[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: (erielack) NY Harbor
- --- Janet & Randy Brown <jananran_@_mymailstation.com> wrote:
> At the risk of continuing off-topic, I have to look at the practicality
> of rail freight tunnels under water.
>
> They aren't.
>
> Can you name three?
>
> Detroit-Windsor (NYC/MC)
>
> Port Huron-Sarnia (GTW/CN)
>
> And . . .?
>
> The problem is the gradient needed to get under the channel and back up
> with thousands of ton of freight, laid upon the difficulty of driving a
> tunnel through wet.
>
> More than a mile to get down; more than a mile to get across; and more
> than a mile to get up -- all through slop, at best.
>
> There's a very good reason there's no rail tunnel for freight under any
> part of New York Harbor -- and never will be, until oil goes to
> $100/barrel. Then we might start serious study. Until then . . . and
> even so, car float is cheaper and easier and in place.
>
> Randy Brown
http://www.engineering.com/content/ContentDisplay?contentId=41007025
The 'Chunnel' handles major amounts of freight...
The Seikan tunnel in Japan was intended for Shinkansen service, but that
hasn't materialized. However, it IS the world's longest and deepest
railroad tunnel.
Gary R. Kazin
DL&W Milepost R35.7
Rockaway, New Jersey
http://www.geocities.com/gkazin/index.html
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
Sponsored by the ELH&TS
http://www.elhts.org
------------------------------