Roadcruiser1

A more detailed image from the website.

Exactly. It is all pointless. Why not just accept what they are doing now? We don't want to worry about all these problems with Culver, and plus with the Viaduct being fixed, it would be hell.

 

The Viaduct would be fixed way before the Second Avenue Subway comes online .

Still a Rutgers Street Connection needs to be tested to see if it's possible.

Do you have a link to this study?

 

http://www.mta.info/...ry%20report.pdf

Page 28

"For the optional connection to the Nassau line, the soft soils south of 4th Street make use of a TBM impossible. In this area, cut-and-cover construction or a drilling machine appropriate for soft soils (known as an Earth Pressure Balance Machine, or EPBM), may be used. In addition, the connection requires a shallow profile to join with the existing Nassau line, which is just below the surface along Kenmare Street. This shallow profile, combined with the need to construct both the Houston Street station and the Nassau line connection with cut-and-cover methods, make use of a soft-soil tunneling approach, such as an EPBM, more difficult.

 

Along the existing Nassau line, cut-and-cover construction is expected between the connection and the south end of the existing Canal Street station because of the need to reconstruct a significant portion of the existing structure. For the platform extensions at Chambers, Fulton, and Broad Streets, it is expected that the majority of the work could be completed from within the existing tunnel structure. However, some cut-and-cover construction may be required pending more detailed investigations during advanced design."

 

It's just cheaper and easier to bypass this completely.

Impossible. I explained that the study showed the soil is not strong enough to connect the to the Nassau Street Line and the Montague Street Tunnel. The did a whole study on this and this proved impossible. Unless if you have some alien technology that humans don't know then it won't happen.

You guys have to remember that not all of Manhattan sits on land. Parts of the harbor was filled with trash, or soil to make room for more expansion. An example would be Battery Park City. These areas are not suitable to build tunnels in.

The soil for any Rutgers Street Connection has been untested....

Actually a running to Brooklyn will most certainly take at least half of the loads of the Lexington Avenue Line. At least half of the current Lexington Avenue riders come from Brooklyn. Now if we can do the same thing with the Bronx.

Obviously you don't know the 's policies. Let me enlighten you...

 

They're all about cost-neutrality and savings. This will allow them to scrap Phase 4 for now while getting a connection to Brooklyn. Of course, you'd know this is what I meant if you read my whole post...

 

It was my idea. I proposed it a long time ago back on pages 1 and 2. It also isn't set in stone. The soil needs to be tested, and everything has to be checked to see if it is even possible. This is why a Nassau Street connection was cancelled a while back. The soil wasn't a good enough quality to build a connection..

EXTRA STATIONS!?

 

The amount of congestion would be unbearable. If they did this, they should just keep the how they are. This line in my eyes is going to be an Express service for Lexington. Notice how all the stops are mostly Express stops on the Lexington Av Line. If they were to add a 3T above 72 St, then we would be talking more stations. The only reason for a 3T above 72 St is so that what I said earlier works. When the line has a problem, we don't have to go on it and shut it down, but go and have a Skip-Stop.

 

What are you talking about? The and doesn't have skip stop service. The only two examples is the current (J)/(Z), and the former (1)/(9).

With all the layups, a stalled train could be moved onto one of them to keep things moving. The map above is the best idea I've seen that's also realistic.

 

Not really. Also you forgot it's a two tracked line. Adding more stations will slow this line down.

Here is the track map for the Second Avenue Subway. I don't know if it is recent, but it is the track map.

The Second Avenue Subway proposed by the IND in the 1920's and the 1930's was supposed to have 6 tracks. 2 of them local, 2 of them express, and 2 of them super express. The plan basically called for making the Second Avenue Subway a super trunk line and have it serve almost every part of the city. This plan was never built because of the Great Depression, Robert Moses and the automobile, and World War 2. When World War 2 ended the Second Avenue Subway was proposed again. This time it would have 4 tracks and would have been a normal trunk line. This would have also included the IND Queens Boulevard super express. Again it didn't work because of Robert Moses and the automobile, a lack of funding, and the Korean War. The last proposal was in the 1970's. Again it would have been a 4 tracked trunk line. This didn't happen because of the Vietnam War, and the city's fiscal crisis. Finally we are in the time period of 2008 to now and the future and the Second Avenue Subway was/is proposed again and is being constructed. Originally proposed to be a 3 tracked line this time with the being in financial trouble the tracks have been reduced to 2, and the future of the Second Avenue Subway is still in doubt.

Yes, because it was specifically Robert Moses who tore it down.

 

Learn some history, bub.

 

It wasn't Robert Moses exactly, but if you look through history you would see that his supporters, and the people that work for him are responsible.

Also the Second Avenue Subway is an IND line. The is the new IND Second Avenue Line service. That is the reason why it is IND.

The Second Avenue Subway is most certainly needed. Every time I need to travel to the East Side I am forced to use the Lexington Avenue Line which has almost no breathing room due to the heavy amount of passengers. You can easily feel crushed. For those that don't believe me you will have to ride the line during rush hour. During that time it is the worse. The Second Avenue Subway is desperately needed. I just wished they weren't so stupid in tearing down the Third Avenue Elevated. If it wasn't torn down then the Second Avenue Subway would not be needed.

People did see this and they tried to save it. I guess they had nothing to Robert Moses, and his minions.

I am not going to do any more idea things, but to increase construction speeds I often suggest the order of a second TBM. Why isn't that done?

I shut Shortline up the other day and I can surely do the same to you, so you better not start with me on this crap.

 

If the line doesn't need Express service, thats understandable bra. We need a middle track though. The has a middle track. The have the tracks from Bergen St to Church Av chief. The uses the Culver Express track rush hours. The runs on the to 179 St rush hours too. Even if they are not in active service, they are needed. What if a probable What If scenario became a What Should We Do? Cutting the would just make people mad if something happened to the line. Crowd up the again. Express tracks would allow the trains to still run normal service. Imagine if there were no Express tracks on the Viaduct. The would be absolutely screwed. We don't wan't to make this mistake with the .

 

Do not talk to me. Talk to the , but they will only give you the same response since they are GOD DAMN BROKE!

Um, can you try not to steal others' ideas when you posr and try to make them look better when you post? You completely opposed my idea, and now you U-turn and use my idea as your own? Don't do that. If I wanted to use one of your ideas, I would cite you, do the same for me.

 

Alright credits to you LMAO.

Express all times peak direction so there is space for the allowing more TPH.

 

Why is that needed? There is no need for that. If the is built like it is now it would take people to nowhere. The does. Look listen. The Second Avenue Subway is hooked to the 63rd Street Tunnel. There is no need to create express service for a new subway service. A future service can use it. Whatever the letter is this service will run from Hanover Square to somewhere in Queens.

I have always thought of doing this to the Second Avenue Subway. The will need a way to get to the Bronx. A way will need to be found, but it will most certainly run underneath Third Avenue to Gun Hill Road. Hopefully it would be possible to connect it to the Rutgers Street Tunnel. This will allow express service on the Culver Line. It could possibly run to Coney Island and the will be pushed to Avenue U. For this plan phase 4 is capped and a provision is made for it to be finished in the future. However you can now create a second service. Whether it be the or the (U) it doesn't matter. It can run from Hanover Square to Rockaway Park-Beach 116th Street finally replace the .

It dosen't matter where it is, 60th or 61st, it can happen. Plus, the way this city is going, East Side tolls & congestion pricing would be necessary to not only keep the afloat, but to help keep the city afloat. That is hypothetical, but the way the is going, it will take a disaster to get them to do something. Plus, a few years ago, the had a surplus! Whatever happened to that??

 

I already pointed it out there are transfers to many lines already that go to the IND Queens Boulevard Line. It would just be redundant. The never had a surplus. Years back they said that they needed congestion pricing, and tolls or else they would be the way they are today. The State didn't listen and now the is in terrible financial shape. They are already planning to raise fares either later this year or next year.

The is receiving grants from the government to help complete this thing. There's nothing to say they won't get anything to complete Phase 3.

 

Anyway, 4 tracked service is possible. I don't understand what you mean by no space; 2nd Avenue is wider than Lex, and Lex just had double decked lines. That can be done on the SAS, and considering all the track connections, it may be a better option. And about the 63rd Street transfer: The passage can run under 62nd Street.

 

Quite frankly, I just can't believe you when you claim you're not trying to be mean...

 

The Government is funding the first section only right now. We don't even know if we will get funding for the next three phases. The once again can't afford this. Unless if there is congestion pricing, or something like that the is broke. There is also no way that a 63 Street station will exist underneath the switch. It is too far down below street level to even consider it. You also have the East Side Access down there. Also the already has a transfer at 63rd Street to the . riders if it will ever happen will just transfer to the . If they don't want to there is Houston Street. Another location to transfer to the . 55th Street has a transfer to the and the . I just don't see the need for this if the idea already exists.

I say add a station at 60th Street and provide a transfer to the so riders won't have to transfer to the and the to access the Lower East Side.

 

The switch to the 63rd Street Tunnel prevents that from happening. Along with the transfer to the idea.

I am not being mean here I am telling the truth. The can barely afford to complete this subway line, the neighborhood is up in arms, and the construction time is extremely long even for a 2 tracked line. Do you really think there would be express service here? I don't think it will happen. We will never live to see the Second Avenue Subway in the Bronx. Maybe Queens since it is hooked to the 63rd Street Tunnel, and maybe if it could be connected to the Rutgers Street Tunnel then we will see Brooklyn, but there is no way we will see the Second Avenue Subway in the Bronx because that would require new infrastructure. It would take a long time as well. I highly doubt the Second Avenue Subway will carry four tracks. Even if it's completed I have full doubt. They don't have the money and they don't have the room. Also the Second Avenue Subway doesn't need express tracks. The London Metro does well with 2 tracked lines, the Tokyo Metro does well with 2 tracked lines. Most of the new metro systems in China are 2 tracked. It doesn't make them inferior. New Yorkers are just used to a four track system because it was built like that. Nowhere else in the world will you find a 4 track or 6 track subway system except in NYC.

No express service is just going to screw the . At least there could be some <T> trains, express from 72 under (peak only)

As I said before, We need a 61 St station for Tram transfer instead of SRO M15+SBS+

 

YES. Finally someone agrees with me. You guys have no idea how crowded it gets on the at 125 St, or even 86 St if you know what I'm sayin. Local service only is not going to pull it off.

 

Do you know the reason why they broke down the ELs in Manhattan? ELs take up a lot of space. Manhattan is currently over-populated with buildings in the city. An EL is just taking up space for buildings to be put in. Look at this valuable space being taken up. A hunk of EL gone makes quite some buildings. Plus, the MTA has pretty much all of the underground to build, as long as it doesn't hit pipes, or stuff like that.

 

 

The Second Avenue Subway will never need express service. The chances that it will run outside of Manhattan is slim since we are facing problems constructing it, and the second thing is the spacing. The Second Avenue Subway will have no local stops. It's spacing is similar to lines on the Washington Metro and Philadelphia's SEPTA. The neighboring Lexington Avenue Line also makes it redundant. The reason why the Canarsie Line is overcrowded is because it has no neighboring lines to take the loads off, but the Second Avenue Subway is different. The Lexington Avenue Line is nearby. Notice also there is no St. Mark's Place, or a 28th Street Station. These stations would exist on a normal four track line, but to save costs the Second Avenue Subway is two tracked, and doesn't have these stations. Therefore no express service will ever be needed.

The map will show the spacing.

Also elevated lines doesn't even run onto buildings. They only run on the street. Their pillars are on the street. They don't run into buildings. They don't even interfere with buildings. They are completely on the street. They might lower real estate values, but that is it. Elevated lines run above streets not houses so you are wrong. Tearing down an elevated line has nothing to do with allowing more houses to be built. They don't run anywhere on the city block. You are wrong. I also see you live in Virginia so I doubt you know what elevated line is like. I live near the West End Elevated. I know what they are like. You are wrong.

We should have had preserved our elevated system though. I am certain if it still existed today it would be a popular tourist attraction like the El in Chicago.

I know all about it being 2T all the way, to 125 St, but I still think that we need some Express when the joins.

 

Something just hit me. Imagine if the 3 Av EL tracks were still here. A Bronx extension may have been coming sooner than we thought. Surely, those 3 Av EL tracks could have come in handy.

 

There are no provisions for express tracks. We did be lucky to even see the Second Avenue Subway at this rate. I might sound cruel but with the neighborhood up in arms and the the way it is I am seriously concerned. Also the Third Avenue Elevated was IRT not BMT/IND. It wouldn't have been able handle the BMT/IND trains. Not just that the Third Avenue Elevated wasn't built to be able to carry the weight of the current full length trains. It can be seen at the end of it's life only carrying three redbird cars per train. Retrofitting it would have been too expensive. The better idea would have been to save the Third Avenue Elevated completely, but people prevented that from happening. There is still the MNRR ROW, but there is no room for it. Also again with the Second Avenue Subway the way it is I doubt the the will ever see the Bronx. Most of the problems now will be solved when the Webster Avenue SBS comes online. That would be in 2 years from now.

Edit this is what actually happened at 18th Avenue today. http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/local/new_york&id=8660344