NYS rail plan announced

"but to provide an efficent, low cost way to travel through the whole state." low cost?? effient? Hope your not talking about AmtraK. Nothing they do is "low cost". Some of you are stuck on $10/gal . I ask where you get that number from. At 4.25/gal gas triggered our current economic trouble and many "ckicken littles" said we'd never see gas in the 2 dollar range again. I recently collected on a bet with a co-worker on this very number. Little did I know that it would be a dollar something as crude dropped to $35/barrel. If the government would get out of the way annd let the oil companies actually tap our vast domestic resoures there is no way gas will be 10/gal. This can happen if we the people insist on it. Those of you who "know" what the price will be in a few years, could you tell me next weeks Lotto numbers?

Wow - where to begin.

In Europe, Japan, etc... their 'bullet' trains run on dedicated ROW's specially engineered to handle 200+ MPH speeds - no freight trains to deal with, no grade crossings. It's almost an apples-to-oranges comparison to what we're looking at doing here in NY.

I agree with Otto - I think the plan here in NY is to expand rail capacity. Give Amtrak a dedicated track to use and it'll give the two existing tracks some additional breathing room. Right now most of the CSX main is Class 4, the dedicated track would have to meet Class 6 standards for 110 MPH passenger travel which is essentially tighter geometry. I don't think there are any requirements for grade-separated crossings at those speeds, but you'll need automatic train control system on the 3rd track if they want to go over 80 MPH.

Personally, I think if they want to help the upstate economy - they need to eliminate tolls on the Thruway and do away with the Thruway Authority altogether. An 18 wheeler traveling from NYC to Buffalo will pay $106 in tolls and a passenger car $18 (cash - not EZ-pass). Before this turns into a trucks vs trains debate - the nations railroads are running at or close to capacity. If the Class 1 RR's want to expand capacity - they're privately held corporations... let them foot the bill.

As others have noted - high speed rail works best when connecting major cities (the NE Corridor example is perfect - Boston - NYC - Philly - DC) and it makes sense for the short-haul trips. But when I can fly direct from Rochester to Orlando in 3 hours - it makes the train a hard sell - even a 300 MPH bullet train would be difficult to justify with a HUGE capital outlay when we have an airline system in place (albeit one that's not perfect) that works amazingly well under most circumstances.

Cab signal or PTC won't be a problem as such a system is required on all passenger carrying railroads after 2012.
so all 3 tracks would need it.

The only way you'll see $10 gas is if inflation from all this irresponsible spending kicks in - but in that case we'll all be making 3-4 times what we earn now so it will be the same.

There is an incredible amount of oil out there. We will not be running out of it in the foreseeable future unless we voluntarily MAKE it run out by ignoring the reserves we have. There is nothing wrong with planning for the future and moving toward change in a studied, responsible manner. But to declare hysterically that the auto and the airplane "are dead" is inaccurate and irresponsible.

The whole deal is so transparent it's surprising that anyone falls for it. They pick some grand sounding project, announce that the government is riding in like a white knight to save us all, paint glowing pictures about commuting to and from NYC, and the people blindly suck it up.

Judicious use of funds to address specific rail infrastructure needs is appropriate. The idea of building an additional track all across the state is a boondoggle.

In reality you don't need 3 main trains all the way across NYS... Just in places. There really isn't space on some of the realignments done late in the NYC/PC days ether. The new alignment around Oneida NY and over Canasota NY is strictly a two track affair. The west shore line around Rochester makes that line de-facto three tracks already, Utica yard and the new platforms would also be a small issue, but that is so short you might as well leave it 2 mains.

The line is already 2 main tracks with fairly frequent and long controlled sidings, unfortunately CSX continues the practice of storing cars in most of the controlled sidings. The good thing about these sidings is they are all (with the exception of Oneida, which is on the new alignment) layed on the former northernmost train, with space between them and the remaining 2 mains to lay the third track. I wondered how much more fluid things would be if CSX would actually clear them off, and have dispatchers put slow manifest trains in them for the faster trains to run around.

Okay so lets say you tripple track from CP-169 to CP -235 (Utica here) CP-239 to CP-263 (Oneida bypass here) CP-270 to CP-359 (West shore here) CP-382 to CP-429 (4 main tracks into frontier remain here to the west). Then remove the waysides except for the Distants to the interlockings and the interlocking home signals and use PRR 4 aspect CSS with LSL thats allready used elsewhere. (no need to add more stuff to Amtrak or CSX engines) You would not need a whole lot of interlocking configuration, many of the interlockings still have the space and design layout for the 4 track mains. You would just need to restore the switches for the 3rd main. There would be a couple newer CR interlockings that would present a problem.

It would sure help everyone involved. Amtrak could run up to 110mph, CSX would gain a signal system with much much reduced maintenance costs, and much more fluidity in train movements.

On another point......
The jury is still out on those gensets.... they have had their issues. Yes I know the ALCos smoke, but they are New York State made products. Besides short lines don't run near as much or often enough to justify these. More often they just run their engines at a fraction of their capacity, way out in the boonies where there is little else emissions, I say replacing all the CSX yard engines at Frontier, East Syracuse and Selkirk, and Oak Point would have much more effect.

Alcochaser... you miss the point. You can't run Amtrak at 110 MPH on existing track. Class 4 track is limited to 80 MPH passenger speeds and even if you did upgrade the CSX main - even just one track to class 6 standards, you still have the issue of dodging CSX freights and being at the general mercy of the CSX dispatchers along the way. I'm sure some sidings will need to be added along the way - or where Amtrak trains meet - they'll have to run one on the freight track for a while... but those are logistical details that'll need to be worked out.

Now personally - I think this high speed rail project will never see any return on investment. We're probably looking at a modest increase in passengers at best and I think passenger travel needs in upstate NY would be best served by eliminating tolls on the Thruway. CSX will certainly benefit from the additional capacity - but as I stated earlier should a profitable corporation feel the need to increase capacity then they have the means in which to do so... otherwise this becomes more corporate welfare.

Right now we're seeing around 70 trains per day on the CSX main (at least here through Rochester). That's 3 trains per hour... hardly what I would consider congested. Yards are another story.

nessman wrote:We're probably looking at a modest increase in passengers at best and I think passenger travel needs in upstate NY would be best served by eliminating tolls on the Thruway.

yeah eliminate tolls on the thruway?? S*** they do that and are state taxes will go up to make up for lost money there!

scharnhorst wrote:yeah eliminate tolls on the thruway?? S*** they do that and are state taxes will go up to make up for lost money there!

Otto - forgive me for going off topic here for a sec...

Well... the Thruway Authority is a completely separate entity that duplicates what you already get from the NYSDOT. Eliminate the toll collectors and EZ-pass system and those costs go away. Get rid of all the Thruway Authority administrative staff and have the NYSDOT absorb those functions. Merge the maintenance of the Thruway with the NYSDOT.

The tolls provide for additional maintenance and services that you don't get along other interstates. The taxes we pay when we put fuel in our cars pay for highway maintenance.

Plus Thruway tolls also pay to support highways that do not collect tolls (i.e., I-84), the Erie Canal, etc.

Now yes - you shift the funding of the Thruway from the toll payers to the NYS taxpayers... however - eliminate the tolls and you provide incentive for businesses to ship goods and services to/from and through NY. Incentive for people to make that trip from Buffalo to Utica to ride the Adirondack Scenic. Eliminate tolls and you eliminate a cost of doing business and living in NY.

But it's just a part of the overall equation. The cost of doing business and living in NY is the highest in the nation. Government here consists of layers upon layers of duplicated services. The Thruway Authority is just that.

Alcochaser, you seem to feel CSX is doing something "wrong" by storing cars. Yes, it no doubt hampers operations but what to you propose to DO with them? To quote the auto dealer's ad here locally, "Hey - you can't stack cars!" The cars exist, business is down - they don't magically disappear until needed!

BR&P, While yes, I can not predict future oil prices, I'll leave that to the speculators on Wall St.. I can expect the economy to turn and improve eventually. (if it doesn't we're all going to be in alot more trouble anyway) With such comes increased production, increased sales, increased jobs, increased Oil consumption. When Woldwide consumption resumes to the levels we saw over the last 2 years, we will see those gas prices head right back up to where they were and most likely increase as said economy improves. OPEC is set to meet within the next 2 weeks and has already said, they will cut production, meaning less supplies, and higher prices as demands increase for less product. Yes, it's called supply and demand. I dought the Gov. will pursue very little of what is believed to be under our own soil. Atleast untill overseas supplies have dwindled severely. I believe the intent is to keep it as part of a strategic reserve. Conservationist don't have as much power as most people think. New drilling technologies are alot safer and environmentally friendlier now. This package is meant to increase time service for Amtrak by alleviating the Congestion on the 2 track mains currently in use. No 100 MPH trains in near future. Rochester is a choke point with 3 locals Amtrak, and 5 road trains stopping at the Yard while through traffic tries to pass through. Even with the west Shore Sub. it gets very busy and backed up fast. Esspecially during the spring/summer/fall Months with all the track maintainance. PS, If you happen upon those Lotto numbers for next week, don't forget to share with your friends, LOL

There's room for additional tracks along the Onieda by-pass and over the hump at Canastota. In some places there's room for 4 tracks; the only tight spot is from roughly CP-263 over to where it rejoins the original ROW at that dead-end road crossing (I forget the name of the road) just west of the Thruway overpass. But even here there is room for three tracks.


As for the Thruway, if you think of the toll as a tax, it becomes obvious that if you were to cut taxes you'd see more people use the road and possibly even greater revenues as a result - they'd certainly hold steady. If the redundant Thruway Authority was combined into the state DOT, which there have been some rumblings about recently, you'd definately see more overall revenue.

BR&P wrote:Alcochaser, you seem to feel CSX is doing something "wrong" by storing cars. Yes, it no doubt hampers operations but what to you propose to DO with them? To quote the auto dealer's ad here locally, "Hey - you can't stack cars!" The cars exist, business is down - they don't magically disappear until needed!

Cars have been stored in those sidings even when things were booming, Conrail started it, CSX continues. It's a terrible use of a circuited 261 signaled fully controlled siding.

As far as the Class 4 to Class 6 upgrade. There is not a -whole- lot difference between them in terms of rail geometry. Slightly tighter tolerances, and more Hi-Rail inspections. The big ticket item is the CSS and LSL upgrades. The area maintenance is not a deal breaker in any stretch of the imagination. It also would not all be 110. Places are too curvy or would have municipal restrictions on them. So on these sections you would not need Class 6, only perhaps Class 5.

Conrail used maintain the track as if it was Class 5 anyway.

Digressing from the NYS rail plan a bit....

Rochester is a choke point with 3 locals Amtrak, and 5 road trains stopping at the Yard while through traffic tries to pass through.

I suppose you meant Amtrak stops at the Depot, not at the yard.

As for the 3 locals and 5 road trains working at the yard while other traffic tries to get by, that's nothing new. My notes from March 7, 1979:

The West Base crew went east of CP30 (367) and pulled in 26 cars a westbound had dropped on Track 4 there. Eastbound IHSY dropped 26 more.The Fairport traveling switcher arrived with 10 cars. The Genesee Junction Traveling Switcher arrived with 25 and outlawed on 3 Main at the east end of the yard so the East Base crew had to bring the train into the yard. The First Belt arrived from Charlotte with 83 cars, he outlawed at the east end so the East Base had to handle that too. BUSE7A set off 31 cars. And all that was between 4 and 5PM!!

So the Fairport, Junction and the Belt are your 3 locals, IHSY and BUSE7X were 2 road trains and the West Base you could count as a third road train. Pretty close to your scenario but I believe you mean per day, not all at once. If anybody needs an illustration of how our local industrial base has shrunk...and to someone who had been around in the '40s, that snapshot from 1979 would seem tame.

How best to improve things with this initiative is complicated by the blend of private (CSX) and quasi-public (Amtrak) issues. I think even the dreamers have conceded we're not talking about a whole new rail route across the state. And any significant changes which would improve passenger service will have to be planned and implemented with the participation of CSX. Knowing how politics works, we'll probably be surprised at how little we wind up with to show for it all by the time it's done - probably leading to another bunch of billions in the NEXT package!

Alcochaser wrote:Places are too curvy or would have municipal restrictions on them.

Let's debunk that myth once and for all.

Municipalities have NO say whatsoever in train speeds. Railroads are federally regulated. Some towns have tried and have failed. NIMBY's have tried and failed.

Next thing you know you'll have towns trying to limit the speed of airliners flying 35,000 feet above the ground.

That may be true, but the railroad does have some areas where they voluntarily limit speeds due to municipal areas or other reasons. This is what I mean. You don't need 110mph track where the Amtraks will be slowing to a stop for a station stop. Use some common sense.

110mph Class 6 also will not be authorized over any grade crossing. Those areas will be limited to 90mph Class 5 due to FRA rules. UNLESS someone installs the fancy 4 quadrant gates with sensors like Amtrak has on the few NEC grade crossings.

Rochester can be an operational pain in the rear. That was the entire reason the West Shore remained. I have no idea if the West Shore can be easily double tracked.... perhaps a siding or two?

In reality what you will have is 3 main tracks across most of it (West Shore being counted as a defacto third track) with the majority of it being Class 5 90mph with CSS, with remote sections with no grade crossings being 110mph if they are A, not curvy, B not near a station platform or C, not near grade crossings. In reality just 90mph Class 5. 3 main tracks would be a huge improvement, 110mph Class 6 in places it makes sense would be icing on the cake.