Eastern Railroad Discussion > CSX double stack restrictions

All trains with double stacks over Sandpatch, have the "short" stacks.SA Tunnel cannot handle "tall" stacks.On the Magnolia Cut-off, it is my understanding that only one of the two mains were undercut for stacks. Carrothers, Graham & Randolph Tunnels. Any other tunnels east of these that need undercutting? Intermodal traffic on CSX over Sandpatch amounts to eastbounds, Q136, Q138, Q134 and Q148. And westbounds Q135, Q136, Q133 and Q139. Would stack traffic increase dramatically if "tall" stacks could be accommodated? How big is Penn Mary? Its well known that Q137 has to get out before Q138 can get in. Could the Baltimore fire force CSX to give up the idea of double stack traffic over SA? Not that that idea ever exsisted anyway....Roadrat

Both the Howard Street Tunnel and Virginia Tunnel are too low for double stacks. They both were changed from double track to single track in order to accomodate the excess height cars currently in use.

As far as I know, CSX still has plans to enlarge Virginia Tunnel. They plan to use the well-established cut-and-cover technique to "daylight" the bore, but only temporarily. Apparently constructing a bunch of highway bridges is too expensive.

CSX developed a plan to enlarge the Howard Street tunnel as part of its $500+ million plan to turn Baltimore into a "Super Port." CSX sought funding from Maryland, which decided against providing any. I think CSX plans to complete at least part of the plan, which includes restoration of double (and triple?) tracking between Baltimore and Philadelphia.

Making the Howard Street Tunnel taller is an engineering problem. You encroach on Howard Street and the Light Rail Line if you build the tunnel up. You go below sea level if you dig the tunnel down (at least at the southern end). You could make the tunnel wider to restore the second track and eliminate the choke point. Is that economically feasible if you cannot run double stacks?

Why can't they go below sea level? How close are they to it?

I think the Howard Street tunnel is within a few (2 or 3) feet of sea level, at least at its southern end. The engineers can certainly design and build a tunnel that can go below sea level. The question is: how much will it cost? If it costs $1 billion to make the modification and only generates $1 in additional business, there isn't much point. Has anybody seen or heard of any feasibility studies?

I had said in an earlier thread about THE tunnel that the Port Authority of Maryland wants to enlarge the Howard Street Tunnel and was willing to put up some significant money. But the railroads thus far, are not willing to spend significant money. Perhaps the railroads want guarantees of so many containers per year.

Twinbrook,


Double stacks are able to go through the Howard Street tunnel. I have taken them through there on the q133-q134.

Penn Mary is not a big yard. It is essentially a holding yard for the GM assembly plant. The intermodal trains pass thru Penn Mary and into the Sea Girt Marine Terminal. I don't know the capacity of the marine terminal but 138 used to make a cut on the single track between Bayview and Penn Mary and yard one half a train at a time. There are a couple of curves coming toward Penn Mary and that slows them down some.

We've got to be a little careful about terminology here. Stacks CAN fit through Howard Street tunnel, as long as they're no taller than enclosed auto racks (18' 9" above top of rail, IIRC). The racks run to Twin Oaks, PA, south of Philadelphia, to be unloaded. I've seen stack trains with two containers per well, just north of the tunnel where the B&O crosses over Amtrak.

Now, a doublestack car has a platform height a minimum of 11" ATOR. Containers come in three sizes: 8" high, 8'6" high, and 9'6" high. Howard Street can fit two 8'6" containers, since you need 18 feet plus some room for bounce and sway. But the high-cube containers stand 20'1", and allowing for bounce, sway, and empty containers, you need 20'6" of clearance. Actually the standard is 22', since there are a few other little items like interbox connectors (IBCs) to account for. So the Howard Tunnel is probably cleared for 19 feet. They'd need to find another 2 to 3 feet, and it isn't there, at least not cheaply. Under the tunnel is a large drain, so they can't go down, and above it the street is only about a foot and a half above the crown of the tunnel, so they can't go up (this limited clearance required a special track design when the light rail was built).

Now that the tunnel liner may be damaged by the fire, it's time to return to an idea that surfaced a number of years ago: a new tunnel between Penn Mary Yard and Curtis Bay. Anybody got a spare $500 million?

Now here I have to admit to a bit of confusion (nothing new for me). CSX proposed turning Baltimore into a "Super Port" a year or more ago. This would involve 1) enlarging the Howard Street Tunnel for double stacks, 2) double or triple track all the way from Baltimore to Philadelphia and 3) enlarging the tunnels on the Magnolia Cutoff. This was a project that would cost $500+ million. CSX wanted Maryland to kick in serious money for it. Maryland declined. The project got delayed and reduced in scope to only adding the extra track to Philly.

I must agree: not all double stacks are alike. Some require significantly more clearance than others.

It seems that we should all take an interest in the Maryland Consolidated Transportation Program (CTP) "Road Show" this autumn. The CTP outlines the Capital Improvement Program for the entire Department of Transportation (including ports and railroads). Officials from MDOT visit each county and hold public hearings.

Speaking out on TO is fine. In addition, we need to speak out where public officials can hear us.

JohnZuna;

Thanks for the information. I have seen double stacks on the Metropolitan Branch and been surprised because I didn't think there was enough clearance. In line with the previous thread, would you say they are some of the smaller containers requiring less clearance?

Twinbrook