old NYP vs Grand Central

[s10mk]

Hi everyone, I have a fun topic to bring up. I have always wandered, which train station was better, the old Pennsylvania station in new york, or grand central station. I have made one train trip to new york, and I was amazed walking around in Grand Central station.

I've always been fascinated by pictures and documentaries of the old Penn station. In terms of size and grandeur, how did the two stations compare? Has anyone here seen the inside of penn station before it was torn down?

 

[Bob Dylan]

NYP was a Glorious Place in its heyday, but by the early Sixties it had become a dump because of neglect by the failing PRR.

Sadly it was torn down to build the damn MSG on the top, leaving us with the pit we have today! ( I only saw it in the early 60s just before the end! )

GCT was a Palace in its Prime, and once Jackie O got involved in saving it from the Wrecking Ball and it was rehabbed, it once again became a Jewel!

 

[s10mk]

NYP was a Glorious Place in its heyday, but by the early Sixties it had become a dump before it was torn down to build the damn MSG leaving us with the pit we have today! ( I only saw it in the 60s just before the end! )

GCT was a Palace in its Prime, and once Jackie O got involved in saving it from the Wrecking Ball and it was rehabbed, it once again became a Jewel!

I do wish I could have seen penn station, even if it was long after her prime

 

[s10mk]

IMAGE: LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

 

[jphjaxfl]

I traveled to both Pennsylvania Station and Grand Central in New York as a child in the 1950s and 1960s. My Dad worked for the New York Central in the midwest so we traveled into Grand Central more frequrently. Both were very functional large city railroad stations with different track levels which help with the crowds. Penn Station was massive and very beautiful. The replacement under Madison Square Garden is a dump by comparison. I remember as a child being at awe of both stations. I was told to stay close to my parents and walk fast because it would be easy to get lost. Unfortunately, Penn Station like so many other beautiful railroad passenger stations in cities like Atlanta, Birmingham, Memphis, Chicago and other cities are just memories. Thankfully Grand Central was saved and is better than ever.....just no long distance trains.

 

[HP_Lovecraft]

More then a few times I've gotten totally lost at Penn, trying to find a specific exit. Its such a frustrating layout.

I took my kids into NYC last weekend. As crazy as it sounds, we GOT OFF the NER at stamford, jumped on the Metro-North into Grand Central instead of Penn. Those MTA trains come every 10 minutes! It was such a better experience, that I'll probobly do that from now on.

What is the latest on the Moynihan station? I remember hearing about that 15 years ago? and as far as I can tell, nothing has happened yet.

 

[Thirdrail7]

Would the old Penn station be able to handle the crushing load that exists today?

 

[jis]

Would the old Penn station be able to handle the crushing load that exists today?

I saw the old Penn Station during the early phases of its destruction. It appeared to have much more open pedestrian circulation space than the Rabbit's warren does today.

Saying that today's Penn Station is able to handle the crush load is giving it more credit than is due IMHO. It barely bungles along at best.

OTOH, the railroad infrastructure underground is in much better shape to handle much more traffic than the old Penn Station ever could. but that is a different matter.

 

[JoeBas]

Would the old Penn station be able to handle the crushing load that exists today?

Isn't "New Penn Station" just the bottom half of "Old Penn Station", in terms of the station facilities themselves? Wouldn't the above referenced rail infrastructure improvements been just as possible with "Old Penn Station"?

 

[s10mk]

Here is another picture I think you guys will like

IMAGE: DETROIT PUBLISHING COMPANY/LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

 

[Manny T]

As s10mk's picture shows, the old Penn was magnificent in an Eiffel Tower sort of way, but the photo also shows the superiority of Grand Central Station: notice the stairs down to the tracks at Penn.

The innovation at GCT (apart from the aesthetics) was the fact that you could walk directly from the great hall to your train platform without walking down any stairs--the platforms were built level with the station concourse. Later they added a lower level to increase capacity, and of course you need stairs to access these additional tracks. But it's great when your train departs from the upper level at GCT and you can just walk (or run) directly onto the platform to catch your train.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Nice find Bill! Thanks for sharing!

 

[MARC Rider]

As s10mk's picture shows, the old Penn was magnificent in an Eiffel Tower sort of way, but the photo also shows the superiority of Grand Central Station: notice the stairs down to the tracks at Penn.

The innovation at GCT (apart from the aesthetics) was the fact that you could walk directly from the great hall to your train platform without walking down any stairs--the platforms were built level with the station concourse. Later they added a lower level to increase capacity, and of course you need stairs to access these additional tracks. But it's great when your train departs from the upper level at GCT and you can just walk (or run) directly onto the platform to catch your train.

Of course you don't need stairs to access the trains at Grand Central, it's a stub-end terminal station. Penn Station is a through station, thus the need to access the platforms by stairs.

 

[jis]

As s10mk's picture shows, the old Penn was magnificent in an Eiffel Tower sort of way, but the photo also shows the superiority of Grand Central Station: notice the stairs down to the tracks at Penn.

The innovation at GCT (apart from the aesthetics) was the fact that you could walk directly from the great hall to your train platform without walking down any stairs--the platforms were built level with the station concourse. Later they added a lower level to increase capacity, and of course you need stairs to access these additional tracks. But it's great when your train departs from the upper level at GCT and you can just walk (or run) directly onto the platform to catch your train.

I don;t see what is the innovation in that. Almost every terminus station that I have been to you do not have to go down stairs to get to the platform from the headhouse. Naturally for a through station you cannot have the headhouse at the same level as the platform, so you have to have either stairs or ramps. So sorry, I don;t see your point, nor what the great innovation is.

 

[Thirdrail7]

Would the old Penn station be able to handle the crushing load that exists today?

Isn't "New Penn Station" just the bottom half of "Old Penn Station", in terms of the station facilities themselves? Wouldn't the above referenced rail infrastructure improvements been just as possible with "Old Penn Station"?

I think there may be more to it than that but wasn't around for the original Penn Station. I'm thinking of Jis's comment:

I saw the old Penn Station during the early phases of its destruction. It appeared to have much more open pedestrian circulation space than the Rabbit's warren does today.

If this is the case, that would work. What I'm curious about is the picture listed above. I don't see catenary but I do see third rail. The track appear to have blockades so I'm not getting a good sense of where in this station this picture is taken. While I've looked at other pictures, I do see a lack of standing area outside of the main waiting room. There are multiple concourses in the current Penn Station with a new one being opened on the lower tracks and there still isn't enough room at times. Remember, there are over 1000 scheduled trains at this point. I wonder if all of this open area would have helped or hindered the three railroads that operate into Penn Station today.

 

[PerRock]

Here's some interesting information: http://newpenn.nyc/reference/historic-penn-station/

Thirdrail7: From a reverse image search I'm seeing the date 1910 attached to that photo.

peter

 

[jis]

Here's some interesting information: http://newpenn.nyc/reference/historic-penn-station/

Thirdrail7: From a reverse image search I'm seeing the date 1910 attached to that photo.

peter

That's why no catenary.

 

[Manny T]

Pretty much every design history of GCT I've ever seen notes the fact that you can get to your train without going up and down any stairs as a noteworthy design innovation. Here's an example for what it's worth:

"Another innovation was the extensive use of ramps, rather than stairs, throughout the station. This allowed both local commuters and long distance travellers to quickly get from track level to city streets, without lugging luggage up and down crowded steps; the feature was soon adopted in transportation centers around the world."

http://www.history.com/news/grand-central-terminal-an-american-icon-turns-100

 

[reppin_the_847]

I'm not old enough to have had the honor of visiting the OLD Penn Station, but I will say that New York's Grand Central Terminal is arguably the nicest train station I've ever been to in my life. It's interesting to note that the Lakeshore Limited & Empire Services trains used to end at Grand Central rather than the current Penn Station. This old article mentions the switch:

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/07/nyregion/amtrak-trains-to-stop-using-grand-central.html

Isn't it true that once in a blue moon Amtrak still utilizes Grand Central for very rare situations?

 

[zephyr17]

Amtrak will go into GCT when the Spuyten Devil bridge over the Harlem River that leads onto Amtrak's West Side line is not usable for whatever reason (and the trains are not flat out annulled).

All of NYC's passenger service to New York went into GCT. Amtrak's Lakeshore Limited and Empire Service that moved into Madison Square Garden's basement were just the tattered remnants of what was once a great fleet of passenger trains.

 

[s10mk]

Did grand central terminal(station) always have its train platforms underground? Or did the modern grand central terminal have a train shed in its new york central days? I was just wondering if the new York central utilized tunnels to serve grand central, and if so, did they use electric traction like penn station?

 

[jis]

The original Grand Central was over ground with a magnificent arch roof train shed apparently. That was deconstructed when the whole railroad was pushed underground at the time the current station was built.

 

[jis]

Pretty much every design history of GCT I've ever seen notes the fact that you can get to your train without going up and down any stairs as a noteworthy design innovation. Here's an example for what it's worth:

"Another innovation was the extensive use of ramps, rather than stairs, throughout the station. This allowed both local commuters and long distance travellers to quickly get from track level to city streets, without lugging luggage up and down crowded steps; the feature was soon adopted in transportation centers around the world."

http://www.history.com/news/grand-central-terminal-an-american-icon-turns-100

Manny, the historians are right. We were responding to your missive which gave the wrong impression. You said:

The innovation at GCT (apart from the aesthetics) was the fact that you could walk directly from the great hall to your train platform without walking down any stairs--the platforms were built level with the station concourse. Later they added a lower level to increase capacity, and of course you need stairs to access these additional tracks. But it's great when your train departs from the upper level at GCT and you can just walk (or run) directly onto the platform to catch your train.

The portion highlighted in bold in the quote from your previous post above, are your words apparently and not that of any historian. The innovation was the use of ramps, not that the platforms were built at the same level as the station concourse, which BTW is patently false for Grand Central, since if that were the case, the innovation of using ramps would have been unnecessary.

And the portion highlighted in Italics is also partly wrong, since both levels of the current Grand Central were built at the same time.

Amtrak will go into GCT when the Spuyten Devil bridge over the Harlem River that leads onto Amtrak's West Side line is not usable for whatever reason (and the trains are not flat out annulled).

All of NYC's passenger service to New York went into GCT. Amtrak's Lakeshore Limited and Empire Service that moved into Madison Square Garden's basement were just the tattered remnants of what was once a great fleet of passenger trains.

True, but the service had been completely decimated by NYC and then by PC way before Amtrak came onto the scene. It was not Amtrak that decimated the service. Just clarifying, not suggesting that you meant to imply such.

 

[zephyr17]

Pretty much every design history of GCT I've ever seen notes the fact that you can get to your train without going up and down any stairs as a noteworthy design innovation. Here's an example for what it's worth:

"Another innovation was the extensive use of ramps, rather than stairs, throughout the station. This allowed both local commuters and long distance travellers to quickly get from track level to city streets, without lugging luggage up and down crowded steps; the feature was soon adopted in transportation centers around the world."

http://www.history.com/news/grand-central-terminal-an-american-icon-turns-100

Manny, the historians are right. We were responding to your missive which gave the wrong impression. You said:

The innovation at GCT (apart from the aesthetics) was the fact that you could walk directly from the great hall to your train platform without walking down any stairs--the platforms were built level with the station concourse. Later they added a lower level to increase capacity, and of course you need stairs to access these additional tracks. But it's great when your train departs from the upper level at GCT and you can just walk (or run) directly onto the platform to catch your train.

The portion highlighted in bold in the quote from your previous post above, are your words apparently and not that of any historian. The innovation was the use of ramps, not that the platforms were built at the same level as the station concourse, which BTW is patently false for Grand Central, since if that were the case, the innovation of using ramps would have been unnecessary.

And the portion highlighted in Italics is also partly wrong, since both levels of the current Grand Central were built at the same time.

Amtrak will go into GCT when the Spuyten Devil bridge over the Harlem River that leads onto Amtrak's West Side line is not usable for whatever reason (and the trains are not flat out annulled).

All of NYC's passenger service to New York went into GCT. Amtrak's Lakeshore Limited and Empire Service that moved into Madison Square Garden's basement were just the tattered remnants of what was once a great fleet of passenger trains.

True, but the service had been completely decimated by NYC and then by PC way before Amtrak came onto the scene. It was not Amtrak that decimated the service. Just clarifying, not suggesting that you meant to imply such.

Agreed

 

[s10mk]

Thanks everyone! There has been a lot of great discussion about NYP and GCT. Here is a picture I took outside of madison square garden, it is one of the original eagles that used to stand over NYP.