Amtrak Gateway Tunnels - Freight Usage

Question that has probably been answered before, why doesn't the state try to get some of the Class I's to pitch in for this endeavor as well? Currently, there is no way for freight to get across the Hudson besides trucks filling up the few Hudson crossing we have already, railcar barges, or going up to Albany and then back down, which increases the time drastically.
There was talk of having a tunnel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-Harbor_Rail_Tunnel) under the Hudson so that freight trains could go under it.
What if they tried to get freight companies to pitch in for the new tunnels, and build the tunnels to freight specs (if not already), and let freight companies use it? If they plan to fix the current tunnels after the new ones, there should be enough room for freight trains to come through. That being said, I don't know if there's any possible connection to NYC's freight network once you get across the river through Gateway.

The biggest issue with freight is that there's virtually no electrified freight in America and FDNY is not going to allow you to run diesels in the tunnels.

... apart from the fact that a long freight train would eat up I hate to think how many passenger slots -- frequent memory-schedule passenger service is irreparably incompatible with long freight trains at less than passenger-train speeds on the same tracks.

How many passenger trains between 11pm and 5am? Clearly there isn't 100% utilization 24/7...

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

eolesen wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 10:11 pm How many passenger trains between 11pm and 5am? Clearly there isn't 100% utilization 24/7...

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

I see 6 NJT departures alone between midnight and 1.30 am…on a Sunday night.

that doesn't include Arrivals or Amtrak trains.

... and there's not much sense in building track connections to the freight railroads if they can only be used between 1 and 5 am. If there's going to be a freight tunnel to Long Island points it will have to be able to handle morning arrivals and evening departures -- merchandise traffic to and from metropolitan areas has rush hours too.

Is there enough freight into/out of Long Island to justify building a tunnel? Sorry, I don’t know much about the freight through there.

That's another good point -- just about everything consumed on Long Island comes from somewhere else, but from how far away is the critical issue. They get perishables from Texas, Arizona, and the west coast, but I don't know what the current split is between truck and intermodal. Delivery at LI destinations will require the sort of space now being used in New Jersey; not easy to find on Long Island.

As to the hours between 1 and 5 am, there needs to be some time for track maintenance; both the Japanese and the French originally considered operating freight service at night on Shinkansen and LGV but found they would need a maintenance window every night.

There is an insane amount of truck traffic that crosses into NYC every day, much of it seems to be taken off of freight trains somewhere in the area, loaded onto trucks, and then shipped into/thru NYC, and sometimes put back onto trains.

lensovet wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 10:43 pm The biggest issue with freight is that there's virtually no electrified freight in America and FDNY is not going to allow you to run diesels in the tunnels.

The only solution I can think of is some of the Class I's invest in electric or dual-mode locomotives to pull trains in through the tunnels, and then let have the train continue diesel once through the tunnels. Would be an expensive and timely endeavor I'd imagine, but would probably save time and money instead of unloading from train to truck just to get through NYC, or taking that very long freight train detour to upstate NY. That being said, the article I linked mentioned how the proposed tunnel would have the proper ventilation for diesel passage.

ExCon90 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 8:54 pm ... apart from the fact that a long freight train would eat up I hate to think how many passenger slots -- frequent memory-schedule passenger service is irreparably incompatible with long freight trains at less than passenger-train speeds on the same tracks.

From my understanding of the new Gateway Project, they would create two new tunnels with at least one track each, and then rehab the old tunnels; this would offer a minimum of 4 tracks, double from what they have right now; I'm sure that even with more services that the new tunnels would allow, like MOM and the Lehigh Valley connection, there would still be plenty of track room at nights/downtimes in the day to let freight trains use one, out of the at least four, tunnels.

Bracdude181 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:10 am Is there enough freight into/out of Long Island to justify building a tunnel? Sorry, I don’t know much about the freight through there.

From what I've heard, yes, there is. Not to mention freight trains going to other parts north of NYC, like Boston, have to take a very long route just to get past NYC. The recently built Governor Mario Cuomo Bridge was supposed to have some sort of rail aspect to it that could alleviate this (albeit I heard it was more passenger-oriented), but the now-former Governor Andrew Cuomo, from what I heard, stopped it from being included in the initial build. There is room for rail being added onto it but I doubt that will ever happen; unless the current tunnels under the Hudson give way and they need an alternative.

The issue with a freight tunnel under the Hudson is that it would cost more than what the entire freight industry spends a year on ROW maintenance. It would make more sense to have Class I's come onto the Gateway Project, and share some of the cost and benefit, than to make a separate freight tunnel. That, or have some very large draw bridge over the Hudson that would remain open 80% of the time for Hudson marine traffic (which is nowhere near it used to be) but closed the other 20% of the time to let trains over the river.

Again even with ventilation in the tunnel FDNY is not going to allow any combustion engines under Manhattan.

Speaking of Manhattan, where are these freight trains going to go once they get out of the tunnel? Into PSNY? Keep in mind that the onward tracks are very congested as well.

As far as freight into Long Island is concerned, maybe replace the car float operations with a bridge between Greenville yard and the other yard where the floats go? (Forgot exactly where) Then somewhere in the middle have a swing or drawbridge for tall marine traffic maybe?

How rail freight works in NYC and LI is described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_frei ... ong_Island
To sum it up: it all comes from north, aside from some barge floats. Staten Island is a different story.

Greenville is across from Brooklyn. It's about 3.5 miles, so four times longer than the Verrazzano, longer than the Tappan Zee, and in a busy harbor. Only a tunnel was thought feasible.

I would call using the Gateway tunnels for freight a non-starter idea. Instead, I would build two tunnels:

• 65th street railyard to Greenville Yard (Claremount Terminal)
• Spuyten Duyvil to Englewood

The latter would get those trash trains out of NYC faster.

lensovet wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 1:14 pm Again even with ventilation in the tunnel FDNY is not going to allow any combustion engines under Manhattan.

So Class I's would either have to invest in dual mode locomotives in the area (very unlikely), or Amtrak could expand their little known freight service, Amtrak Express, where they use their electric locomotives to ferry freight through the tunnels and wherever else, where diesels could then take over (seems like a hassle but doable).

lensovet wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 1:14 pm Speaking of Manhattan, where are these freight trains going to go once they get out of the tunnel? Into PSNY? Keep in mind that the onward tracks are very congested as well.

Yeah, I forgot that the freight infrastructure in Manhattan is all but gone, they would also need to have some sort of connection to the Bronx or Brooklyn or the West Side Line.

kitchin wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 3:33 pm How rail freight works in NYC and LI is described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_frei ... ong_Island
To sum it up: it all comes from north, aside from some barge floats. Staten Island is a different story.

Greenville is across from Brooklyn. It's about 3.5 miles, so four times longer than the Verrazzano, longer than the Tappan Zee, and in a busy harbor. Only a tunnel was thought feasible.

That freight from the north also has to go to more points south of NYC. Currently, the only ways to get over the Hudson are to truck it or go up to Albany to cross a rail bridge. Since the Gateway Project is about public transportation, it should also include freight and the tax paying companies that handle it. This would also reduce emissions while also reducing the amount of trucks on the road in NYC.

If they made some sort of larger version of the Newark Bay Bridge, they could have its spans open for marine traffic most of the time, and go down the few amount of times needed for a freight train to cross the bridge. It would be far cheaper than a tunnel. Passenger railroads like the NJCL do this all the time, especially in the summers when the rivers it crosses are also very very busy.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:12 pm I would call using the Gateway tunnels for freight a non-starter idea. Instead, I would build two tunnels:

• 65th street railyard to Greenville Yard (Claremount Terminal)
• Spuyten Duyvil to Englewood

The latter would get those trash trains out of NYC faster.

That would make a lot of sense, and would what should be done, but tunnels are incredibly expensive. The freight tunnel on its own would cost more than what yearly ROW maintenance for most railroads costs. I think if there was a way to combine the interests of commuter and freight rail into the Gateway Project, it could be done far cheaper and perhaps faster.

Cannot schedule freights over a draw span same time every day. The tides are a contributing problem.