Lake Shore Limited bottlenecks

[ctclark1]

This is one reason why at least in NYS, they want to build a "dedicated" 3rd track. CSX wants a wider distance between the tracks. NYS can't afford it, so I'm not waiting, but I think it'll help if it's ever built.

Seeing as how the line was historically graded for four tracks the entire way, how is this an issue? Is there not enough space for three evenly spaced tracks?

The way I've understood things I've read about the dedicated line for passengers is that the only way it would happen (at least with any NY assistance) would be grade seperation at road crossings, something I don't see happening. But that was under old administration when HSR was the big push, so I'm not sure if this is still a concern.

Not to mention rebuilding bridges the entire way for the third track again, even if it was just to follow the same ROW. As with my previous post, not an expert, but what I see as things standing in the way.

One quick question Greg (or anyone else that can answer) - by wider distance b/t tracks, do you mean between all three tracks, or between the existing Tracks 1/2 and the proposed new Track 3? (If its this last case, presumably the new track could go where the fourth track was with the space from the third track empty, but I think it would still require a lot of work to reset the rail bed in the 4th track's old spot, and the bridges/crossings, etc...)

[Greg Moore]

This is one reason why at least in NYS, they want to build a "dedicated" 3rd track. CSX wants a wider distance between the tracks. NYS can't afford it, so I'm not waiting, but I think it'll help if it's ever built.

Seeing as how the line was historically graded for four tracks the entire way, how is this an issue? Is there not enough space for three evenly spaced tracks?

The way I've understood things I've read about the dedicated line for passengers is that the only way it would happen (at least with any NY assistance) would be grade seperation at road crossings, something I don't see happening. But that was under old administration when HSR was the big push, so I'm not sure if this is still a concern.

Not to mention rebuilding bridges the entire way for the third track again, even if it was just to follow the same ROW. As with my previous post, not an expert, but what I see as things standing in the way.

One quick question Greg (or anyone else that can answer) - by wider distance b/t tracks, do you mean between all three tracks, or between the existing Tracks 1/2 and the proposed new Track 3? (If its this last case, presumably the new track could go where the fourth track was with the space from the third track empty, but I think it would still require a lot of work to reset the rail bed in the 4th track's old spot, and the bridges/crossings, etc...)

It's just the 3rd track they want a wider separation on. No additional grade crossings would be required (though they'd be desirable). Many of the bridges I think still can hold additional tracks.

I think the problem is in many places to get the distance CSX wants, it would still require shifting existing tracks. So I can see something like a "build track 3, lease it to CSX, take track 1 out of commission, move it over, put it back in commission, take track 2 out of commission, move it, put it back into commission." This all takes time and money. And has to be done on a VERY busy ROW.

But, regardless, NYS doesn't have the money at this point.

[ctclark1]

I think the problem is in many places to get the distance CSX wants, it would still require shifting existing tracks. So I can see something like a "build track 3, lease it to CSX, take track 1 out of commission, move it over, put it back in commission, take track 2 out of commission, move it, put it back into commission." This all takes time and money. And has to be done on a VERY busy ROW.

So have 1/2 gradually shifted inwards over the years since 3/4 were removed? Or is it that 1/2/4 spacing still doesn't give CSX the gap they want?

As far as grade crossings, my understanding of it had been this dedicated track, if it ever happened, was to aim for as few grade crossings as possible (again, this was during the cross-state HSR push under Pataki) which would mean either a separate ROW or converting a huge number of existing crossings to over/underpasses, which would be an insane undertaking in many areas. But I may be misunderstanding or mis-remembering what I read years ago.

But, regardless, NYS doesn't have the money at this point.

True that, just my curiosity at this point.

[Railjunkie]

Lets just do this the easy way, give me cab signals and 90mph on the Mohawk. Wait a second that was offered and NYS wanted 110mph so I guess its a no go.

A dedicated thrid track for passenger service sounds great but, the space is on the north side all the stations with the exception of Amsterdam are on the south side. So I guess you need to either build pedestrian bridges to the new platform or cross over the two freight mains. Meets would be another problem, someone is going to have to cross over to the freight side and hopefully dosent get stuck behind a 40mph coal drag for 15 miles.

HSR is a dream on the Mohawk CSX dosent want it NYS cant afford it. Ive got 15 years to go and Im not placing any bets on this project ever seeing the light of day.

[twropr]

Tonight I heard a very interesting delay to #49 on the Mohawk radio feed. The NC Disp. informed the lone engineer that a 10 MPH temporary speed restriction at MP 222.6 had been annulled and asked if there was anyone aboard the engine who could copy the form. When the engineer said it was just him, NC said "it's your call - you can either copy when you're stopped or you can run thru it at 10." The engineer elected to do the later.
It does seem that the trains are running slower over the Mohawk than they did when I lived in Upstate NY 10 yrs ago. They used to make it from CP 184 to CP 225 in 34-35 min - now it takes them almost 40.

Andy

[David Benton]

Can the conductor not write it down back in the train ???.Isnt he in charge ?

[Backshophoss]

The conductor's radio most likely cannot be heard by the DS,understand part of the problem is a need to upgrade of
the repeaters in the area,a by product of narrowbanding the channels?

[Railjunkie]

Can the conductor not write it down back in the train ???.Isnt he in charge ?

When the conductor copies a form he has to make two copies one for himself and the other for the engineer, of which he must recieve a copy. Rules state that engineers are not allowed to take forms while the train is moving unless there is a second man on the head end. In this case it would have been easier, less delay to do the temp 10mph than stop and copy.

[Mcoov]

So have 1/2 gradually shifted inwards over the years since 3/4 were removed? Or is it that 1/2/4 spacing still doesn't give CSX the gap they want?

In a lot of places, the current 1/2 is the former 2/3. In others it's either the former 1/2 or former 3/4.

[ThirdRail7]

[quote="afiggattthe funds are all in place, if the work is actually completed in late 2015 or mid 2016, the 2017 official date will allow the state DOT to issue a self congratulatory press release on how the work was completed a year or two early.

There are 2 other funded HSIPR projects for the LSL route that I don't see mentioned in this thread:
1) the $71 million Indiana Gateway Corridor project for track and crossover upgrades to reduce the bottlenecks on the NS tracks in Indiana. The funds were obligated in September, 2012 so the agreements have all been signed.
2) $18.5 million for Syracuse Track construction and signal improvements. The funds for this project still have not been obligated as CSX and the FRA reportedly have been unable to agree to terms. This is a FY2010 award which does not have the 2017 deadline the stimulus grants do, so the FRA and CSX can continue to negotiate if that is what they are doing. There are benefits to putting a reasonable deadline on project funding to motivate the various agencies and parties involved to reach agreements and get going on the project.[/quote]

The funds are now obligated! Please allow a brief "fair use" quote:

Empire Corridor gets federal fund boost
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/pas ... boost.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

New York State will receive $18.5 million to relieve rail congestion in and around Syracuse, N.Y., an Amtrak station stop on right-of-way owned by CSX Corp.

The federal Department of Transportation will advance the money to its New York State counterpart to oversee reconfiguration of tracks and an upgrade of signal systems, to begin in 2015. New York State will contribute $4.6 million of its own funds to the project.

Work will include upgrading and some expansion of train sidings to alleviate conflicts between Amtrak Empire Service trains and CSX operations, addressing needs of Syracuse Station and a nearby CSX freight yard. The new layout also aims to increase speeds faster than the current 30 mph limit, according to local media.

Syracuse Station hosts four Amtrak trains per day in each direction, including the long-distance train Lake Shore Limited

[Woody]

At the Chicago end of the Lake Shore route, the LD train will one day be greatly helped by corridor train improvements.

From Union Station, the Wolverines run "South of the Lake". For most of that distance the five Michigan trains share tracks with the Lake Shore Ltd. and the Capitol Ltd. (and dozens of freights) The Michigan DOT has begun analysis and planning for comprehensive upgrades to that stretch of the Chicago-Detroit corridor, which means a lot to Michigan and means nothing to Indiana. Some of the projects may fall within the larger C.R.E.A.T.E. plan in Chicago.

So this South of the Lake project could be almost shovel-ready next time big money comes around. The grants would go to Illinois, and somehow to Indiana (politely not getting in the way, at least) but the LD trains would get huge benefits from every minute saved.

Then surely someday Ohio will want to speed up trains in the Chicago-Toledo-Cleveland corridor. Upgrading most of that line to 110 mph capability would change everything for the Lake Shore and the Capitol Ltd. -- and probably the Broadway Ltd. as well.

[25Hz]

When the delay reports come in, it usually reflects the large amount of traffic along this route. It seems as if there is literally a wall of trains. <snip>
Perhaps the schedules along this route are no longer realistic. Perhaps a new schedule based upon today's traffic patterns is needed.

Living next to these tracks, some days it definitely seems like a wall of trains. I've heard people talk about getting "double-trained" at 2-track crossings, this is the only place I've ever seen a "triple-train" wait at a 2-track crossing... I don't remember which directions, but as an example, train 1 was traveling on track 1. Just before train 1 finished, train 2 was lumbering slowly across Rt 19. Then, by the time train 2 finished, Train 3 was going by on track 1...

You have to consider that CSX seems to have been doing a lot of major maintenance along the Chicago Line/WLR over the last few years. I know through Bergen Track 1 was replaced in 2009, They just did Track 2 through here this fall... Add in the signal changeovers through the eastern half of the state and routine maintenance, I've seen a heck of a lot of work being done through Bergen just since moving here last winter, and more times than I can count I've witnessed "walls of trains" backed up in either direction, rumbling slowly by at speeds you would typically see them entering a yard. More days than not it does seem to be business as usual, but there are a lot of days when there are backups, I've presumed because of maintenance somewhere; but know that it could be anywhere between Albany and somewhere in Ohio that could be logically causing it based on the of the amount of traffic this road sees. There's not a lot of logical detours nor are there a lot of places for traffic to split between Albany and Buffalo, even farther west of Buffalo really. If it is the maintenance causing these problems, presumably they'll be resolved at some point in the future. Do I know that this is the reason? No, just speculating, but I don't know as the schedules need to be reworked at this point. Particularly as it would probably require reworking the schedules across the country to keep layovers and platform occupancy...

Just my thoughts on the matter... I'm no expert.

That is becoming an issue on the west trenton line (ex CNJ/reading main) where the line goes from 3 to 2 tracks to cross the delaware o a bridge, 3rd track being extended closer to bridge is funded. Other day i saw a CSX job stopped waiting to proceed after one local and one super-long and 2 septa used the line within a 15 minute window. A year or two ago such traffic did not exist.

Freights handed off corridor, LD, and commuter to amtrak and state agencies because they were unprofitable, then you got an uptick in freight tons per month, suddenly that handed-off anemic pax remnant becomes an issue. I think the solution is to put some/many tracks back in formerly double & triple tracked areas. As for the water level route alb-buf it was once 4 tracks, 3 shouldn't be rocket science.

Seems time has come for us to either build bypass routes, parallels, or something, because the freights kinda make all the gears spin, but less planes and cars is also needed. A tough nut to crack for sure, but i'm hopeful for a sensical solution.

[Woody]

I think the problem is . . . This all takes time and money.
. . . But, regardless, NYS doesn't have the money at this point.

True that, just my curiosity at this point.

Somehow New York State has the money for a replacement
for the Tappan Zee Bridge over the Hudson that will cost $4 billion,
according to its proponents, or $5 to 6 billion alleged by its critics.

New York State has plenty of money for whatever it wants to do.
Under Gov Cuomo, the choice is to spend much more on highways
and a tinkle on transit and trains.

I take this sort of personally, because I've lived in New York for
almost 50 years, and I have never crossed the Hudson on the
Tappan Zee Bridge. Frankly, I don't care if it falls into the river.

[Greg Moore]

I think the problem is . . . This all takes time and money.
. . . But, regardless, NYS doesn't have the money at this point.

True that, just my curiosity at this point.

Somehow New York State has the money for a replacement
for the Tappan Zee Bridge over the Hudson that will cost $4 billion,
according to its proponents, or $5 to 6 billion alleged by its critics.

New York State has plenty of money for whatever it wants to do.
Under Gov Cuomo, the choice is to spend much more on highways
and a tinkle on transit and trains.

I take this sort of personally, because I've lived in New York for
almost 50 years, and I have never crossed the Hudson on the
Tappan Zee Bridge. Frankly, I don't care if it falls into the river.

Except, NYS really hasn't figured out how to fund the Tappen Zee. So far it's all smoke and mirrors.

And while you may be content to see it fall in the Hudson (and it's pretty close to that, remember, it was building during the Korean War period and never designed to last this long or carry this much traffic) its lose would be a huge economic blow.

But otherwise, yes, I think NYS (like most of America) really needs to invest in infrastructure, and soon.

[Gilbert B Norman]

I take this sort of personally, because I've lived in New York for
almost 50 years, and I have never crossed the Hudson on the
Tappan Zee Bridge. Frankly, I don't care if it falls into the river.

Some kind of boycott, or just simply no reason.