"Selkirk Hurdle" and the Cross-Harbor rail freight tunnel proposal for NYC

I agree, but what's  your point?

The NH and PRR moved 100 car freight trains across New York Harbor in just a few hours by car ferry floats.  Car floats would probably be more cost effective than a tunnel.  A tunnel would probably need to be funded by tax payers.  The NH ran most freights at night when passenger traffic was low.  

NH Joe

The Poughkeepsie railroad bridge is now a tourist attraction / state park: Walkway over the Hudson

I have heard stories that the PC was involved in making the Poughkeepsie situation happen.

I would say most of the rail traffic in the NYC area comes in containers on trucks and uses stacks outside of the metro area.

john in western pa posted:

I agree, but what's  your point?

The point is to contribute additional information for discussion if the topic interests you.  

Dominic Mazoch posted:

I have heard stories that the PC was involved in making the Poughkeepsie situation happen.

Yes, interesting story there. The bridge was going to be rehabilitated after the fire damage but plans fell through ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walkway_over_the_Hudson

In August 1974, the Penn Central applied for $1.75 million to repair and improve the bridge from the federal government through the Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 1973.^[16] By 1975, efforts had shifted to acquiring a combination of state and railroad funding. In November 1975, a formal agreement between the New York State Department of Transportation and the trustees of the Penn Central was approved, allowing the $359,000 insurance payout for the bridge to be spent on repairs, with the state paying the rest ... on April 1, 1976, ownership of the bridge changed with the inception of Conrail. ^[18] Having been forced to include the route over the bridge (the Maybrook Line) in its new system at the behest of Connecticut Senator Abraham Ribicoff, Conrail announced that it would not promise to repair and use the bridge despite a Connecticut foundation's offer to pay half the repair cost if the bridge were used again. The railroad further said that other work required to make the route usable would raise the reactivation cost to $45.8 million.

Seven years passed ...

... and to sum up, the bridge was falling apart and Conrail basically gave it away to avoid further liability. Previously, rail traffic across the bridge had been in decline because of changing rail traffic patterns.

ACE, Really good post.

I wonder if Conrail were to have retained at least some NYC harbor marine equipment (maybe a few tugs and car float barges), and tried to grow that business - Would things be different today.