is the direction of this oneway correct?

Could it be that there is a missing turn restriction at this junction?

osm.org/directions?engine=fossgis_valhalla_car&route=40.750549%2C-73.943726%3B40.750589%2C-73.943503

Should oneway=yes be added to clarify that most of the mapped ferry routes here are just in one direction? I understand that this is because of the significant difference of the duration and a different operator (?)

There seems to be two shuttle_train route relations: relation/11749967 and relation/6377345

And although relation/6377345 is reusing existing ways which is nice it is likely not considered from routing engines as the member ways are not tagged route=shuttle_way like they are (correctly?) done for the relation/11749967

Hier ist mit hoher Wahrscheintlichkeit eine barrier mit access=no oder permit o.ä.
Wenn nicht, würde man sonst ohne Kontrolle ins Sperrgebiet kommen wie die GraphHopper Route zeigt;

https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=49.629149%2C11.783645&point=49.636099%2C11.786451&profile=car

Is "access" really "no" for this way or just e.g. "private"?

The width tag cannot be correct as the entrance to the ferry is tagged with hgv=yes and typical trucks have a width larger than 2.5 meters (even without mirrors already).

I think the width was just a wild guess and not a measurement as the width of this way (way/1063729619) is exactly 5 meter for 2 lanes.

See this car route and click on the truck icon: https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=52.962574%2C4.777823&point=52.963873%2C4.768285&profile=car
and this leads to an error that it cannot find the route for the truck profile which does not make much sense as the opposite direction is possible. I.e. entering the island with a truck is possible but not leaving :)

maxheight should be probably removed from the bridge (as there is no limitation?) and instead a seamark:bridge:clearance_height tagging should be used for the river?

Ist das evtl. nur für Fußgäng freigegeben?

Überlappender Weg way/1204498678