Jump to content




Help Support AmtrakTrains.com by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.

Path Train Extension


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_Andrew_*

Guest_Andrew_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 September 2013 - 04:03 PM

There has been recent talk of extending the PATH Train to Newark Airport. My question, is, how will this conflict with the Raritan Flyover Project? http://www.railwayag...html?channel=62



#2 afigg

afigg

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,897 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 12 September 2013 - 10:47 PM

With the projected cost of extending PATH several miles to the Newark Airport station now at approximately $1 billion, that likely provides for a route that does not conflict with future upgrade plans for that segment of the NEC. The cost of the PATH extension has taken a big jump from earlier estimates. Maybe the new plan is tunnel under the NEC ROW to get to the eastern side of the NEC tracks and the Newark Airport station? Until the Port Authority provides details on the results of their environmental and engineering study, all we can do is guess.

#3 Trogdor

Trogdor

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,137 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Here

Posted 12 September 2013 - 10:57 PM

Unfortunately, from what I understand, it still requires transferring to that godawful monorail at EWR (with cars so small you'd think you were in one of those amusement park ferris wheel pods).
Posted Image

#4 AlanB

AlanB

    Engineer

  • Honored Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,367 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens, New York

Posted 13 September 2013 - 05:48 AM

I think that there has been talk of extending both PATH and the Newark City Subway to the airport for the last 30 to 40 years. I grew up in Belleville and rode the Newark Subway to college and there was talk of extensions to EWR way back then. The monorail wasn't even a glimmer in anyone's eyes back then, much less a station on the NEC.

So I'll believe an extension of either train to the airport when I see a shovel in the ground and the money to build it.

To answer the question however, it wouldn't have any impact on the Raritan Flyover. There is already a bridge carrying freight trains over the NEC right there. That bridge isn't going anywhere, so PATH's plans must deal with that no matter what. And any flyover will either use that existing bridge or a new one right in the same area.
Alan,

Take care and take trains!

#5 Guest_Andrew_*

Guest_Andrew_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 September 2013 - 07:52 AM

1. But then wouldn't Path Trains interfere with "Westbound" trains heading to Raritan at the Hunter Flyover?

 

2. What is the actual distance between Newark Penn Station and Newark Airport Rail Station?

 

3. If the Port Authority tunnels under the NEC to get to Newark Airport Rail Station, what would their method be? TBMs? Cut-and Cover and or Drill-and Blast?



#6 afigg

afigg

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,897 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 13 September 2013 - 11:37 AM

 

1. But then wouldn't Path Trains interfere with "Westbound" trains heading to Raritan at the Hunter Flyover?
 
2. What is the actual distance between Newark Penn Station and Newark Airport Rail Station?
 
3. If the Port Authority tunnels under the NEC to get to Newark Airport Rail Station, what would their method be? TBMs? Cut-and Cover and or Drill-and Blast?

1. Why would the Port Authority be allowed to build a PATH extension that would interfere with NEC and NJ Transit plans?
2. How about firing up a map program or Google Earth to measure the distance yourself? Not that difficult.
3. A couple of guys with pick axes and dynamite. Good grief, until PATH releases their study on the proposed extension, we don't know what the thinking is on how to extend PATH.

If the price tag is $1 billion, that may keep the project on the, yea, we will build it someday list. Or not.

#7 The Davy Crockett

The Davy Crockett

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,332 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALX
  • Interests:The Rails, US History, The Great Outdoors, Good Food

Posted 13 September 2013 - 04:27 PM

I'm not at all familiar with this proposed extension or where the money would come from, but that is a billion bucks better spent towards new tunnels under the Hudson. 


I wish I was a headlight on a northbound of the border train.

#8 afigg

afigg

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,897 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 13 September 2013 - 05:10 PM

I'm not at all familiar with this proposed extension or where the money would come from, but that is a billion bucks better spent towards new tunnels under the Hudson.

The funds would come from the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey  (PANYNJ) which owns and operates PATH, the airports (JFK, LGA, EWR, Teeterboro, Stewart), tunnels, bridges, and ports in the greater NYC region. It is a very large operation with $4 billion in revenue and $3.3 billion in capital spending in 2012*. The Port Authority would almost certainty be a contributor to the Gateway project, but it has a number of major capital projects on its plate in the coming years.

 

* edit: pulled up the PANYNJ 2012 financial statement and filled in the numbers.


Edited by afigg, 13 September 2013 - 05:15 PM.


#9 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 13 September 2013 - 09:57 PM

One of its bigger projects at present is raising the Bayonne Bridge in place to allow larger Container Ships to pass under it.

(null)

#10 Guest_Andrew_*

Guest_Andrew_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 September 2013 - 09:13 AM

Does the current estimate for the Path Extension to EWR Rail Station include the Hunter Interlocking Flyover? 



#11 Guest_PATH user_*

Guest_PATH user_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 November 2013 - 10:33 AM

See this thread from flyertalk  (which at a first glance doesn't seem to have anything to do with the current discussion),

 

http://www.flyertalk...-j-ord-iah.html

 

but if you look closely

 

http://www.flyertalk...183-post26.html

 

 

 

A Wall Street Journal article in September 2013 indicated that the NJ Gov Chris Christie had requested that United launch flights from ACY to a host of cities in exchange for directing the Port Authority of NY/NJ to start work on the PATH rail extension from Newark Penn Station directly to Newark Airport.

United reportedly refused the first time around, but I wonder if with this announcement, an announcement on the PATH extension will follow.

Here's a link to a Google search on the topic, click the first link to pull up the WSJ article to avoid the paywall: https://www.google.c....to the Airport

 

It's still a speculation at this point.

 

 



#12 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 15 November 2013 - 12:08 PM

Indeed, when the original Christie - UA deal was talked about there was a clear indication of a quid pro quo, since United does not expect to make any money running those two daily flights. They are apparently willing to let them be if they get something out of it for Newark Airport, which they of course care about a lot. A direct PATH train from WTC to EWR would be quite a boon for the UA hub at EWR. So let's see if Christie is able to deliver his end of the deal before he decamps to try to become the President.

 

As for how PATH will get across the NEC, it will be on an elevated structure akin to the one used by it to get across half the NEC to its yard in NWK. Indeed it will probably be mostly on elevated structure either above the NEC or above McCarter Highway or some combination thereof - hence the seemingly high cost.The Yard will probably be moved from NWK to EWR where there is ample space for such. So any question about what tunneling technique will be used is quite irrelevant. It will also have to fly over the Lehigh Valley CSAO line. Where it will do so exactly will depend on the choice of the actual routing. The PATH station at EWR will be between the AirTrain station and the CSAO leads. There are also proposals floating around to eventually extend it to a centrally located single station in the short term parking lots area with travellators connecting it to the terminals. But that is not part of the current proposals.



#13 Guest_Andrew_*

Guest_Andrew_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 November 2013 - 03:04 PM

1. First of all, Christie will not become the President of the United States!

 

2. What phase of engineering is the PATH Extension in now?



#14 MattW

MattW

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,717 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East of Atlanta, GA

Posted 15 November 2013 - 04:40 PM

Question about the potential funding for this. I asked on another forum, but only one person spoke up and while I don't doubt they're correct, I'd still like to hear it elsewhere. If Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) are used to fund the extension to EWR, does that mean that a South Newark station (or any other intermediate station) couldn't even be built on the extension even if all aspects of that station, platform, faregates, escalators, etc. were funded from other sources?


Forum's official broken record about expanded Georgia passenger service!

#15 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 15 November 2013 - 05:50 PM

Matt, that is my understanding. First they will have to create a sliver of PA property from the airport property to Newark Penn Station to build the thing on, and then use it only for airport access and nothing else. OTOH, like they di in Jamaica they could use it as an excuse to pour all sorts of money into Newark Penn Station. :)

 

As for stage it is at stage zero, only talks and speculation. No funding yet so other than some preliminary design work done in the past there is nothing.



#16 MattW

MattW

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,717 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East of Atlanta, GA

Posted 15 November 2013 - 06:42 PM

Frankly, that's insane. To me it sounds like the only way to get any intermediate station in a project such as this is to fund from NWK to the intermediate's platform edge through some other means, then fund the rest of the extension through the PFCs, but given where the rumored/wanted/proposed station would be, that's already a third of the route to EWR. Well, I guess only time will tell how this will settle out. Unfortunately, given current politics as well as history, my guess is that the extension will only ever serve the airport.


Forum's official broken record about expanded Georgia passenger service!

#17 Guest_Andrew_*

Guest_Andrew_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 November 2013 - 11:23 AM

Why can't PFC's fund the Newark Airport Station Complex, and the Port Authority fund the new station in South Newark?



#18 MattW

MattW

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,717 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East of Atlanta, GA

Posted 16 November 2013 - 12:33 PM

I only loosely understand it, but I'll give it a shot. PFCs are regulated by the FAA and apparently, they very clearly state that any use of the funds must support improvement to the airport and nothing else. I.e. they couldn't be used to fund mixed-use development next to the terminal. Where the grey area in my opinion hits is what's considered a benefit from the PFCs. While yes, the extension wouldn't exist without the PFCs being used to fund the entire length, I still think that if the station were funded via other means, that that isn't the PFCs being used to provide an other than airport benefit. Basically, it's coded somewhere in the regulations and best interpreted by a lawyer.


Forum's official broken record about expanded Georgia passenger service!

#19 Guest_Andrew_*

Guest_Andrew_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 November 2013 - 07:32 PM

Why not update these regulations? 



#20 jebr

jebr

    Engineer

  • Forum Manager
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,909 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"The Last Great City of the East," St. Paul, MN

Posted 16 November 2013 - 08:30 PM

Why not update these regulations? 


Have you seen Congress lately? If it's something set in law, good luck getting it changed.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users