Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Location
    Inwood, Manhattan

Recent Profile Visitors

96 profile views
  1. I just saw an 8-car set of R32s ending with 3781 out of service on the northbound express track at 42-PABT. Could they be going into retirement at 207?
  2. I think it would have to run on surface streets. Also, the is only one track; you'd need 2.
  3. It would be capacity-constraining for both lines if it were on the same tracks, and there would be no space to make the el wider.
  4. I think light rail runs into most of the same problems, unless it were to run on streets, in which case why bother? I think the part where it runs via the is impossible. I think a lot of this is good, but why not terminate in Midtown and skip York/96 (or build as separate lines)? Also, IIRC, the Lower Montauk Branch is still used for the odd freight train.
  5. I think that the best option is to do nothing; service is fine as-is. But if the had major repairs needed, for example, it could probably just be cut back to 207 or 215 and your plan could go ahead.
  6. No way in hell. I live on a cross street less than a block from Seaman, and that's TOTALLY impossible. I think the best option would be to run it either up and over a lot of buildings (most of which are about 7 stories, so probably impossible) or to dig it into a subway and under the river.
  7. Rebuilding the Broadway Bridge shouldn't be under consideration, ever. In addition, any track over Isham should also not be under consideration because it would necessitate demolition of a large swath of Inwood Hill Park. Both would get HUGE resistance from the local community (myself included), probably unlike anything else, anywhere in the city, ever.
  8. I thought you were proposing for it to curve across the Broadway Bridge. Under my new understanding, there would be a lot of sharp curves across the route. In addition, 218 St is wholly unsuitable for subway usage - it is surprisingly steep. By the way, I realised my post had the same comments twice. Sorry about that!
  9. No way there are enough s to cover running all rush-hour s express, especially without Bergen St lower level.
  10. Looks cool! But I think the 's highly limited budget could be used better on other light rail routes not already mostly served by subway service. This looks cool, but I feel this is a little bit wasteful with the 's limited budget, as the route is mostly already served by subways. I think this is a cool plan with the , but I think the engineering with the is totally impossible for 2 main reasons. First, the Broadway Bridge would be incredibly difficult to rebuild with a curve for the upper level. You could avoid this by building the curve before the bridge, but this runs into the other main problem. The Allen Hospital is right there, and it would block any development as it's (as far as I know) one of the major hospitals in the area.
  11. How should I do that? It was at the NE corner on 25 St at 23 St and .
  12. Someone’s vandalised an OMNY reader with Sharpie saying “FTP”. (The reader still works.) While I agree with the message, their methods are appalling.
  13. I don’t really have any thoughts on that, as I rarely go to that area. But isn’t most of it just barren industrial wasteland?
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.