Passenger Trains > First arch in place on Portal Bridge replacement in NJ

Trains.com photo.

Article:

https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/first-arch-now-in-place-on-new-jerseys-portal-north-bridge/?fbclid=IwY2xjawG2XFtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHQ_8xY7fA7u3sk6Ck6hhUZTjcEifKKBo-2PZsT7jXtLjMI5q2o8tqTFD-Q_aem_MMpwx9JoNVPZLOYdK9cYVQ

---

Is the pier temporary or does the arch still need to move in one direction or the other?

joemagruder Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is the pier temporary or does the arch still need
> to move in one direction or the other?

That's clearly not the final configuration.

Ray

Ray_Murphy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> joemagruder Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Is the pier temporary or does the arch still
> need
> > to move in one direction or the other?
>
> That's clearly not the final configuration.
>
> Ray

If it was, trains would dive off into the water.

Attached is a screen grab from Amtrak's Portal North project video of what the finished bridge should look like with its 3 spans .

---

joemagruder Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is the pier temporary or does the arch still need
> to move in one direction or the other?

Pier looks permanent to me, looks like it's gotta go to the left yet but the support structure on the barge is hiding some crucial information.  With all those jacks (?) not sure if they're under tension or compression, installed on this end of the span, it looks like it might be cantilevered on that pier right now.  Interesting project to be sure, I had no idea they were this far along with it.  Would be neat to see a time lapse video of this span going in.

Andy

Look above the tug and you can see the ramp leading up to the arch. It is close to the final position.

I would say thats the first Pier Abutment foundation that is for the bridge spans. As a bridge engineer and deep foundation installer, the contractor wouldnt pour all that concrete and drill to bedrock for a temporary structure. Thats the first span in place.
 

Peter_Hawtrey Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If it was, trains would dive off into the water.

Lol, yeah no prob. Quick and easy loading of the commuter ferries to Manhattan, saves space in the tunnels...

JG

Was the arch span delivered by barge and being pulled toards the shore for it's installation?

Kinda curious process, these days you never know what somebody dreamed up, good or goofy.

tia.

Peter_Hawtrey Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ray_Murphy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > joemagruder Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Is the pier temporary or does the arch still
> > need
> > > to move in one direction or the other?
> >
> > That's clearly not the final configuration.
> >
> > Ray
>
> If it was, trains would dive off into the water.
>
>sounds quite normal to me!!

Sequence of screengrabs from NJ Transit cameras and videos:

1 - Arch sections being assembled at Coyman's NY (south of Albany on the Hudson River) - Earlier this year.
2 - First arch after arrival at project site - 11/21/24
3 - Arch positioned on lift barge and jacks next to future support piers. - 11/25/24



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/24 12:17 by prr60.

---

---

---

4 - Arch placed on pier and temporary beams and cribbing offset toward the channel - 11/26/24
5 - Arch partially rolled toward final position - 11/27/24
6 - Arch in more or less final position - 11/28/24

---

---

---

Thanks to all who provided photos and graphics.
jb

That's going to be a beautiful railroad bridge!  So many look just like highway bridges anymore.

Looks like the new bridge is double track. Will another new bridge be needed before the old bridge is retired?

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Looks like the new bridge is double track. Will
> another new bridge be needed before the old bridge is retired?

Needed for 4-tracking the ROW  yes, but will not be salvaged awaiting the 2nd bridge . 

It's too bad they couldn't have squeezed out even a third track on the new "northern span" as it could have relieved some of the future traffic, let alone the traffic for when Portal bridge comes down and a new "Portal" or "southern span" is put in its place. Just saying. It's not too much of a ROW to take in. Bridge planners kinda do this for highway bridges when replacements/rebuilding are at hand. Yet I know this WHOLE project is on a think ROW, overall. I would have even like to have seen a new third tunnel under Hudson River, as I fear the existing Hudson River tunnels may be more repair than what all have bargained for.........It's going to be interesting for sure!!!

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's too bad they couldn't have squeezed out even
> a third track on the new "northern span" as it
> could have relieved some of the future traffic,
> let alone the traffic for when Portal bridge comes
> down and a new "Portal" or "southern span" is put
> in its place. Just saying. It's not too much of a
> ROW to take in. Bridge planners kinda do this for
> highway bridges when replacements/rebuilding are
> at hand. Yet I know this WHOLE project is on a
> think ROW, overall. I would have even like to have
> seen a new third tunnel under Hudson River, as I
> fear the existing Hudson River tunnels may be more
> repair than what all have bargained
> for.........It's going to be interesting for
> sure!!!

BrightLine did this future capacity allowance on the Orlando extension. Although it is mostly single track, with a passing siding, the line's bridges and right of way were built to accommodate a future second track. Extra wide piers, etc.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jp1822 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It's too bad they couldn't have squeezed out
> even
> > a third track on the new "northern span" as it
> > could have relieved some of the future traffic,
> > let alone the traffic for when Portal bridge
> comes
> > down and a new "Portal" or "southern span" is
> put
> > in its place. Just saying. It's not too much of
> a
> > ROW to take in. Bridge planners kinda do this
> for
> > highway bridges when replacements/rebuilding
> are
> > at hand. Yet I know this WHOLE project is on a
> > think ROW, overall. I would have even like to
> have
> > seen a new third tunnel under Hudson River, as
> I
> > fear the existing Hudson River tunnels may be
> more
> > repair than what all have bargained
> > for.........It's going to be interesting for
> > sure!!!
>
> BrightLine did this future capacity allowance on
> the Orlando extension. Although it is mostly
> single track, with a passing siding, the line's
> bridges and right of way were built to accommodate
> a future second track. Extra wide piers, etc.
>
> if they stop working with blinders on, they could have done all 4 tracks on one bridge........