Amtrak is breaking ridership records recently exceeding 33 million. So yes we definitely need huge investment in rail. The upfront costs will be high as we haven’t built rail infrastructure for quite a while so training and learning costs will be huge but eventually they will come down. Just look at the portal bridge for example. It son time and under budget. And hopefully the Hudson tunnel project is also in he same trajectory.
This is a no-brainer and is well overdue. The state of Connecticut has been working on and already has been building brand new train stations in multiple locations along this Rail line. Due to Commuter train use already significantly up in recent years and will continue to increase significantly in the future. All the improvements and faster speed of trains on this line. These repairs has been needed to be done years ago. $1.3 billion is nothing especially that this a key part of a multiple state transportation system that goes from Boston Massachusetts to Washington DC.
The tracks in CT need to be straightened before quad tracked. No use being able to pass local trains if your top speed is 60mph like so much of the NEC in the state
I feel like your indifference to whether or not this project is worth it is misguided. The money being allocated for this project, as you said, is just a small piece in a much larger infrastructure package benefiting the WHOLE COUNTRY. You mentioned in the video the structural deficiencies the current bridge has, so how could you possibly look at that and think “is building a new bridge really necessary?” Yes.. the answer is yes. Otherwise you would have to be ok with the current issues plaguing the bridge already, and then having to worry about being in a situation where the bridge just might collapse Baltimore style as you literally mentioned in this video. The northeast corridor quite literally funds the rest of the Amtrak network since it’s the only profitable route, so if it’s shut down, Amtrak is essentially screwed. I know being an unbiased source of information is important, but you cannot let that stop you from doing basic critical analysis on this situation, especially when the answer is obvious. Critical analysis is just as important to journalism as reporting unbiased information, and it’s important to understand that both are achievable at the same time
first of all, love the video. Second, Oh my gosh stop going, ohhhh but is it worth itttt, the taxpayyeeeers, THIS is the best use of funds i can think of, upgrading a century old link on America's most vital rail line. We have so many billion dollar highway projects no one even makes videos about them, while in Texas they are spending tens of billions to demolish more of austin to expand I-35
The turntable bridge in Norwalk CT ("Walk Bridge") is older, in worse condition, fails on opening/closing more often, is nearly impossible to replace, has zero space on either side to stage construction or build in a new footprint (in the middle of the town), carries way more traffic, has been going thru the NIMBY / BANANA loop (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything) because the "aesthetics at any cost" crowd don't want the vertical lifts intruding on the skyline (which is the only real practical solution). Meanwhile, they can't close the upstream river to larger barge traffic due to US Coast Guard rules, which are only for gravel & salt delivery. That one is pegged at multiples of billions & they've already started work on associated satellite projects such as creating rail yards on either side for the several weeks the line will be shut down & commuters bussed around the bridge. Typical cluster fugg.
That’s Metro-North/CDOT territory. Those guys couldn’t run a lemonade stand. I think Amtrak should take total control of the Northeast Corridor and cut local politics out of this critical route. Fairfield country is all NIMBY, all the time, we should just ignore them.
I was working on that project while it was still getting off the ground in 2023 and the plans for it are pretty solid. The main issue with the project was by far the timing of processes. Since the bridge depends on tides and the town ordinance put in place, lots of work can only be completed during specific hours. Also some equipment such as the crane were imported from Germany and had a 3 week delay due to the fires in the Port of Newark back in mid 2023. The DOT and CMJV crews are well managed but it’s just a tough spot for a bridge.
@@Spenceyyyy I retired from CTDOT just before the pandemic so my info is prolly dated. I wasn't sure if they ever put the NIMBY thing to bed. Saner heads HAD to prevail over that one but they were making serious static back then. I hope it goes well, that bridge is scary as fugg . . .
@@ClockworksOfGL I was in CTDOT Engineering, we were pretty professional & I'd like to say we had our shit together. Some op's brass were political appointees in wayyyyyyy over their heads, especially back when we had a corrupt Pubby gov for 10 years. Many of them went to jail with him. Amtrak should have priority I do agree with that. Recently I've witnessed the control room at GCT holding an Amtrak train outta New Haven Union Sta at a red signal from crossing Tracks 4 to 6 into State St Station (the shortest gap between stations in the entire nation) for like 20 min's for no reason at all. AT ALL. I was pissed as I was waiting to board northbound. I mentioned it to the Amtrak conductor & he just looked down & shook his head.
Well due to the sharp curves on either end of the bridge, I don't think trains would even be able to go faster than that. Plus, there is a station one mile south of the bridge.
I was just watching a video about the Millau Viaduct in France and I still can’t get my mind wrapped around the fact that they built that thing for 394 million euros ($637 million in 2024 dollars) but this project, and the similar portal bridge in New Jersey cost more than double.
As a local and an amateur rail historian besides, the new bridge is necessary, tho the historic span would have been safe longer if not for deferred maintenance from the mid 60’s thru the 80’s. Also I find it’s a shame that part of the old bridge isn’t being saved as a potential public space A-la the NYC high line
The costs of construction projects involving government are outrageous, and something needs to be done about it. No way can the US afford to fix all the infrastructure that needs to be fixed, at these inflated prices. Some of it is brought on by the government’s own rules, but someone is raking in fat stacks.
When you stop investing in a certain type of infrastructure project you "forget" how to build them (i.e. the companies that previously did that work either were forced to downsize or went out of business outright). To the same contributing effect: materials have gone up just like your groceries. When you forget how to build infrastructure, the selected contractors have more work than they can reliably staff. Thus it is inevitable that timelines are delayed and costs overrun. If you can't staff a project but you can try really hard to stick to the plan, but you wind up shelling out a fortune on overtime. Oh and the project still winds up behind schedule. If you invest in the infrastructure consistently, you create a market for reliable contracting competition by companies that can properly staff projects. Properly staffed projects means on-time completion and on-budget performances. At the end of the day though it boils down to the contractors not the government.
I feel like this video wasn't repetitive enough. Specifically, you asked "but is it worth it" several times, never providing anything approaching an answer or even any real context, and yet the video still didn't pass the critical ten minute threshold.
I am an Amtrak Contractor and am on that bridge once a year and know the guys out of Groton in charge of maintaining it. It's ALWAYS breaking or having to have parts replaced or repaired so they hate that bridge lol. I love it as I'm somewhat of a NHRR history buff but then again I'm don't have to fix it all the time 🙃All other bridges on the CT shoreline have been replaced already...this is the last one from the New Haven Railroad Era. Over 100 years old, I'd say it's had a good run.
@@ScottPalmer-mp1we The redesign of I-84 / I-91 interchange being initially planned now calls for moving the rail line through Hartford closer to Asylum Street to accommodate the new sunken I-84 alignment so it will likely be built double-tracked. CTDOT was just awarded Federal funds for the station relocation study.
The NE corridor is the only part of Amtrak that is profitable. I’m sick and tired of subsidizing rail service outside the NE. It shouldn’t be cheaper to drive when hundreds of people ride on the same train.
Why isnt the freight companies placing investments in this infrastructure improvements when they use the same lines and not to mention Amtrak generally has to yield to their mile long locomotive trains. 🤔
The USA needs to learn how to keep rail infrastructure costs low and efficient. Yes, a bridge is a big piece of infrastructure however in no world should it cost $1.3 billion. Spain built the Madrid-Barcelona high speed line for €9.5 billion when adjusted for inflation in 2022. This line required multiple viaducts, bridges, and tunnels. This bridge is not even on a high speed portion of track and likely never will be.
I feel they should design it to handle much higher speeds on the the bridge but with the approach on the curved end as well I mean your already replacing the bridge why not get it too at least 120mph ? And and have redundant added abutment that could be used to add 1-2 more tracks would it be more expensive yes but would be more costly to go back and rework it again,
The speed limit through eastern CT is 90 mph due to all of the curves along the shoreline. It cannot be widened or straightened much because of population density and property values.
it will be obsolete before the shovel hits the dirt...should be non-moveable and more than two tracks...the money is there for the project it's just that you cant line the union pockets and give your buddies a bonus
True about the sports arenas - taxpayers will gladly fork over billions for stadiums that replace 25 year old stadiums, but rebuild a critical bridge or tunnel that's over a century old? FREEDUMB!!!!!
@@cptyolowaffle seems a bit of that is also to blame with misinformation. A claim many of the residents repeat is they don't want diesel exhaust to be vented into their neighborhoods, but there wont be any diesel locomotives using the tunnel.
Personally, I think the big-ticket NEC investments are mostly underwhelming. New bridges and tunnels are being built with double track, not even triple track much less quad track, and design speeds are below the corridor speeds. In other words, they’re replacing old choke points with new choke points. Far short of future-proofing the projects; they’re not even fully fixing the issues of today.
a 40 mph crossing speed, for the "best" train corridor connecting, uh, NYC, and the rest of the northeast metropolis. Yes. it is justified, 70 mph allowance is sad, 110 speed limit wouldn't even future proof it since Acela, the current fastest train set on the corridor can go that speed anyways.
Final cost - $3 Billion Tell me I’m wrong, pin this comment, the come back in 2029 when it’s over budge, behind schedule and doesn’t meet the standards required and apologize. Think I’m wrong? Have you tried to build anything lately?
So what’s the option if the bridge is not built - to close down the rail line from Boston to NYC? There have been discussions for decades to replace the line from Providence to New Haven with a high speed line directly between the two cities across RI and CT instead of along the coast, but nothing has been done. We are a third world country when it comes to rail.
How can such super utilitarian, prefabricated and boring concrete element bridge cost so much?? Calculated break even for the bridge must be over 150 years while the bridge lasts 80-100 years at max..
The road bridge? high enough for river traffic... the rail bridge? needs fancy engineering... But if the track could be gradually elevated a couple of miles earlier before reaching the river, the bridge could be as high as the road bridge...? Are Nimbys forcing the issue? Is elevating the track way before the river not viable?
While I don't like the up front cost, and I assume ticket prices will be going up accordingly, given its projected life span of well over 100 years, I'd have to say yes. But they dammed well had better hit their budget and schedule targets or I will be more than happy to claw back wages.
When asking “is it worth it” we have to think of the alternative - just doing nothing. Sure, let’s allow the busiest rail route in the entire country to just stop because we failed to replace a 100 year old bridge and it collapsed. Ok. Where is this concern for taxpayer dollars when a state DOT wants to rebuild a highway interchange for the purpose of saving drivers 30 seconds on their commute?
Ridership numbers aren’t entirely accurate. Yes Amtrak has 12.1 million per year, but you have over half a dozen commuter services who use parts of the north east corridor. And if you include those numbers, you probably encroach on a quarter billion. Those numbers are much more worth it. Yes this bridge isn’t useful to all of them, but it’s a fluid system
Is this project worthy of federal investment? The Northeast Corridor states create federal surpluses! It is in the best interest of the nation to invest in projects that keeps the Northeast Corridor region open for business!
I may be wrong ,but I don’t believe that Amtrak makes enough to support itself! Building new bridges appears to be a cash cow for bridge builders and those who are subsidized by US taxpayers, no wonder the National debt is 36Trillion dollars!
Something should be done, yes. But why another bridge? Looking at the surrounding area this should be replaced by a tunnel. The original railroad built a bridge at a location compromising location and cost with the reality of steam locomotive exhaust. The railroad is now electrified and freight trains hauled by diesels are infrequent and don’t make as much smoke and can be abated with forced ventilation. The route could be straightened and speeds increased that much more.
@@maestromecanico597 I agree with you, a tunnel would be better, or a taller bridge, but this is what we got and it’s better than what we currently have
@ A new bridge is a marginal improvement over what is there now…complete with all the future mechanical woes with what is there now. When adjusted for inflation the proposed cost is about HALF of what it cost the PRR to build Penn Station complete with the East and North River tubes. For today’s money there is no excuse NOT to dig a tunnel that increases speeds to MAS and removes a maritime hazard.
There’s enough money for both to happen. And while I believe Montana deserves better (bring back the Hiawatha), the Northeast corridor is arguably way more important and in dire need of repairs.
How is it all of these projects were covered with private money a century ago, but now they require taxpayer money to be built? I’m not saying it’s not a necessary project, but what changed?
A hundred years ago, these tracks were owned by New York Central and the Pennsylvania Railroad, private companies. Those don’t exist anymore and are now operated by Amtrak, a government agency
@@1Nanerz the same reason private money doesn’t build highways. If highways were privately funded you’d be paying an arm and a leg to drive. If everyone who took the train had to drive the roads would be gridlocked day and night. You think only car drivers get to use public infrastructure for free?
@ 😳what gave you the idea that car users get to use roads for free?!! It’s called gas taxes! That’s what they’re for! Not for some government slush fund or affordable housing. They’re for roads! You do realize that the gas price is like 50% taxes, right? These rail infrastructure projects should be subsidized but mostly should come out of the fare box if they’re so star spangled awesome.
Amtraks bridge on the springfield line that crosses the CT river in Enfield to E. Windsor also needs to be replaced. I read recently there was money (8M) to study the replacement. That's alot of cash being wasted..
The issue isn’t whether to replace the bridge, it’s Democratic policies that make the costs so high. With less cost, more infrastructure can be improved.
Driving from NYC to Providence or Boston is hell. And flying doesn’t necessarily get you where you need to go any faster given the time it takes to get to and from the airport and through security.
@@hjancaitis Exactly. When the Acela service began they said at the time that it eliminated half the commuter flights between Boston and NYC. Absolutely worth the cost.
Amtrak is breaking ridership records recently exceeding 33 million. So yes we definitely need huge investment in rail. The upfront costs will be high as we haven’t built rail infrastructure for quite a while so training and learning costs will be huge but eventually they will come down. Just look at the portal bridge for example. It son time and under budget. And hopefully the Hudson tunnel project is also in he same trajectory.
This is a no-brainer and is well overdue. The state of Connecticut has been working on and already has been building brand new train stations in multiple locations along this Rail line.
Due to Commuter train use already significantly up in recent years and will continue to increase significantly in the future.
All the improvements and faster speed of trains on this line. These repairs has been needed to be done years ago. $1.3 billion is nothing especially that this a key part of a multiple state transportation system that goes from Boston Massachusetts to Washington DC.
should be quad tracked and not moveable but anything is better than what we have
Why 4 tracks?? I mean it once was way back
Totally agree. It's a shame they didnt build a fixed crossing that can always stay open for trains.
@@Prostyle0079 Express Acela and maximizing trips between BOS and NYP should absolutely be on the menu in my opinion.
The tracks in CT need to be straightened before quad tracked. No use being able to pass local trains if your top speed is 60mph like so much of the NEC in the state
@@longislandsound will never be 4 tracked east of New Haven
I feel like your indifference to whether or not this project is worth it is misguided. The money being allocated for this project, as you said, is just a small piece in a much larger infrastructure package benefiting the WHOLE COUNTRY. You mentioned in the video the structural deficiencies the current bridge has, so how could you possibly look at that and think “is building a new bridge really necessary?” Yes.. the answer is yes. Otherwise you would have to be ok with the current issues plaguing the bridge already, and then having to worry about being in a situation where the bridge just might collapse Baltimore style as you literally mentioned in this video. The northeast corridor quite literally funds the rest of the Amtrak network since it’s the only profitable route, so if it’s shut down, Amtrak is essentially screwed.
I know being an unbiased source of information is important, but you cannot let that stop you from doing basic critical analysis on this situation, especially when the answer is obvious. Critical analysis is just as important to journalism as reporting unbiased information, and it’s important to understand that both are achievable at the same time
Nations with great passenger rail systems spend a bunch of federal money on those systems. We just need to get used to doing so.
Already do. People just don’t realize it, or don’t see the projects it goes to
Thanks!
first of all, love the video. Second, Oh my gosh stop going, ohhhh but is it worth itttt, the taxpayyeeeers, THIS is the best use of funds i can think of, upgrading a century old link on America's most vital rail line. We have so many billion dollar highway projects no one even makes videos about them, while in Texas they are spending tens of billions to demolish more of austin to expand I-35
"The bridge has gotten older and older"... haven't we all
The turntable bridge in Norwalk CT ("Walk Bridge") is older, in worse condition, fails on opening/closing more often, is nearly impossible to replace, has zero space on either side to stage construction or build in a new footprint (in the middle of the town), carries way more traffic, has been going thru the NIMBY / BANANA loop (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything) because the "aesthetics at any cost" crowd don't want the vertical lifts intruding on the skyline (which is the only real practical solution). Meanwhile, they can't close the upstream river to larger barge traffic due to US Coast Guard rules, which are only for gravel & salt delivery. That one is pegged at multiples of billions & they've already started work on associated satellite projects such as creating rail yards on either side for the several weeks the line will be shut down & commuters bussed around the bridge. Typical cluster fugg.
That’s Metro-North/CDOT territory. Those guys couldn’t run a lemonade stand. I think Amtrak should take total control of the Northeast Corridor and cut local politics out of this critical route. Fairfield country is all NIMBY, all the time, we should just ignore them.
I was working on that project while it was still getting off the ground in 2023 and the plans for it are pretty solid. The main issue with the project was by far the timing of processes. Since the bridge depends on tides and the town ordinance put in place, lots of work can only be completed during specific hours. Also some equipment such as the crane were imported from Germany and had a 3 week delay due to the fires in the Port of Newark back in mid 2023. The DOT and CMJV crews are well managed but it’s just a tough spot for a bridge.
@@Spenceyyyy I retired from CTDOT just before the pandemic so my info is prolly dated. I wasn't sure if they ever put the NIMBY thing to bed. Saner heads HAD to prevail over that one but they were making serious static back then. I hope it goes well, that bridge is scary as fugg . . .
@@ClockworksOfGL I was in CTDOT Engineering, we were pretty professional & I'd like to say we had our shit together. Some op's brass were political appointees in wayyyyyyy over their heads, especially back when we had a corrupt Pubby gov for 10 years. Many of them went to jail with him. Amtrak should have priority I do agree with that. Recently I've witnessed the control room at GCT holding an Amtrak train outta New Haven Union Sta at a red signal from crossing Tracks 4 to 6 into State St Station (the shortest gap between stations in the entire nation) for like 20 min's for no reason at all. AT ALL. I was pissed as I was waiting to board northbound. I mentioned it to the Amtrak conductor & he just looked down & shook his head.
If they're building a new bridge it baffles me that they are designing it for only 70mph.
Well due to the sharp curves on either end of the bridge, I don't think trains would even be able to go faster than that. Plus, there is a station one mile south of the bridge.
I was just watching a video about the Millau Viaduct in France and I still can’t get my mind wrapped around the fact that they built that thing for 394 million euros ($637 million in 2024 dollars) but this project, and the similar portal bridge in New Jersey cost more than double.
As a local and an amateur rail historian besides, the new bridge is necessary, tho the historic span would have been safe longer if not for deferred maintenance from the mid 60’s thru the 80’s. Also I find it’s a shame that part of the old bridge isn’t being saved as a potential public space A-la the NYC high line
The costs of construction projects involving government are outrageous, and something needs to be done about it. No way can the US afford to fix all the infrastructure that needs to be fixed, at these inflated prices. Some of it is brought on by the government’s own rules, but someone is raking in fat stacks.
When you stop investing in a certain type of infrastructure project you "forget" how to build them (i.e. the companies that previously did that work either were forced to downsize or went out of business outright). To the same contributing effect: materials have gone up just like your groceries. When you forget how to build infrastructure, the selected contractors have more work than they can reliably staff. Thus it is inevitable that timelines are delayed and costs overrun. If you can't staff a project but you can try really hard to stick to the plan, but you wind up shelling out a fortune on overtime. Oh and the project still winds up behind schedule. If you invest in the infrastructure consistently, you create a market for reliable contracting competition by companies that can properly staff projects. Properly staffed projects means on-time completion and on-budget performances. At the end of the day though it boils down to the contractors not the government.
The main culprit there is highway infrastructure, which is enormously expensive and a net negative for the economy. Rail is generally fine.
I feel like this video wasn't repetitive enough. Specifically, you asked "but is it worth it" several times, never providing anything approaching an answer or even any real context, and yet the video still didn't pass the critical ten minute threshold.
I am an Amtrak Contractor and am on that bridge once a year and know the guys out of Groton in charge of maintaining it. It's ALWAYS breaking or having to have parts replaced or repaired so they hate that bridge lol. I love it as I'm somewhat of a NHRR history buff but then again I'm don't have to fix it all the time 🙃All other bridges on the CT shoreline have been replaced already...this is the last one from the New Haven Railroad Era. Over 100 years old, I'd say it's had a good run.
I hope they can double track the section of track through Hartford, though I have heard that it would be very expensive.
@@ScottPalmer-mp1we The redesign of I-84 / I-91 interchange being initially planned now calls for moving the rail line through Hartford closer to Asylum Street to accommodate the new sunken I-84 alignment so it will likely be built double-tracked. CTDOT was just awarded Federal funds for the station relocation study.
@@stephanjones3239 I'm glad to hear about the plans. Thanks.
Amtrak hasn’t been a for-profit company since either the 1980s or 90s, Congress struck that part of the law
The NE corridor is the only part of Amtrak that is profitable. I’m sick and tired of subsidizing rail service outside the NE. It shouldn’t be cheaper to drive when hundreds of people ride on the same train.
Why isnt the freight companies placing investments in this infrastructure improvements when they use the same lines and not to mention Amtrak generally has to yield to their mile long locomotive trains. 🤔
Because Amtrak owns the track so it’s responsible for paying for any projects
NEC generally doesn’t share the track with freight
@@TheLiamster no. Cdot owns this track. Which is why the track in Connecticut sucks
@@darthmaul216 not correct. that's only west of new haven. everything east is amtrak owned up until the massachusetts border.
@tomoconnell2320 yes they do. P and W uses the tracks east of New Haven
The USA needs to learn how to keep rail infrastructure costs low and efficient. Yes, a bridge is a big piece of infrastructure however in no world should it cost $1.3 billion.
Spain built the Madrid-Barcelona high speed line for €9.5 billion when adjusted for inflation in 2022. This line required multiple viaducts, bridges, and tunnels. This bridge is not even on a high speed portion of track and likely never will be.
Should be able to support full high speed rail not just 70 mph
The curves coming into the bridge are too sharp, so the geometry of the right of way doesn’t allow that.
I feel they should design it to handle much higher speeds on the the bridge but with the approach on the curved end as well I mean your already replacing the bridge why not get it too at least 120mph ? And and have redundant added abutment that could be used to add 1-2 more tracks would it be more expensive yes but would be more costly to go back and rework it again,
The speed limit through eastern CT is 90 mph due to all of the curves along the shoreline. It cannot be widened or straightened much because of population density and property values.
it will be obsolete before the shovel hits the dirt...should be non-moveable and more than two tracks...the money is there for the project it's just that you cant line the union pockets and give your buddies a bonus
That part of the mainline is only 2 tracks. Doesn't turn into 4 until New Haven
True about the sports arenas - taxpayers will gladly fork over billions for stadiums that replace 25 year old stadiums, but rebuild a critical bridge or tunnel that's over a century old? FREEDUMB!!!!!
Some of us taxpayers disagree, but get outvoted
@@andrewreynolds4949 You want Freedumb? Move to Somalia!!!
Susqahanna river bridge is more of a priority as is the b&p tunnels
There are efforts underway to replace the B&P tunnel with a new Frederick Douglass tunnel, however NIMBYism is getting in the way of it right now
@@cptyolowaffle seems a bit of that is also to blame with misinformation. A claim many of the residents repeat is they don't want diesel exhaust to be vented into their neighborhoods, but there wont be any diesel locomotives using the tunnel.
Why not build a tunnel designed for high speed rail beneath the river instead? Such a tunnel would eliminate train delays due to ship traffic.
Hell if the next one lasts 100 years that's worth it no problem.
Personally, I think the big-ticket NEC investments are mostly underwhelming. New bridges and tunnels are being built with double track, not even triple track much less quad track, and design speeds are below the corridor speeds.
In other words, they’re replacing old choke points with new choke points. Far short of future-proofing the projects; they’re not even fully fixing the issues of today.
Of course it’s worth it, that’s not a hard question to answer
They should do a super efficient design aka whole thing sits on one pillar and drawbridge span is raised and lowered by flock of pigeons..
a 40 mph crossing speed, for the "best" train corridor connecting, uh, NYC, and the rest of the northeast metropolis. Yes. it is justified, 70 mph allowance is sad, 110 speed limit wouldn't even future proof it since Acela, the current fastest train set on the corridor can go that speed anyways.
Final cost - $3 Billion
Tell me I’m wrong, pin this comment, the come back in 2029 when it’s over budge, behind schedule and doesn’t meet the standards required and apologize.
Think I’m wrong? Have you tried to build anything lately?
Right in Old Saybrook
So what’s the option if the bridge is not built - to close down the rail line from Boston to NYC? There have been discussions for decades to replace the line from Providence to New Haven with a high speed line directly between the two cities across RI and CT instead of along the coast, but nothing has been done. We are a third world country when it comes to rail.
How can such super utilitarian, prefabricated and boring concrete element bridge cost so much?? Calculated break even for the bridge must be over 150 years while the bridge lasts 80-100 years at max..
The road bridge? high enough for river traffic... the rail bridge? needs fancy engineering... But if the track could be gradually elevated a couple of miles earlier before reaching the river, the bridge could be as high as the road bridge...? Are Nimbys forcing the issue? Is elevating the track way before the river not viable?
While I don't like the up front cost, and I assume ticket prices will be going up accordingly, given its projected life span of well over 100 years, I'd have to say yes. But they dammed well had better hit their budget and schedule targets or I will be more than happy to claw back wages.
When asking “is it worth it” we have to think of the alternative - just doing nothing. Sure, let’s allow the busiest rail route in the entire country to just stop because we failed to replace a 100 year old bridge and it collapsed. Ok. Where is this concern for taxpayer dollars when a state DOT wants to rebuild a highway interchange for the purpose of saving drivers 30 seconds on their commute?
Terrible job
Wrong design
Just replace it with a traditional bridge a greater hight eliminating the need for an inefficient draw bridge
Ridership numbers aren’t entirely accurate. Yes Amtrak has 12.1 million per year, but you have over half a dozen commuter services who use parts of the north east corridor. And if you include those numbers, you probably encroach on a quarter billion. Those numbers are much more worth it. Yes this bridge isn’t useful to all of them, but it’s a fluid system
The economy loses over $24million everyday the NEC is out.
Is this project worthy of federal investment? The Northeast Corridor states create federal surpluses! It is in the best interest of the nation to invest in projects that keeps the Northeast Corridor region open for business!
I may be wrong ,but I don’t believe that Amtrak makes enough to support itself! Building new bridges appears to be a cash cow for bridge builders and those who are subsidized by US taxpayers, no wonder the National debt is 36Trillion dollars!
The NEC actually makes a large profit; the problem is everywhere else, and particularly the long distance services which lose massive amounts of money
First here
And yet, we still don't care.
@ cool
Something should be done, yes. But why another bridge? Looking at the surrounding area this should be replaced by a tunnel. The original railroad built a bridge at a location compromising location and cost with the reality of steam locomotive exhaust. The railroad is now electrified and freight trains hauled by diesels are infrequent and don’t make as much smoke and can be abated with forced ventilation. The route could be straightened and speeds increased that much more.
Tunneling is far more expensive than making a bridge
@ Yes but in the long run tunnels don’t get stuck in the open position and have a lower likelihood of getting hit by a boat.
@@maestromecanico597 I agree with you, a tunnel would be better, or a taller bridge, but this is what we got and it’s better than what we currently have
@ A new bridge is a marginal improvement over what is there now…complete with all the future mechanical woes with what is there now. When adjusted for inflation the proposed cost is about HALF of what it cost the PRR to build Penn Station complete with the East and North River tubes. For today’s money there is no excuse NOT to dig a tunnel that increases speeds to MAS and removes a maritime hazard.
Waste money on the NEC when those billions can be used to improve train service in states like Montana? Yes that’s America for you!
Add 6 extra trains for northern Montana
There’s enough money for both to happen. And while I believe Montana deserves better (bring back the Hiawatha), the Northeast corridor is arguably way more important and in dire need of repairs.
How is it all of these projects were covered with private money a century ago, but now they require taxpayer money to be built? I’m not saying it’s not a necessary project, but what changed?
The government spent trillions building interstate highways.
A hundred years ago, these tracks were owned by New York Central and the Pennsylvania Railroad, private companies. Those don’t exist anymore and are now operated by Amtrak, a government agency
@ ya, I know that. That’s my point. Why can’t private money justify this expense?
@@1Nanerz the same reason private money doesn’t build highways. If highways were privately funded you’d be paying an arm and a leg to drive. If everyone who took the train had to drive the roads would be gridlocked day and night. You think only car drivers get to use public infrastructure for free?
@ 😳what gave you the idea that car users get to use roads for free?!! It’s called gas taxes! That’s what they’re for! Not for some government slush fund or affordable housing. They’re for roads! You do realize that the gas price is like 50% taxes, right? These rail infrastructure projects should be subsidized but mostly should come out of the fare box if they’re so star spangled awesome.
Glad to see taxpyer money going here, than to fund these foreign wars.
Can you please make a video about East Haddam bridge project ruclips.net/video/YA4p6XO0LDk/видео.htmlsi=ipo0ccyqjDlkdf1A
Amtraks bridge on the springfield line that crosses the CT river in Enfield to E. Windsor also needs to be replaced. I read recently there was money (8M) to study the replacement. That's alot of cash being wasted..
Look at the money wasted. From las Angeles. To San Francisco. And it well never run
?
Are you talking about the California High Speed Rail Project? That is not Amtrak.
@potblack6043 I know but it's real wasted money
The issue isn’t whether to replace the bridge, it’s Democratic policies that make the costs so high. With less cost, more infrastructure can be improved.
Ask Donald Trump.
dont build it. why not drive and take the airplane. rail travel sucks
spoken like someone who has never used it
Driving from NYC to Providence or Boston is hell. And flying doesn’t necessarily get you where you need to go any faster given the time it takes to get to and from the airport and through security.
@@hjancaitis Exactly. When the Acela service began they said at the time that it eliminated half the commuter flights between Boston and NYC. Absolutely worth the cost.