| (Three speeches have edited out.) # # ICYMI: Governor Hochul Announces Commencement of Construction Work on Metro-North Park Avenue Viaduct Replacement Project |
|---|
$590 Million Phase 1 of Project to Replace the Vital Structure Carrying All Metro-North Trains Into and Out of Grand Central Terminal Is Underway Governor Kathy Hochul today announced that reconstruction work on the 130-year-old Park Avenue Viaduct in East Harlem has begun as areas underneath have been cleared for the viaduct’s new foundations and columns that will support the new structure. “Carrying hundreds of thousands of passengers every day, the Park |
Instead of my taking a huge time to edit-to-fit, I ask the reader to just use the reply button, and you will then be able to read the whole text without problems,
I wonder if the new viaduct will allow increased axle loads. I understand that the extra axle of the B-A1A wheel arrangement of the FL-9 was to handle the extra weight of its electrical equipment over the viaduct.
I don’t think so. That would require heavier structural members and probably a redesign of the whole viaduct. Compare the replacement of South Shore’s viaduct near 130th and Torrence with a truss bridge as part of the CREATE project.
As far as I know, absolutely zero common-carrier freight is handled over the viaduct, and there is no reasom to rebuild it for increased axle-loads.
My information tells me that the FL-9 needed the extra axle specifically for the Park Ave Viaduct, which tells me that it was the weak link on the New Haven line. If they are going to replace it, why not replace it with something comparable to the rest of the line.
The extra axle was for the extra weight of the late-Fifties technology 750VDC dual-mode installation. The P32DMs do not have any weight restriction on the viaduct despite having nearly twice the rated horsepower, and presumably any high-speed-engined replacements would use simple conversion of the 750V to use with inverter-fed AC traction motors. It is difficult for me to imagine any service on this line that would require a heavier axle loading (or stiffer track modulus). It is also difficult to imagine political permission to increase speed on the viaduct and in the tunnel on the stretch between 125th St. and GCT. Any true HSR using this as last-mile connection would have both lower axle loading and lower unsprung mass.
Of course I’m sure that Hochul & Co. and all the union management would love an excuse to do expen$ive and unnecessary “infrastructure capacity improvement” on this very visible little piece of line.
Overmod, I do expext a moderate increase in speed on the viaduct and in the tunnels, but that wsill not require support of greater weight. Otherweise, your usual excellence in explaining things. Thanks.