|
|
| Re: Wouldn't LIRR East Side access have been a lot cheaper if... (1157904) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Wouldn't LIRR East Side access have been a lot cheaper if... |
|
|
Posted by Fisk ave Jim on Tue May 22 13:10:19 2012, in response to Re: Wouldn't LIRR East Side access have been a lot cheaper if..., posted by andy on Tue May 22 11:21:13 2012. "Connecting it to the LIRR at Harold involves building under Sunnyside Yard in spongy unstable soil, underpinning the BMT Astoria El, the IND subway under Northern Blvd., and the street itself. Harold will be rebuilt for the new connections under traffic, a tough feat in itself."They knew all this goin in. The MTA consulted with geologists & hydrologists prior to turning the first spade in LIC. They knew about the subsoil & underground springs that are unique to Long Island v/s the solid (Manhattan Schist) rock thats found on the west side of the East River. Their original opening date projections took this into account "Existing Grand Central tracks can't be shared because of different third rail types" Thats a bit of an oversimplification. The technology exists for using a 3d rail shoe compatable with both over/underriding rails. One reason that can't be overlooked as to why a shared terminal would not work are the different union aggrements between LIRR/MNR (workrules, wage scales etc.) & lets not forget the signaling. AFAIK, cab signals are not compatable with each other Not to mention the dwarf waysides protecting the interlockings which are unique to Metro North. They have their own seperate station & everybodys happy. Anyway, from the armchair, allow me to "oversimplify" somewhat, Im not an engineer, but if they can build the 6th avenue subway with all the obstructions encounted along that route and with 1930s construction technology, they can build anything. That project set the bar IMO for underground projects. |
|
|
|