Pittsburgh to Harrisburg Realignment - 1 to 51

When I began my observations in July of 2011 of the Pittsburgh to Harrisburg line, I was unsure that much, if anything was possible. The line was built in the 1850's for the Pennsylvania Railroad. To my surprise I discovered that two or so miles in the vicinity of the viaduct across the Conemaugh River near Mineral point have been a railroad right of way since before the Pennsylvania Railroad. That stretch of right of way was originally built for use by the state owned Allegheny Portage Railroad of the 1830's. The Allegheny Portage Railroad name was a wonderful description of what the railroad did. It's purpose was to connect the eastern and western sections of a canal built across Pennsylvania. It made the connection by portaging canal boats across the Allegheny Mountain frontal from Johnstown to Hollidaysburg.

The Pennsylvania Railroad did some slight line adjustments during its ownership. The only significant adjustment was the realignment from from Portage to Lilly around the turn of the 19th to the 20th century. Unlike the original construction, steam powered shovels were available. This section of the line was the original Allegheny Portage Railroad. I recall being shown a photograph of the earth moving project owned by a neighbor when I was growing up. His father had been a civil engineer for the PRR at the time. He described how the work was  done by persons who had immigrated from Italy working under difficult conditions.

As a reminder, high speed rail is defined as operations of 125 mph or more. Higher speed rail is defined as speeds up to 110 mph. These observations have been for higher speed rail passenger operations. High speed rail appears to be impractical for the Pittsburgh to Harrisburg line.

An assumption was made that with realignments allowing 110 mph curvature, the tangents into and out of the faster curvature would be capable of 80 to 110 mph speed.

So what might be done for the Pittsburgh to Harrisburg line? Something could be done. Identifying line realignments make it conceivable for higher speed railroad operations up to 110 mph for a 2.5 hour schedule Pittsburgh to Harrisburg. Looking at the earlier posts with a designated number in order, here is a summary:

1. Milepost 353.2 to 348.8 looked at the line beginning the Amtrak Station in Pittsburgh. There was nothing that might be done to increase line speed.
2. Milepost 348.8 to 344.5 looked at the line still within the Pittsburgh metro area with little opportunity for change.
3. Milepost 344.5 to 342.1 looked at the line still within the Pittsburgh metro area with little opportunity for change.
4. Milepost 342.1 to 339.2 could be changed to allow 110 mph by either a deep cut or a tunnel. The value of the affected property from the vicinity of North Braddock to Wilmerding might justify a cut. Alternatively, using a deep cut in the vicinity of East Pittsburgh and Turtle Creek could allow 80 mph operations. The cost benefit of 80 mph per 110 mph as close as this line segment is to the Pittsburgh terminal would be a consideration. As the Port Perry branch joins the Pittsburgh line in the vicinity of Turtle Creek, a flyover a dedicated passenger track might be needed to avoid a conflict between freight and passenger operations. The Port Perry branch crosses the Monongahela River connecting with the Monongahela Branch which then returns to the Pittsburgh mainline west of the Pittsburgh Amtrak station  via a bridge crossing the Ohio River over Brunot Island in the vicinity of Sheraden and the Marshall - Shadeland section of Pittsburgh. This route around Pittsburgh is an important freight line taking freight trains into and out of the Conway freight yards further downstream the Ohio River. Because of the ponderously slow freight train speeds, the convergence of freight and passenger operations must be considered at either Turtle Creek or Wilmerding. A flyover might be needed  at whatever point might be identified.
5. Milepost 338.2 to 336.1 examined a potential opportunity for a 110 mph realignment or a lesser realignment allowing 80 mph in the vicinity of Pitcairn. The 110 mph realignment would require a deep cut or tunnel. A deep cut would affect woodland and residential real estate at a place called Wall, PA.  The 80 mph realignment would affect adjacent woodland to the exisitng right of way. Pitcairn was a significant freight yard until the enlargement and modernization of the Conway yard in the 1950's. Dormant for decades, Conrail established an intermodal container facility at the former Pitcairn yard. With the proximity of the Pittsburgh AMtrak station, is an 80 mph or 110 mph realignment the better decision>
6. Milepost 329.8 to 327 found a realignment that could allow 110 mph. It would affect residential real estate at Manor and Jeannette and adjacent farmland.
7. Milepost 310 to 308.9 found an alignment to could allow 110 mph. Realignment affects residential property at Bradenville.
8. Milepost 306.2 to 304.4 found a realignment that could allow 110 mph. The realignment would affect farmland in the vicinity of Derry.
9. Milepost 302.3 to 300.8 found a realignment that could allow 110 mph. The realignment would affect farmland and woodland south of Torrance.
10. Milepost 300.8 to 288 examined the potential for an entry into the Conemaugh River Valley near Torrnace that could sustain either an 80 mph or 110 mph speed. Once within the Conemaugh River Valley, increased speed at 110 mph would be possible by straightening the right of way using four bridges to cross and recross the Conemaugh River Valley to Florence. Woodlands would be affected. The Conemaugh River watercourse would be affected.
11. The post numbered 11 discussed the miles noted in the post numbered 10.
12. The post numbered 12 discussed the miles noted in the post numbered 10.
13. The post numbered 13 discussed the miles noted in the post numbered 10.
14. Milepost 284.6 to 283.8 found a realignment that could allow 110 mph. Affected would be woodland residential property near Seward.
15. Milepost 278.7 to 277.3 to 276.2 could allow 110 mph speed. It would require deep cuts or a tunnel through the Johnstown metro area. Residential and industrial property would be affected.
16. Milepost 276.2 to 273.3 found a realignment requiring either a tunnel or a deep cut east of Johnstown to the vicinity of East Conemaugh. Woodland property and residential property would be affected.
17. Milepost 273 to 269.9 found that from the vicinity of the town East Conemaugh to a point west of Mineral Point, 110 mph could be attained with a new alignment. Five bridges crossing and recrossing the Conemaugh River Valley together with cuts and fills would be required. Woodland property would and the Conemaugh River watercourse would be affected.
18. Milepost 269.9 to 266.9 found a realignment near Mineral Point that could allow 80 mph. THe realignment would require cuts and fills plus two bridges. Woodland would be affected.
19. Milepost 266.9 to 264.5 found a relaignment in the vicinity of South Fork that could allow 110 mph. Woodland would be affected. Cuts and fills would be required. Four bridges would be needed.
20. Milepost 260.5 to 257.1 found an alignment in the vicinity of Portage that could allow 110 mph. Woodland would be affected as well as residential property at Portage. Cuts and fills would be required.
21. Milepost 255.8 to 251.2 found an alignment that could allow 110 mph. It would avoid Lilly. Cuts and fills would be required. Woodland would be affected as well as residential property at Cassandra.
22. Milepost 240 to the vicinity of milepost 222.2. This section is the Allegheny Mountain frontal. The inherent problems of the line from Gallitzin to Tyrone were reviewed.
23. Milepost 240 to the vicinity of milepost 222.2. This section is the Allegheny Mountain frontal. The inherent problems of the line from Gallitzin to Tyrone were reviewed.
24. Milepost 240 to the vicinity of milepost 222.2. This section is the Allegheny Mountain frontal. The inherent problems of the line from Gallitzin to Tyrone were reviewed.
25. Milepost 240 to the vicinity of milepost 222.2. This section is the Allegheny Mountain frontal. The inherent problems of the line from Gallitzin to Tyrone were reviewed.
26. Milepost 240 to the vicinity of milepost 222.2. This section is the Allegheny Mountain frontal. The inherent problems of the line from Gallitzin to Tyrone were reviewed.
27. Milepost 250 to 40.666506N78.244739W in the vicinity of milepost 222.2 identified an alignment that could allow 110 mph. It is a straight line from the vicinity of Cresson to the vicinity of Tyrone. It would bypass Altoona altogether. It would require deep cuts and fills. It would eliminate the constrictions and impediments inherent to the existing crossing of the Allegheny frontal. It would cross from the Ohio River watershed to the Chesapeake Bay watershed. For the most part woodland would be affected with some farmland being affected. Some residential property in the vicinity of Tyrone would be affected. This line would make the passage over the Horsehoe Curve into a recreational bicycle trail.
28. 40.666506N78.244739W, the end of the proposed Cresson to Tyrone realignment, to milepost 221.2 could allow 110 mph through the Juniata River gap between Brush Mountain to the south and Bald Eagle Mountain to the north just east of Tyrone. The realignment would affect woodland and residential property in the vicinity of Tyrone. Three bridges would be required.
29. Milepost 222.2 to milepost 221.2 found a realignment through the Juniata River gap between Brush Mountain to the North and Bald Eagle Mountain to the north just east of Tyrone that could allow 80 mph. This realignment would be made should the Cresson to Tyrone alignment in post 27 might not be built. Alternatively, the realignment could be built in anticipation of future construction Cresson to Tyrone as it would correct a 40 mph speed restriction for passenger trains. An 80 mph speed would allow for efficient transition to 110 mph speed realignments  east of milepost 221.2. Woodlands would be affected. Two bridges would be required.
30. Milepost 220.7 to milepost 220.2 then milepost 219.3 to milepost 218.8 found an alignment that could allow 110 mph. Three bridges would be required. Cuts and fills would be required. Woodland would be affected in the alignments described near Birmingham. 
31. Milepost 217.8 to milepost 217 then milepost 216.3 to milepost 214.6 found a realignment that wold allow 110 mph to the west of Spruce Creek. Cuts and fills would affect adjacent woodland. eight bridges would be required to cross and recross the Juniata River watercourse.
32. Milepost 209 to 205.5 found an alignment that could allow 110 mph speed. Five bridges would be required to cross and recross the Juniata River watercourse in the vicinity of Petersburg. Woodland would be affected.
33. Milepost 204.5 to milepost 199.5 found an alignment to allow 110 mph. The alignment would affect woodland and light industrial property in the vicinity of Huntingdon. Seven bridges would be required as the proposed line would cross and recross the Juniata river watercourse.
34. Milepost 196.2 to 192.6 the proposed realignment encounters Jacks Mountain. The two degree curvature would permit 80 mph. Either a deep cut or tunnel would be required. Woodland in the vicinity of Mapleton would be affected. One bridge would be required
35. Milepost  184.1 to milepost 182.6 found an alignment east of Newton Hamilton that could allow 110 mph. Two bridges would be required. 
36. Milepost 181 to milepost 179.5 found an alignment west of McVeytown that would allow 110 mph. The alignment would affect the watercourse of the Juniata River. A bridge or a change to the Juniata Rver watercourse could accommodate the alignment.
37. Milepost 179 to milepost 179.5 found an alignment tht would allow 110 mph. This alignment opposite of McVeytown would require a cut and would affect farmland and woodland.
38. Milepost 176 to milepost 172.2 found an alignment that would allow 110 mph. Three bridges would be required as the line would cross and recross the Juniata River opposite and in the vicinity of  Longfellow (Longfellow is at milepost 173.5. The cuts required would affect farmland.
39. Milepost 172 to milepost 170 found an alignment that would allow 110 mph. The alignment in the vicinity of Granville would affect farmland.
40. Milepost 172 to milepost 161.9  found an alternative alignment that would allow 110 mph for the line. Farmland some retail and residential property would be affected. Cuts would be required with five bridges as the line would cross and recross the Juniata River. This alignment in the vicinity of Lewistown would require a new location for the Lewistown Amtrak Station. Locating it near 40.575475N77623919W in the vicinity of the current Walmart store would provide efficient access to the limited access Route 322 around Lewistown. Lewistown is about a 50 minute drive to nearby State College and PSU.
41. Milepost 157.7 to milepost 157.2 found an alignment west of Denholm that could allow 80 mph. The required cut would affect woodland. Alteratively, milepost 158.5 to milepost 156.9 found an alignment that could allow 110 mph.
42. Milepost 156.5 to milepost 153.9 then milepost 153.5 to milepost 152 found an alignment that would allow 110 mph. The alignment would avoid Mifflin. It would require three bridges as it crosses the Juniata River three times. Woodland and industrial property would be affected.
43. Milepost 151.to 150.6 found an alignment capable of 110 mph to the east of Port Royal. 
44. Milepost 151.7 to milepost 148.6  and milepost 148.1 to milepost 147.5 avoids Port Royal by being located across from Port Royal. The realignment in the vicinity of Mexico would allow 110 mph. Two bridges would be required as the alignment would cross the Juniata River twice. The required cut would affect farmland.
45. Milepost 143.4 to milepost 141.6 found an alignment that would allow 110 mph. The alignment would be in the vicinity of Thompsontown across the Juniata River. Woodland would be affected by the cut.
46. Milepost 141.1 to milepost 137.8 found an alignment that would allow 110 mph. The Juniata River would be crossed four time thus requiring four bridges. Farmland and woodland in the vicinity of Millerstown would be affected.
47. Milepost 134 to milepost 124.5 found an alignment that would allow 110 mph. The town of Newport would be avoided. Cuts would affect farmland and woodland. FOur bridges would be required.
48. Milepost 120.5 to milepost 118.8 found that a viaduct built over the Susquehanna River watercourse from Duncannon south woudl allow 110 mph. Affected would be the Susquehanna watercourse.
49. Milepost 118.8 to milepost 115.6 found an alignment that would allow continuation of the 110 mph capability. A deep cut through Cove Mountain in the vicinity of Kinkora and Cove would affect woodland. Route 11 would be affected.
50. Milepost 113.7 to milepost 112 found an alignment near Marysville through a cut in Cove Mountain that would allow 80 mph. Woodland would be affected.
51. Milepost 111 to milepost 110.5 and milepost 110 to milepost 109 identified that 2 degree curves as the approaches for the 1902 Rockville bridge across the Susquehanna River would allow 80 mph. A new bridge would likely be the better decision altogether.