From: grammatim@verizon.net   
      
   On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 5:26:27 PM UTC-5, John Levine wrote:   
   > In article ,   
   > Peter T. Daniels  wrote:   
      
   > >> >> and the Selkirk-Castleton bridge,   
   > >> >I don't know what that is -- possibly the bridge at Poughkeepsie that was   
   > >> >finally repurposed as a pedestrian bridge a few years ago?   
   > >> Not to belabor the obvious, but it's the rail bridge across the Hudson   
   > >> between Selkirk and Castleton.  The Poughkeepsie bridge is at   
   > >> Poughkeepsie.  See any map of NY state for details.   
   > >Sorry for never having heard of Selkirk, NY, or Castleton, NY. I know the   
   highway crossings.   
   >   
   > I realize it's awfully far upstate, but if you're familiar with the   
   > thruway's Berkshire extension, it's the railroad bridge you can see   
   > just to the south of the thruway bridge.  Since the fire on the   
   > Poughkeepsie bridge, it's the route that rail freight has to take from   
   > NY to NJ if it doesn't use the NYNJR car float from Brooklyn.   
   >   
   > >You didn't explain how the Hudson Tubes are relevant to possibly losing the   
   NJT-Amtrak tunnel to NYP.   
   >   
   > One might change to the PATH train at Newark and then back to the   
   > Amtrak from 33rd st to NYP, roughly like people did before the North   
   > River tubes were built, but I agree that's would handle about 5% of   
   > the traffic.  We really need more rail capacity, where we includes everyone   
   > who travels in the general area between Boston and Washington.   
      
   The scenario is the failure of the old tunnel and the absence of the Christie-   
   killed ARC tunnel. Walking passengers from one train to another isn't an   
   option.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)