Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
Dasglion

I've Heard Some Rumors...

Recommended Posts

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5G77 Safari/525.20)

 

Throughout history, (MTA) has wanted to create a tunnel for the SIRT to connect to the Bay Ridge 95 Street station. However, it has not happened because of budget issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been discussed before.

The currents are very strong in the waters between Staten Island and Brooklyn.. that's right where everything "opens up"...

 

I doubt it will happen any time in the forseeable future.

I don't think you'll ever see trains on the VNB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can the Verrazzanos' structure handle trains going over it?

 

Yes. It could in theory, with new suspenders, handle 2 whole more road decks. It is a monstrous beast. If track were put on it, it would be 2 tracks to minimize static weight.

 

- A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:confused:ive heard a few thing about the SIRR being intigrated into the NYCS

 

 

I would be shocked if this ever happened. The cost would ridiculous either building a tunnel or putting the tracks on the bridge. Plus then the TA would have to set up all of the staten island stations with HEEPS and additional personnel.

 

It would also cause employee problems because SIR is a federal railroad so it's employees get a federal pension not a city pension and they make more money than there TA equals. The SIR would no longer be a railroad if they were to be included in the TA. There would be union issues also because the engineers for SI are part of a much better and more powerful union than TWU, the brotherhood of locomotive engineers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There would be union issues also because the engineers for SI are part of a much better and more powerful union than TWU, the brotherhood of locomotive engineers.

 

I didn't know TWU was that bad...

 

Either way, there are two choices: reactivate the North Shore Line -or- build a rail connection to Brooklyn. When/if the North Shore Line is ever used again, I don't see the FRA granting SIR anymore waivers to run subway equipment on a railroad...especially since it would constitute a connection to the nationwide rail network. Just imagine R160's running on the LIRR. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes. It could in theory, with new suspenders, handle 2 whole more road decks. It is a monstrous beast. If track were put on it, it would be 2 tracks to minimize static weight.

 

- A

If the TsingMa bridge in Hong Kong can hold two tracks for the MTR Airport Express, then so can the Verrazano Bridge. The two are constructed with similar designs and it was the TsingMa Bridge that exceeded the Verrazano in length.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We'd need another Robert Moses for that to happen...
With another Robert Moses, it will never happen then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert moses would pave over all the LIRR tracks and make into a parking lot for "improvement".

 

I think they should use the VNB, but the only trick is where to put the approaches in brooklyn. I think a tunnel is more expensive than via bridge.

 

- A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't work over the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge. The bridge was designed to be flexible with the high winds that it must deal with due to the tall heights of the bridge and towers. With the trains crossing over, it would cause the bridge to flex and sway too much, which is what already happening on the Manhattan Bridge due to the tilting and swaying that the heavy trains cause to the Bridge. So they would then need to make the Verrazano-Narrows rigid in order to prevent the subway trains from causing the bridge to sway and tilt, which would then cause problems with having the bridge stay flexible in the wind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wouldn't work over the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge. The bridge was designed to be flexible with the high winds that it must deal with due to the tall heights of the bridge and towers. With the trains crossing over, it would cause the bridge to flex and sway too much, which is what already happening on the Manhattan Bridge due to the tilting and swaying that the heavy trains cause to the Bridge. So they would then need to make the Verrazano-Narrows rigid in order to prevent the subway trains from causing the bridge to sway and tilt, which would then cause problems with having the bridge stay flexible in the wind.

 

Nah, you'd put them in the middle, not on the outside. I for one would not want to be dangled that high over nothing but water. You'd but 2 tracks, as close as possible to each other down the center. You could keep the bridge in service, or take it out of service, whichever, and do the track and new suspenders at the same time, or put new suspenders in with existing suspenders, keep the old ones, then construct the new support structure for the tracks,, then put the timbers etc up, and run test trains etc. See how fast you can run them, then put the line in service. :)

 

- A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They could just not run trains over the bridge... The (R) or (SIR) can run over the bridge... :)!

 

WHAT are you talking about? Clarify that statement. Seems like you're contradicting yourself.

 

Grammar, grammar, grammar...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The VNB is a LOT stronger than it looks. The towers don't even begin to approach any kind of straining point even with the 2 decks. You could load it end to end with fully loaded tank trucks and it would make no difference at all.

 

There are longer bridges with trains that run on/over/through them. MUCH longer. The suspender cables as they are now are sufficient for road decks only, to support the dynamic loads a tracked deck would bring, you'd need to add a smaller additional single or pair of suspender cables next to each existing connection point. This combined with the tracks being inside the towers and in the center would restrict the flexing that plagues the manny b and willy b to a barely noticeable % and nothing close to anything that would affect the integrity of the bridge.

 

Problem solved.

 

Next? :)

 

- A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The VNB is a LOT stronger than it looks. The towers don't even begin to approach any kind of straining point even with the 2 decks. You could load it end to end with fully loaded tank trucks and it would make no difference at all.

 

There are longer bridges with trains that run on/over/through them. MUCH longer. The suspender cables as they are now are sufficient for road decks only, to support the dynamic loads a tracked deck would bring, you'd need to add a smaller additional single or pair of suspender cables next to each existing connection point. This combined with the tracks being inside the towers and in the center would restrict the flexing that plagues the manny b and willy b to a barely noticeable % and nothing close to anything that would affect the integrity of the bridge.

 

Problem solved.

 

Next? :)

 

- A

but remember, those bridges are designed like that BEFORE they are built. It's a whole different thing adding rail service to something that wasn't planned for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wouldn't work over the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge. The bridge was designed to be flexible with the high winds that it must deal with due to the tall heights of the bridge and towers. With the trains crossing over, it would cause the bridge to flex and sway too much, which is what already happening on the Manhattan Bridge due to the tilting and swaying that the heavy trains cause to the Bridge. So they would then need to make the Verrazano-Narrows rigid in order to prevent the subway trains from causing the bridge to sway and tilt, which would then cause problems with having the bridge stay flexible in the wind.

 

Would one track straight down the middle fix that? Of course it's less capacity than 2 tracks, but I'm sure Staten Islanders would appreciate the connection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would one track straight down the middle fix that? Of course it's less capacity than 2 tracks, but I'm sure Staten Islanders would appreciate the connection.

 

Listen guys, the VNB is out of the question. Its much more complicated to build a second deck on a bridge that is heavily in use. The only option is a tunnel of 2 or 3 tracks and then connecting the (R) directly to the SIRR. There would be a problem with that since the SIRR uses the same station and car demensions as the IRT lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.