Fed's promise $10B for new North River tunnels

I once asked someone knowledgeable about the two names for the river. I forget who it was, but I remember the answer: the name North River was in common use until the early 1900s, and the Pennsylvania Railroad stuck with that name even though popular usage was changing. Maybe it just looked like a fad to call it "Hudson."

At least through most of the 20th century it was always called the North River in the maritime industry, and I think it still is. The piers have always been designated "Pier nn North River." According to historical accounts It was given the name by Henry Hudson, I believe on the same voyage as when he gave the name South River to the river between Cape May and Cape Henlopen. That name didn't last, however, the river being soon renamed after Baron De La Warr, whose name evolved into Delaware.

kilroy wrote:

SemperFidelis wrote:Let's all hope and pray that the bodies of dead drug dealers and mafioso dumped in the meadows don't somehow count as endangered species or the project will never get rolling.

We don't have to worry about that, they'll be plenty more of both in the future.

Correct: they would first have to be classed as an endangered species, and they seem in no danger of dying out--if that's the right word here.

ExCon90 wrote:At least through most of the 20th century it was always called the North River in the maritime industry, and I think it still is.

That's probably correct terminology, but the fact that mariners use it is no guarantee that it is right. I worked the Pennsy's Bay bridge (Upper Bay) on the Greenville Branch, and mariners call it the Lehigh Valley bridge. I have no idea why unless it's because the Valley used it to get from Oak Island to Jersey City.
Interesting where the name Delaware came from.

I'm not sure if that includes a new or expanded Penn Station, but they'll need extra space for people and trains to get in and out of the area.

don't think tunnels are going to change that !! just sayinnn.

Amtrak can only expand service so much. They have to deal with a plethora of other issues so there won't be many more of their trains. NJ Transit will have more trains, but they should be able to run a tighter ship as far as turning equipment and other factors that are just not there right now. Expansion of the existing station is just not plausible and is in all honesty pretty unnecessary. Unless they decide they want Metro North trains running into NYP at a high clip the current layout is fine. You leave it in the hands of equipment coordinators and dispatchers to properly piece together the puzzle for billions less than building another station.

SwingMan wrote:Amtrak can only expand service so much. They have to deal with a plethora of other issues so there won't be many more of their trains. NJ Transit will have more trains, but they should be able to run a tighter ship as far as turning equipment and other factors that are just not there right now. Expansion of the existing station is just not plausible and is in all honesty pretty unnecessary. Unless they decide they want Metro North trains running into NYP at a high clip the current layout is fine. You leave it in the hands of equipment coordinators and dispatchers to properly piece together the puzzle for billions less than building another station.

http://www.nec-commission.com/cin_proje ... expansion/

I get it, there is a plan in place and that's fine, but this project would be truly wasteful considering it is essentially putting lipstick on a pig. No one knows how long the current tunnels will last, and God knows how long the new ones will actually take to build. We aren't even talking about this being soon, you can't expand the number of tracks when in reality capacity is going to have to remain pretty much the same by the time anything new is built because by the time it is built, the other ones will be well over 100 years old. Throwing what they currently estimate to be a couple hundred million will easily skyrocket into the billions, and with things already running tight in NYP and Zone A you cannot afford to spend years trying to change something that is much more complex than just about anything in NYC.

ExCon90 wrote:At least through most of the 20th century it was always called the North River in the maritime industry, and I think it still is. ....

Even the gold standard of modern maps (Google Maps, of course!), uses both names:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7863731,-73.9924229,15z" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

JimS

philipmartin wrote: I worked the Pennsy's Bay bridge (Upper Bay) on the Greenville Branch, and mariners call it the Lehigh Valley bridge. I have no idea why unless it's the Valley used it to get from Oak Island to Jersey City.

Well, that's because the Lehigh Valley RR built it and owned it. (Technically, the first bridge was built around 1893 by the "Newark, Jersey City, and Western", one of a series of companies the LV set up and then acquired as part of extending from South Plainfield to Jersey City in the 1880's and 1890's, which did go through what became the Oak Island yard as you noted). I don't think the PRR Greenville float operation got going until after 1900. (Does anyone know when exactly?)
The bridge was rebuilt a few times , and I would guess the PRR put in a lot of the $$ to do that, but it still was an LV bridge.
Jim S.
Here is a fun link I just found on Google about one joint rebuilding effort after a fire in 1913.
https://books.google.com/books?id=BuBaA ... 22&f=false" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SwingMan wrote:Amtrak can only expand service so much. They have to deal with a plethora of other issues so there won't be many more of their trains. NJ Transit will have more trains, but they should be able to run a tighter ship as far as turning equipment and other factors that are just not there right now. Expansion of the existing station is just not plausible and is in all honesty pretty unnecessary. Unless they decide they want Metro North trains running into NYP at a high clip the current layout is fine. You leave it in the hands of equipment coordinators and dispatchers to properly piece together the puzzle for billions less than building another station.

You must not have ever stepped foot in PSCC then. Hint: I am there everyday. The station is a sea of red during rush hour, and sometimes there isn't a single track open and trains quickly approaching from behind in the tunnels. Sure we can hope that the NJT train coming in on one track will unload quickly but the world isn't always perfect and an outbound Amtrak or NJT train might have to load on the very same platform with only one escalator going up and people with suitcases going against the current. While a situation like that is generally avoided, sometimes things have to be done and sacrifices have to be made. In other situations you might have a 12 car NJT train approaching the station, and while there may be a track open, it is not long enough to platform the entire train. The Pennsy didn't build all the platforms to the same length. These are just some of the issues that come up, I am sure I can think of many more, but I am too tired to think today.
Long Island Rail Road has the advantage of 4 leads into West Side Yard to allow for trains to quickly come and go from the yard, but Amtrak and NJT trains all have to wait for their turn to go into Line 1 to head to the yard so they can clear up for the trains behind them to come into the station, the reverse is true when they are leaving the yard. I don't think anybody will argue that the tunnels are not a critical need right now, but it would be foolish to say capacity at Penn Station is not an issue, even in its current state, the whole thing is far from perfect, and it is a ballet as it is everyday for the dispatchers to get everything to work. You can coordinate all you want but that never takes into account the real world when things go wrong, and that is pretty much a given.

pumpers wrote:

philipmartin wrote: I worked the Pennsy's Bay bridge (Upper Bay) on the Greenville Branch, and mariners call it the Lehigh Valley bridge. I have no idea why unless it's the Valley used it to get from Oak Island to Jersey City.

Well, that's because the Lehigh Valley RR built it and owned it....
Here is a fun link I just found on Google about one joint rebuilding effort after a fire in 1913.
https://books.google.com/books?id=BuBaA ... 22&f=false" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's a very interesting post. When I first worked that place in 1957 or '58 I hoped to spend my career there and as things turned out, I could have.
When I worked there, the Pennsy motive power was all electric. In those days I never saw a PRR diesel road engine, (except Baldwin shark noses for the Coast Line.)
On occasions when the operator lined westbound PRR freights for Oak Island, (misroute), if the engineer got his pantographs down fast enough to avoid tearing down the overhead wire, the Valley drill was good at coming out and shoving the train back under the wire.
You have forgive me for thinking it was a Pennsy bridge; all the guys who worked there were Pennsy employees, the operators, signal maintainers and the electricians who ran the diesels that gave us the power to move the span. That was automated maybe thirty years go so the operator could move the bridge without the electrician. It was dispatched by the Pennsy too. The signals were all position light.
When you have a drill coming out of Oak Island to go to Jersey City, your have to line it for track 1, to give it the widest arc. If you lined it for track 2 (the usual westbound track,) the narrower arc might cause it to stall.
Of interest: when they were installing the lift span, they dropped it in the bay; and so it is slightly crooked. When seating it you have to put downward put downward pressure on it to be able to lock it up.
Our Bay bridge got its name changed to Upper Bay shortly before the Conrail merger to distinguish it from the Jersey Central's four lift span Bay bridge, about a mile further down stream. At that time WC tower in Perth Amboy got its name changed to Wood, to distinguish it from the Erie's (EL) WC tower in Waldwick.
It's a lonely spot. A little more than twenty years ago, the operator was murdered there. I think he was involved with loan sharks. They tried to make it look as though he had hung himself.
Maybe twenty-five years ago, it was hit by an aircraft carrier that was being taken up to Kearny for breaking up. It got away from the five Moran tugs that that were moving it. When the guys on the bridge saw the carrier coming at them, they took off. The collision did minor damage.
Since the article you link to dates from 1913, the operation described was all steam.
As for the Pennsy getting damaged physical plant back in service fast, they were still doing it in the '60s. We had a freight wreck on the Bel Del, (passenger service had already been discontinued) and the Pennsy bulldozed derailed cars over the side, and got the single track railroad back in service as soon as possible. They picked up the wrecked cars later.

mvb119 wrote:

SwingMan wrote:Amtrak can only expand service so much. They have to deal with a plethora of other issues so there won't be many more of their trains. NJ Transit will have more trains, but they should be able to run a tighter ship as far as turning equipment and other factors that are just not there right now. Expansion of the existing station is just not plausible and is in all honesty pretty unnecessary. Unless they decide they want Metro North trains running into NYP at a high clip the current layout is fine. You leave it in the hands of equipment coordinators and dispatchers to properly piece together the puzzle for billions less than building another station.

You must not have ever stepped foot in PSCC then. Hint: I am there everyday. The station is a sea of red during rush hour, and sometimes there isn't a single track open and trains quickly approaching from behind in the tunnels. Sure we can hope that the NJT train coming in on one track will unload quickly but the world isn't always perfect and an outbound Amtrak or NJT train might have to load on the very same platform with only one escalator going up and people with suitcases going against the current. While a situation like that is generally avoided, sometimes things have to be done and sacrifices have to be made. In other situations you might have a 12 car NJT train approaching the station, and while there may be a track open, it is not long enough to platform the entire train. The Pennsy didn't build all the platforms to the same length. These are just some of the issues that come up, I am sure I can think of many more, but I am too tired to think today.
Long Island Rail Road has the advantage of 4 leads into West Side Yard to allow for trains to quickly come and go from the yard, but Amtrak and NJT trains all have to wait for their turn to go into Line 1 to head to the yard so they can clear up for the trains behind them to come into the station, the reverse is true when they are leaving the yard. I don't think anybody will argue that the tunnels are not a critical need right now, but it would be foolish to say capacity at Penn Station is not an issue, even in its current state, the whole thing is far from perfect, and it is a ballet as it is everyday for the dispatchers to get everything to work. You can coordinate all you want but that never takes into account the real world when things go wrong, and that is pretty much a given.

I'm talking down the road 5-10 years when anything can get started. I respect what you guys have to deal with up there, but tell me how in the world putting 3-5 more tracks on top of the already tight ladder is going to solve anything? Adding tracks does not add capacity, feeding systems add capacity. I'm not usually over on the south side of the station, but with the way things are (stub end tracks, short platforms, and lots of tracks to crossover) it is easy to see why it is not a fluid place to operate things as tightly as they are. They need to somehow develop extra leads into the station without building under the river (probably way easier on the East River side considering the Hudson River is closer to the station) and expand these footprint east/west instead of south, including making platforms 5-12 longer and 1-4 thru tracks. On the west end that will probably become leads for the new tunnel (I'm thinking), but with Yard E still needed to store trains in the present and no space to move things it just seems like more headaches.

philipmartin wrote:

pumpers wrote:

philipmartin wrote: I worked the Pennsy's Bay bridge (Upper Bay) on the Greenville Branch, and mariners call it the Lehigh Valley bridge. I have no idea why unless it's the Valley used it to get from Oak Island to Jersey City.

Well, that's because the Lehigh Valley RR built it and owned it....
Here is a fun link I just found on Google about one joint rebuilding effort after a fire in 1913.
https://books.google.com/books?id=BuBaA ... 22&f=false" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

... When I first worked that place in 1957 or '58 I hoped to spend my career there and as things turned out, I could have. ...

Thanks for all the interesting history and how it used to be. LV at one time had a big operation on the bay in Jersey City, on the south side of the Morris Canal outlet, just north of the big CNJ Communipaw operation. I don't know when that wound down, but it sounds like by the late 1950's that the PRR was the main user of that bridge and managed all the operations.
Also, about the details you mention to get the bridge to close properly, so many things in real life seem simple and straightforward on paper, but unless you have people with experience in the field who really know what is going on and how to get things done right, it's a disaster.
JS