• Amtrak/LIRR Moynihan Train Hall

  • This forum will be for issues that don't belong specifically to one NYC area transit agency, but several. For instance, intra-MTA proposals or MTA-wide issues, which may involve both Metro-North Railroad (MNRR) and the Long Island Railroad (LIRR). Other intra-agency examples: through running such as the now discontinued MNRR-NJT Meadowlands special. Topics which only concern one operating agency should remain in their respective forums.
This forum will be for issues that don't belong specifically to one NYC area transit agency, but several. For instance, intra-MTA proposals or MTA-wide issues, which may involve both Metro-North Railroad (MNRR) and the Long Island Railroad (LIRR). Other intra-agency examples: through running such as the now discontinued MNRR-NJT Meadowlands special. Topics which only concern one operating agency should remain in their respective forums.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, FL9AC, Jeff Smith

  by ExCon90
 
Little-known fact: the moynihantrainhall website states in at least two places that Alexander Cassatt was the owner of the Pennsylvania Railroad. Who knew?

(I have to wonder who wrote that, and how many people reviewed the copy before approving it for release to the world ...)
  by electricron
 
ExCon90 wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 8:47 pm Little-known fact: the moynihantrainhall website states in at least two places that Alexander Cassatt was the owner of the Pennsylvania Railroad. Who knew?

(I have to wonder who wrote that, and how many people reviewed the copy before approving it for release to the world ...)
Being President of a company does not make you the owner of the company. No doubt Cassatt owned many shares, but I doubt he ever held over 50% of the outstanding stock.

Companies number one goal in any business is earning profits for its shareholders. The PRR and LIRR was going broke in the early 1960s, the old Penn Station was a money pit. All that open space in the ceilings of the old station was not earning any rent. That's why they sold the air rights above the tracks and platforms to developers. Even the NYC wanted to sell the air rights above Grand Central, although it was not allowed to as new legislation prevented that. Even so, both the arch enemies- business competitors- PRR and NYC merged. And they still went bankrupted less than a decade later. Companies that do not earn profits usually fail faster than light travels through a vacuum.

The reason why so many dislike the new Penn Station is the height of the ceilings are so low. the 15 story atrium is gone., instead there are 15 stories of office buildings. - each story around 10 feet high. 15 stories collecting rent for somebody. The original platforms, the stairs to the platforms, the main floor at the top of these stairs were there 100 years ago when they built Penn Station. The brass and rod iron banisters in those stairs are original.
All that is really missing is the 15 story atrium of marble and glass above that floor and around the perimeter, the grand architecture that gave inspirational heart.

Hopefully the Moynihan Train Hall will give just a little of that feeling back.
  by lensovet
 
Kilo Echo wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 10:35 am
lensovet wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 3:39 am I also can’t imagine the open space to the tracks (see https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/04 ... &auto=webp) would be particularly safe in this day and age, never mind the fact that it takes away floor space currently used for vendors and waiting areas/lounges.
As you probably know, the track level was later decked over (at the arrivals level) to accommodate the overhead catenary.
I didn’t know, because none of the photos shared today about how amazing the station was show that. It makes sense but obviously wouldn’t look as dramatically different.
  by Kilo Echo
 
lensovet wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 6:20 pm I didn’t know, because none of the photos shared today about how amazing the station was show that. It makes sense but obviously wouldn’t look as dramatically different.
Below is a view to the southeast (toward Seventh Avenue and 31st Street):
Image
  by bostontrainguy
 
Kilo Echo wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 10:35 am As you probably know, the track level was later decked over (at the arrivals level) to accommodate the overhead catenary.
So what was the deal before the decking and electrification? They didn't allow steam engines, right?
Image
  by CNJGeep
 
It was always electrified, but with DC Third Rail only to begin with
  by bostontrainguy
 
So everything was initially third rail including the tunnels and Sunnyside? Then I have to guess that there had to be an engine change or at least a motor added just outside of the North River tunnels or in Newark. Interesting.
  by STrRedWolf
 
bostontrainguy wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 8:44 am So everything was initially third rail including the tunnels and Sunnyside? Then I have to guess that there had to be an engine change or at least a motor added just outside of the North River tunnels or in Newark. Interesting.
Worse. You had to switch trains from steam to electric at the Manhattan Transfer (no, not the jazz vocal group).
  by electricron
 
bostontrainguy wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 8:44 am So everything was initially third rail including the tunnels and Sunnyside? Then I have to guess that there had to be an engine change or at least a motor added just outside of the North River tunnels or in Newark. Interesting.
They opened Penn Station in 1910 with DC third rail. The LIRR still uses the DC third rail in Penn Station. They installed 11 kV 25 Hz AC catenaries into Penn Station in 1932. PRR's world famous GG1 electric locomotives first entered service in 1935. NJT retired the last of them in 1983. 139 GG1s were built, 16 of them can be found in museums today. That's over 11% of them. You will be hard pressed to find 10% of anything else built in 1935 in museums today.
The GG1s were replaced with 65 AEM7s. SEPTA and NJT are still using their AEM7s on the NEC today. I'm not sure what the status of MARC's AEM7s are today.
Amtrak bought 70 ACS-64 locomotives for the NEC which have been in service since 2013. SEPTA has bought an additional 15 ACS-64s. MARC and NJT have not bought any yet.

Here are the subtotals once more:
139 GG1s
65 AEM7s
85 ACS-64s
  by danib62
 
electricron wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 9:48 am The GG1s were replaced with 65 AEM7s. SEPTA and NJT are still using their AEM7s on the NEC today. I'm not sure what the status of MARC's AEM7s are today.
MARC is a 100% diesel operation these days. Basically MARC only had some AEM7s and HHP8s and relied on Amtrak for service and maintenance on them. Once Amtrak switched to only running ACS-64s Amtrak was no longer willing to maintain MARC's older stock and MARC decided to invest in chargers that could be used interchangeably on all lines instead of buying ACS-64s.
  by Matt Johnson
 
Interesting, I wondered about the catenary when I saw photos of that portion and didn't realize they later covered over the tracks. I also suspect that in modern times that railing would not have proven sufficient to prevent the inevitable tragedies, intentional or otherwise.

In any case, now I know this fantasy would never have come to fruition!
Image
  by electricron
 
Matt Johnson wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 11:20 am Interesting, I wondered about the catenary when I saw photos of that portion and didn't realize they later covered over the tracks. I also suspect that in modern times that railing would not have proven sufficient to prevent the inevitable tragedies, intentional or otherwise.

In any case, now I know this fantasy would never have come to fruition!
Image
I aging the glass floor extending all the way above the catenaries? You could still get the view of the sky down to track level.
  by STrRedWolf
 
danib62 wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 10:47 am MARC is a 100% diesel operation these days. Basically MARC only had some AEM7s and HHP8s and relied on Amtrak for service and maintenance on them. Once Amtrak switched to only running ACS-64s Amtrak was no longer willing to maintain MARC's older stock and MARC decided to invest in chargers that could be used interchangeably on all lines instead of buying ACS-64s.
Negative. MARC runs the HHP-8's after the rebuild project, and Bombardier got the maintenance contract.

They bought the Siemens Chargers because it was cheaper than buying the ACS-64s and could be used everywhere. They then did an experimental project that reworked the HHP-8's convoluted cooling system (simplifying it) and it worked nicely, so MARC's running the hippos (see the HHP-8 thread).

The MARC AEM-7's? Gone.
  by Kilo Echo
 
STrRedWolf wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 9:33 am
bostontrainguy wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 8:44 am So everything was initially third rail including the tunnels and Sunnyside? Then I have to guess that there had to be an engine change or at least a motor added just outside of the North River tunnels or in Newark. Interesting.
Worse. You had to switch trains from steam to electric at the Manhattan Transfer (no, not the jazz vocal group).
The transfer at Harrison, N.J. allowed the PRR entry into Manhattan by train. It eliminated the ferry transfer at Jersey City, long a source of annoyance for Alexander Cassatt.

The Pennsylvania Railroad had to overcome a number of challenges to cross the Hudson by rail. A tunnel under the river was not practicable for steam locomotives, and the steep grade required to reach a well-ventilated, street-level station on Manhattan's West Side would be difficult.

Although Gustav Lindenthal had proposed a gargantuan North River bridge, a visit by Mr. Cassatt to the Gare d'Orsay in Paris convinced the PRR president that an electrified rail tunnel was a superior option. (Mr. Lindenthal eventually did build a span for the Pennsy, viz. the Hell Gate Bridge.)

Charles McKim had to design a station with boarding platforms three levels down from the street. He lowered the concourse and waiting rooms one level, and created an exit level between the main concourse and the platforms. He made his ceilings soar to further reduce the perception of a low track level.
  • 1
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 78