Jump to content

Orion 7

Member
  • Posts

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Orion 7

  1. 18 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

    Well, yes, we don't know what type of equipment will be utilized on the line to transport potential riders. If something productive comes from this study, then we might. Though I'm pretty sure it won't be boxcars, Amtrak Amfleets or maglev. But I'd like to hazard a guess that it'll likely be some sort of railcar that doesn't require a physical or a time separation from the freight trains that currently run there in keeping with FRA regulations. That's most likely to be a railcar closer in size to Metro-North's M8 or LIRR's M7 or M9 rolling stock than to Transit's R160 or R211 cars, but with interiors closer to those of R160s or R211s (with way more seats obviously). It should blur the lines between transit and mainline passenger rail a bit. The way London Overground does. And frankly, we could really use a bit more of that in North America. The old school attitude of "Transit is Transit and Railroad is Railroad and never the two shall meet" is a big reason why we hamper our rail infrastructure from working better to transport people and force them to choose driving over transit. That attitude in the US, and Canada to a lesser extent, has got to go.

    Honestly, I don't expect the ridership numbers to rival that of a full-built Second Ave Subway with extensions to The Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens, but I would like to think that it could put a dent in the amount of cars getting onto the Belt Parkway or Kings Highway. And give some much-needed relief to the busy crosstown bus routes in South Brooklyn

    I honestly get the feeling that this service could end up being an entirely new MTA branch, similar to SIR, but independent of the subway. It's too long to be a Light rail or bus rapid transit line, and too short to be an MNRR/LIRR line unless it offshoots from existing trackage from those services that are still active. It would do best in my option as either a full on subway line (with some major upgrades and expansions) or as i mentioned above, an SIR type service.

  2. On 12/25/2021 at 1:55 AM, User said:

    At least for the last few 1700s, the inspections were up this December and NICE was not going to have those renewed so the scheduling worked out this way.

    That makes since as NICE didn't want to spend money on doing that, just to retire them soon after. However with that being said, I do wonder why do NICE even retire these so soon?They could have made it til 2023-2024 in all honesty. 

  3. On 1/5/2022 at 9:37 PM, Mtatransit said:

    Then we will be waiting until 3100

    And nobody wants to wait that long. Triboro is an option because its easier as the tracks are already there, and there only need to be be infrastructure upgrades (significant ones).

     

    Don't underestimate the MTA though, it will still cost 10 billion dollars

    So is this a proposed new Subway line? Or will it be like SIR and the MTA Railroads? If tracks already exist then this must have once been used for freight services up until WW1-WW2 era.

  4. In light of the whole electric bus movement, is there any word if the MTA is officially done with CNG bus purchases? The go all EV by 2028, but they still have a window between now and then for more CNG orders or even Hybrids for that matter besides the current HEVs being delivered.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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