Grocery Stores/Food Dist.

An excellent idea about the barges. Float over the cars or trailers, unload them at the "new" 65 st. float yard which was never used for any float operations! That yard is close to the BQE for LI access. Or unload the cars/trailers at the NYNJ yard on 2nd avenue.
If you look at pics from the 40's 50's the float yard was very very busy! So why not use it as it was designed for, not just let the new float bridges, which i'm sure the taxpayers helped pay for, go to waste!

This thread may be veering off a bit (I don't care, but others may), but I remember discussions of a 'high' speed/high capacity car float across NY Harbor (as opposed to the cross-harbor tunnel) - reason for high speed/capacity is to reduce labor cost per trip, of course.
Is there something like this in operation currently (Alaska-Washington perhaps?), and would it work for increased NY&A traffic levels (pretend doubled or tripled even)?

BobLI wrote:So why not use it as it was designed for, not just let the new float bridges, which i'm sure the taxpayers helped pay for, go to waste!

From past posts, there is suppose to be plenty of capacity on NY/NJ Rail's operation that is not used, so why not? Mostly due to what jayrmli said:

jayrmli wrote: "The railroads and their corporate partners decided long ago to transload the goods out of Jersey to satisfy a larger market."

But why this decision? Partly due to the fact that using the float operation or Albany route means more waiting which equals more costs, so back to the catch 22.

jayrmli wrote:There is not enough demand/rail freight on Long Island to justify the expense of building the tunnel.

Why just LI freight? The existing Bonx terminal could not make use of this tunnel?

Also, as I have noted in past posts, I think the NJ to SI to Brooklyn route would be best, as it could then be a joint PA/MTA 2 level tunnel project linking freight and subways. So even if frieight fails, the subway connection would still save $ in the long run.

Could we get back to the original intent of this topic? Does anyone have any photos of either King Kullen or Waldbaums being serviced? -Lee

LRail wrote:How come none of the LI grocery stores can be convinced to try rail again? Especially with the rising gas costs of late? Would it be cost prohibitive to reactivate their sidings?

LRail wrote:Could we get back to the original intent of this topic?

Discussing a rail freight tunnel does not seem that far off topic, since it seems the cost of trucking has not exceed the time and/or cost of using the current rail options (car floats or Albany route). Maybe a high speed roll on/off ferry alluded to by Sir Ray might help. I am open to other suggestions to convince any customer to try rail again.

BobLi, you suggested floating the trailers. Did you mean on intermodal equipment or just trailers themselves?


Hrfcarl, I am sorry, but I do not understand your Catch 22 statement. Do you, or have you worked for any of the local railroads, in any capacity? I am just curious as to why you are so sure that there is so much business just lying in wait. Do you have friends in railroad marketing, please enlighten me

Jayjay1213 wrote:Hrfcarl, I am sorry, but I do not understand your Catch 22 statement. Do you, or have you worked for any of the local railroads, in any capacity? I am just curious as to why you are so sure that there is so much business just lying in wait. Do you have friends in railroad marketing, please enlighten me

There is nothing to enlighten, I do not have any inside info, nor am I sure of anything. My profession is the the field of finance/accounting, but has nothing to do with railroads. The arguement against rail frieght to NYC (5 boroughs) & LI seems circular to me: Very few are using railfreight now, so why improve the way rail freight is brought into NYC & LI, but why would anyone use the greater capacity of rail freight if the current routes (car floats & Albany) make its use more costly and/or time consuming vs trucking? Hence the catch 22.

The only justification I can provide is the tons of freight entering NYC & LI by trucks crossing the varioius HR crossings and traveling the highways of NYC & LI now. With the current routes available to rail, trucking is the quicker and/or less costly menthod, even with rising fuel costs and the fact the rail can carry 2x to 3x the loads. So the only way rail freight can compete with trucking is to have a quicker route to NYC & LI, which should lower costs with its higher payloads. This excludes history, in which rail feight did bring in stuff to NYC & LI and what started this thread.

I did hedge my bet on the tunnel by saying it should be a 2 level PA NY/NJ & MTA tunnel project using the SI route. Even if the freight never gets the business predicted, connecting the SI subway to rest of the city subway system via this tunnel will still give savings in the long run since few ferries & busses would be needed leading to a reduction in maintenance on those ferries & busses plus a reduction of traffic on key routes with fewer busses.

Jay, While your comments have merit, it would seem that a new tunnel for joint use would serve to get a lot of trucks off the bridges over the Hudson River. An alternate would be to use the barges & deal with the height restrictions once the freight arrives in Brooklyn or transload it there.
I think we are all aware of the several plans to create trans loading facilities on LI.

1) There isn't real estate available in Brooklyn to make a decent transloading facility, at least enough to make a significant dent to remove trucks off the bridges.
2) What financial incentive is it for corporations who already have transloading in place in New Jersey to move their facilities to the other side of a river? What other city in the world could you make this argument and have anyone go along with it?
3) The only push to increase rail freight on Long Island is to remove trucks off the LIE and local roads. By having them transload in Brooklyn, what is the difference to those who live on Long Island? Do they really care whether that truck they see on the LIE was transloaded in Jersey or Brooklyn?

jayrmli wrote: "The railroads and their corporate partners decided long ago to transload the goods out of Jersey to satisfy a larger market."



But why this decision? Partly due to the fact that using the float operation or Albany route means more waiting which equals more costs, so back to the catch 22.

The decision was because if you transload in Jersey, you can truck in many different directions other than east of Hudson. You can move goods anywhere. Transload to Long Island, and you have to truck it back. Operating two transload facilties increases railroads cost with no benefit to them.

Why just LI freight? The existing Bonx terminal could not make use of this tunnel?

How many interchanges will this freight have to go through to get to the Bronx? 3 railroads? Quicker to go to Albany and back via CSX.

Jay

jayrmli wrote:How many interchanges will this freight have to go through to get to the Bronx? 3 railroads? Quicker to go to Albany and back via CSX.

Which are the 3 RRs that would be involved in such a move from the Arlington Yard in SI to Hunts Pt in the Bronx if the SI to Brooklyn tunnel was built? CSX at Arlington Yard? IF yes, what prevents CSX from making the run to Hunts Pt if either cross harbor tunnel proposal is built as well as drop off some cars at a Fresh Ponds for any Queen and/or LI customers? Could NY&A be allowed to make this Arlington Yard to Hunts Pt run?

jayrmli wrote:The decision was because if you transload in Jersey, you can truck in many different directions other than east of Hudson. You can move goods anywhere. Transload to Long Island, and you have to truck it back. Operating two transload facilties increases railroads cost with no benefit to them.

The Cross Harbor Tunnel included a intermodal and/or transloding site in Queens and/or LI, so who was suppose to operate that/those facilities?

I am asking these questions not to challange, but because I honestly do not know.

Thanks.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/suffo ... 1792.story

So NYS DOT will be the owner of the LI intermodal site, but who will be the operator? The article does not mention how the intermodal cars are suppose to get to the site - Floats or Albany route? Will they be well cars to TOFCs?

The map of the site given in the paper (not web) makes the site a sort of .5x.5x1.5 mile trinangle. In past posts, I mentioned an area north of Republic Airport between Rt110, New Highway and LIRR tracks that does not seem much smaller. There is what looks like a truck park to the west of Rt110 and south of the LIRR tracks, with bridging over Rt110, that could be added to this site as well - increases costs but gives more room. With a cemetary, airport, mall and other commercial property surrouding it, this site should have less NIMBY resistance and Rt110 for North/South access to LIE and Sunrise highways - if big enough, won't this site in Farmingdale be better?

Which are the 3 RRs that would be involved in such a move from the Arlington Yard in SI to Hunts Pt in the Bronx if the SI to Brooklyn tunnel was built? CSX at Arlington Yard? IF yes, what prevents CSX from making the run to Hunts Pt if either cross harbor tunnel proposal is built as well as drop off some cars at a Fresh Ponds for any Queen and/or LI customers? Could NY&A be allowed to make this Arlington Yard to Hunts Pt run?

I'm not sure who is running the Arlington Yard in Staten Island (M&E?). But whoever is designated as the operator of the tunnel would be able to run to Brooklyn. NYAR has exclusive rights over the Bay Ridge Branch to Fresh Pond. (That's 2). CSX has rights over the rest of the old NYCRR to Oak Point (That's 3). You could have some kind of trackage rights agreement, but there isn't enough profit margin for the railroads to want to even do this.

The problem with the whole Criss harbor Tunnel project is that it is now being advanced by politicians, and not the railroads. Ask any railroad official if they want to have this service, and they will tell you no. Any publicly funded project that has been successful (or any project on the drawing boards with any chance of success) is pushed by the railroads.

Jay

jayrmli wrote:I'm not sure who is running the Arlington Yard in Staten Island (M&E?). But whoever is designated as the operator of the tunnel would be able to run to Brooklyn. NYAR has exclusive rights over the Bay Ridge Branch to Fresh Pond. (That's 2). CSX has rights over the rest of the old NYCRR to Oak Point (That's 3). You could have some kind of trackage rights agreement, but there isn't enough profit margin for the railroads to want to even do this.

The problem with the whole Criss harbor Tunnel project is that it is now being advanced by politicians, and not the railroads. Ask any railroad official if they want to have this service, and they will tell you no. Any publicly funded project that has been successful (or any project on the drawing boards with any chance of success) is pushed by the railroads.

Jay

I have seen videos of CSX engines pulling well cars leaving the Arlington Yards and crossing the AK bridge, so I would assume they at least have rights. One would also assume CSX is making regular runs to that yard. But I could be wrong.

IF CSX could obtain trackage rights for the Bay Ridge Branch to add to its rights to the Connecting RR trackage this would seem to be a better/faster route to serve Oak Point customers with Fresh Pond as an additional drop off point. It might make more sense for CSX to give rights to NY&A for that CRR trackage so NY&A could make the Arlington Yard to Oak Point run as well as serve their current Brooklyn, Queens and LI clients if NY&A was given the tunnel rights. I agree politicians will find a way to make this tunnel a mess or never come to be, but I still have to ask: Why hasn't any of the RRs push for it?

On Staten Island, Conrail has the sole rights running into there. It is a Port Newark crew that regularly runs there, with the Bayway job occasionally bringing empty garbage cars over. The majority of the intermodal for SI comes in on CSX, so the CSX road crew leaves the power on the cut of cars, and the Conrail crew jumps on.

As for the intermodal, it cannot be well, aka bucket cars, they do not clear the 3rd rail.

I agree politicians will find a way to make this tunnel a mess or never come to be, but I still have to ask: Why hasn't any of the RRs push for it?

Because they don't want it. Railroads will only push for something if it means more of this: $$$$$

If there isn't a large enough profit margin, they won't go for it. Why would they? Simple economics.

Jay

According to Progressive Railroading, the SI yard is switched by the terminal operator. CSX (Conrail?) only hauls cars over the bridge.