near Principio Furnace in Cecil County. The announcement was posted at http://mta.maryland.gov/advisories/perr ... e-facility" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One comment that I have is that the plan doesn't appear to include a dive under from Track 1 to Track 4, which means that entering the yard from Track 1 at either end requires crossing Tracks 2 and 3, limiting the yard's ability to accept and dispatch train sets during peak periods. If one of the alternate plans showing a large yard and facility is selected then the lack of a dive under will make it less useful than it appears, in my opinion.

I'm not sure why you think a duck under is needed. The new facility is being built on the 4 track side across from the MOW on 1 track. Operationally, trains that will not continue past PVL that terminate in the facility will make the same exact move they make today. If trains eventually continue past PVL, the best move is to upgrade the station on 1 track, build a high speed crossover from Perry and continue north to Prince. If the trains turn at Newark, they'll operate across the plant at Davis and cross over at Prince to enter the facility via 4 track.

Hopefully, by the time this all pans out, a 4 track bridge will be on the horizon.

[TheOneKEA]

The MTA announced today that an open house will be held next Thursday, February 12th from 4pm to 8pm to allow the general public to comment on the proposed Perryville Yard near Principio Furnace in Cecil County. The announcement was posted at http://mta.maryland.gov/advisories/perr ... e-facility" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One comment that I have is that the plan doesn't appear to include a dive under from Track 1 to Track 4, which means that entering the yard from Track 1 at either end requires crossing Tracks 2 and 3, limiting the yard's ability to accept and dispatch train sets during peak periods. If one of the alternate plans showing a large yard and facility is selected then the lack of a dive under will make it less useful than it appears, in my opinion.

I'm not sure why you think a duck under is needed. The new facility is being built on the 4 track side across from the MOW on 1 track. Operationally, trains that will not continue past PVL that terminate in the facility will make the same exact move they make today. If trains eventually continue past PVL, the best move is to upgrade the station on 1 track, build a high speed crossover from Perry and continue north to Prince. If the trains turn at Newark, they'll operate across the plant at Davis and cross over at Prince to enter the facility via 4 track.

Hopefully, by the time this all pans out, a 4 track bridge will be on the horizon.

That's why I think a dive under is needed. A four-track bridge will be accompanied by a major increase in both average speeds and number of Amtrak services, and if a slow MARC consist is either crossing to Track 4 at Grace or crossing to Track 4 at the yard (whose interlocking I'll bet could be called Furnace) that could seriously restrict capacity.

Is it at all likely that Perryville station could get the platform on Track 1 back anytime soon, with or without a northerly service extension to Elkton?

[ThirdRail7]

That's why I think a dive under is needed. A four-track bridge will be accompanied by a major increase in both average speeds and number of Amtrak services, and if a slow MARC consist is either crossing to Track 4 at Grace or crossing to Track 4 at the yard (whose interlocking I'll bet could be called Furnace) that could seriously restrict capacity.

Is it at all likely that Perryville station could get the platform on Track 1 back anytime soon, with or without a northerly service extension to Elkton?

Anything is possible if they want to make it happen. As for the duck under, we're assuming that if four tracks are in place, the current operating profile will be maintained. That may not be true. They may move the MARC on the two dedicated tracks while keeping the Amtrak trains on two adjacent track through the area much like they do between Edgewood and Baltimore.

[TheOneKEA]

That's why I think a dive under is needed. A four-track bridge will be accompanied by a major increase in both average speeds and number of Amtrak services, and if a slow MARC consist is either crossing to Track 4 at Grace or crossing to Track 4 at the yard (whose interlocking I'll bet could be called Furnace) that could seriously restrict capacity.

Is it at all likely that Perryville station could get the platform on Track 1 back anytime soon, with or without a northerly service extension to Elkton?

Anything is possible if they want to make it happen. As for the duck under, we're assuming that if four tracks are in place, the current operating profile will be maintained. That may not be true. They may move the MARC on the two dedicated tracks while keeping the Amtrak trains on two adjacent track through the area much like they do between Edgewood and Baltimore.

Wow, is that really likely? I never considered the possibility that the track layout would be changed to paired-by-use rather than paired-by-direction. Is there enough horizontal space between the substation and the station building to add the required curvature without moving the interlocking?

[ThirdRail7]

Wow, is that really likely? I never considered the possibility that the track layout would be changed to paired-by-use rather than paired-by-direction. Is there enough horizontal space between the substation and the station building to add the required curvature without moving the interlocking?

I think it is entirely possible. It is largely like that now between Gunpow and Baltimore. I'd love too see that occur between Bal and Was if they ever built a fourth track and reconfigured BWI.

As for PVl station, If you look at the substation itself, there is plenty of room between it and the bridge. You could probably build another bridge and just move a few of the power line supports that feed the substation.