Railroad Forums 

  • Connecticut River Bridge Replacement Project

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1542477  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Backshophoss wrote: Mon May 11, 2020 8:55 pm Walk is a pivot span,to become a vertical lift span bridge, might become the "Prototype" for MN's New Haven line bridges.
Mr. Backshop, "I'll raise you".

I think the standard for the Corridor should be a fixed bridge over any navigable waterway with MHW clearance to satisfy whichever "Navy" - Fairfield or US, is the party in interest.

If the Fairfield varietal has "leaned on whoever" - and they can - to ensure whatever number of bridge openings per period of time, and thus limit the number of trains Amtrak and the commuter agencies can operate, are allowed, then no surprise, "someone knows someone".

Now the US varietal has National Security working for it. The highway bridge, whatever it's named, X-ing the Thames at New London, was built, pre-WWII with 135ft MHW clearance. Somebody was thinking forward; now when Amtrak gets funding to rebuild their bridge, it too should have like clearance. NIMBYS, sorry 'bout that - National Security.

The Fairfield Navy now has a substantial "Base" - aka a Marina - upstream on the Mianus (back in my day, a boatyard and a sailmaker was all). So should the inevitable bridge replacement have same 45ft MHW clearance as the Morano.

At Norwalk, I defer to others; both regarding Fairfield Navy upstream Bases and clout.
 #1542494  by Jeff Smith
 
I believe there's minimal "naval" activity above WALK; a barge or two? One industry?

Mianus: I used to eat at Chart House in Old Greenwich by Mianus quite a bit; I never saw the bridge raised. I don't think there's really anything massive above that either, mostly "pleasure" boats, i.e. cruisers as I recall. With Mianus being below Stamford, there's much more activity.

Neither of these two "navigable" rivers is very navigable LOL.
 #1542514  by exvalley
 
The Connecticut River channel depth is only 15 feet. Compare that to the Thames River, which is 35 feet. The biggest ships that I have seen on the river were the cruise ships that operated out of Haddam for a period of time under the Camelot Cruise Brand. I believe that at least one ship is still operated by Lady Katherine Cruises: https://ladykatecruises.com/public-cruises/

If the bridge had enough clearance for tugboats and sailboats, the need for it to open would be very minimal.
 #1542539  by shadyjay
 
Took a spin down the road to visit "CONN" this afternoon. Bridge was up when I got there, a 2-masted schooner passed through, then it closed. Stuck around for an hour or so, but didn't see any trains. Movable bridge op's must still be in "winter" mode... closed unless a boat needs to get through. During the summer months, the bridge is open unless a train is coming. Had this been in "better times", I probably would have seen 2 or 3 trains go by (at least). It was about 5-5:30pm.

The "Lady Kate" and the other CT Riverboat, "Becky Thatcher" rarely, if ever, go south of "CONN". Sunset cruises would turn around "between the bridges". Lady Kate spends most of her time up in Middletown or Hartford during the season.
20200512_164427.jpg
20200512_164427.jpg (1.47 MiB) Viewed 1388 times
Lots more photos of the bridge here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/ ... 888854702/

I just can't see a higher level bridge built in this area.
 #1542560  by The EGE
 
Besides the navy and track geometry considerations, another reason that the Thames went with a movable bridge rather than a higher fixed span is because the USCG Eagle is based at the Coast Guard Academy upstream. Unlike the other NEC bridges, which have mostly barges and pleasure boats, the Thames has a 147-foot-masted schooner going in and out.
 #1542594  by exvalley
 
shadyjay wrote: Tue May 12, 2020 6:50 pmThe "Lady Kate" and the other CT Riverboat, "Becky Thatcher" rarely, if ever, go south of "CONN".
My point was that they had to get to their present locations by going past the bridge. So, while it is rare that they do so, the bridge still needs to accommodate them.
 #1542612  by west point
 
With the schooner a lift bridge high enough to clear most boats might be advisable. However a bascule bridge that only has to operate for the schooner might be cheaper ?A lift bridge to clear 150 feet is a fairly tall very robust bridge. Sail boats require a wide opening. That way bridge could remain closed most of the time year around.
 #1542626  by Arborwayfan
 
How fast a bridge opens and closes makes a difference, too. I am no bridge engineer, but I know there are faster and slower designs available. Ditto for the allowable speed for trains on the bridge, because faster trains would mean either shorter closings or more trains per closing.

Would having more tracks on the new bridge help at all by allowing, say, 2 Amtrak and 2 commuter trains to cross simultaneously? If the bridge is the bottleneck, I assume the tracks on either side have unused capacity, but I'm not sure what that capacity is or what it would allow.

There is always the possibility of a special act of Congress to allow more bridge closings on a particular waterway, too. It could be part of a compromise that included making a new bridge that was high enough not to need to open for most of the boat traffic and which would open for taller boats and ships only at certain stated times. Possibility, not likelihood. :wink:
 #1542650  by shadyjay
 
If you check out the pics on the link I posted, you can see the supports are wide enough for another 2-track span. The bridge is not a bottleneck, as it is 2 tracks on either side, widening to 3 tracks briefly west of the bridge to accommodate the OSB station.

Not all SLE commuter trains from New Haven to go New London, some turn at OSB and head back west. I believe part of the reason why they all don't go to New London was to limit the bridge openings. I believe Amtrak is at or very close to the limit of the # of trains it can run over the bridge due to the USCG regs.

The bridge will never be that high speed, since there is a very large sweeping curve on both sides of the river. Not sure of the speed on the bridge at present. I was impressed, though, with how quickly the span went from fully open to the closed position.
 #1542651  by Gilbert B Norman
 
I guess it would be hard to play the National Security card on the Connecticut River. Looking at the charts, how it's navigable as far as Deep River (I was tense navigating while in the Fairfield Navy as far as Essex with 6ft draft - but I picked off every Can and Nun, just as the Skipper expected me to) - let alone to Hartford - escapes me.

But that was back in another life.

I can only remember how a retired Amtrak Passenger Engineer (Bob Rice lest you wonder, Mr. Railnut - pretty sure he knows you) suggested why can't they just tunnel under the mouth. All I could say was what would the NIMBYs think.

Even though "we all know it ain't goin' nowhere", no wonder these proposals to build a whole new ROW inland keep surfacing.
 #1542772  by shadyjay
 
... and just like that, my FB feed blew up with news about the CONN replacement:
(social media not required to view these articles, FYI)


https://ctexaminer.com/2020/05/14/400-m ... MaZtKLZwSc
The estimated $400 million project, proposed by Amtrak, would construct a new bascule bridge 52 feet south of the existing structure. The original bridge, which dates back to 1907, is an essential link on the Northeast Rail Corridor between Boston and Washington, D.C. and would remain operational during construction. The existing structure will be largely removed once the new bridge is completed.
So I guess we're looking at a whole new bridge here.... not just replacing the movable span.


And then Old Lyme has to chime in...

https://www.rtands.com/track-structure/ ... pq8HWb46Iw
After getting approval by Old Saybrook back on April 20, the new bridge proposal hit a snag with Old Lyme on May 12. Officials there want to see more details of the plan until giving it the thumbs up.
 #1543130  by Jeff Smith
 
https://ctexaminer.com/2020/05/14/400-m ... announced/

$400 million for a single bridge?

A very detailed look at the plans, concepts, and issues:
...
The estimated $400 million project, proposed by Amtrak, would construct a new bascule bridge 52 feet south of the existing structure. The original bridge, which dates back to 1907, is an essential link on the Northeast Rail Corridor between Boston and Washington, D.C. and would remain operational during construction. The existing structure will be largely removed once the new bridge is completed.
...
The proposed bridge design would increase the width of the channel from 148 feet to 150 feet and shift the channel 14.5 feet west toward the center of the river.

According to a 2014 Environmental Assessment completed for the project, this widening and shifting of the channel “could potentially provide additional navigation advantages and reduce the risk of vessel impact.” The existing channel’s off-center location, which is close to the eastern shoreline, currently creates an ebb tide current that “tends to pull marine vessels into Pier 5 (the west channel pier).”

The new bridge will also raise the vertical clearance from 18 feet to 24 feet in the closed position. In the existing structure, vertical clearance is 68 feet in the open position. The new bridge will provide unlimited vertical clearance for a 90-foot-wide section of the channel and at least 74 feet of vertical clearance for the full width of the channel, according to the plan.
...