The 1989 (NYCT) Plan for an (X) train via 6 Av

[NYCTNostalgia]

In 1989 the (NYCT) proposed a plan for an (X) train to run once the 63rd Street Connection opened. It would've ran between 21 St-Queensbridge and World Trade Center. The (NYCT) were so sure of passing this route that they put it on the R44/46 LCD signs.(Proof on blake.prohosting.com/~tptsm/rollsign)

(but scroll down to R44/46 side signs, click it, then click original LCD signs and scroll down the the X train.)But then they decided to veto it.

Any one know why?

What do you think of this route?

[nel070]

the question with the plan is can world trade center handle the and another train with only two relay tracks and another problem is would teh switching from 6av to 8av after west 4st hold up the and trains

[MTR Admiralty]

This line should've been the precursor to today's train. 2nd Avenue was a better terminal than WTC because:

-It doesn't have to share the terminal with the E, doing so will only reduce the capacity for the line.

-It could also affect C service because you have that troubling chokepoint at Canal Street, so it screws things even more.

-2nd Avenue acts as a better terminal

 

It seems like the original plan was to have the QBL expresses use 53rd and the locals, either 63, 50 or Crosstown. But doing so, it won't answer the overcrowding at 53/Lex.

[Eric B]

I had heard of this, upon first seeing the full list of codes and asking about it.

Thing is, I never hears when it was supposed to run. Back then, weekdays was the(Q6), weekends was the (. Perhaps evenings and late nights, where various arrangements were used in those early years of the 63rd St line. ((Q6) to 2nd Av., picking up regular passengers for a few stops, the that changed into a (Q6), the later covered it in the early evening, etc).

So I think it would have probably been at these times. There would not have been a problem of congestion either at W4 or WTC then.

So yeah; don't know why they didn't do it (and on the 46's, the front signs did not have those extra white letters).

Perhaps it was when they decided to frop the out of Queens and run the instead. Hard to believe it ever ran like that.

[LRG]

Pretty interesting. I could only wonder how this would have worked out if actually implemented.

 

This also relates to that story where a (P) train would have ran between Jamaica Center and Penn Station in the event of an Amtrak strike which would have barred LIRR trains from using that station where it shares trackage with NJT and Amtrak.

[MTR Admiralty]

I had heard of this, upon first seeing the full list of codes and asking about it.

Thing is, I never hears when it was supposed to run. Back then, weekdays was the(Q6), weekends was the (. Perhaps evenings and late nights, where various arrangements were used in those early years of the 63rd St line. ((Q6) to 2nd Av., picking up regular passengers for a few stops, the that changed into a (Q6), the later covered it in the early evening, etc).

So I think it would have probably been at these times. There would not have been a problem of congestion either at W4 or WTC then.

So yeah; don't know why they didn't do it (and on the 46's, the front signs did not have those extra white letters).

Perhaps it was when they decided to frop the out of Queens and run the instead. Hard to believe it ever ran like that.

Wasn't this line meant to be for rush hours/weekdays only though?

[Eric B]

I don't know, because then the (Q6) was running to 21st at those times.

 

Maybe it was in the event of the Manhattan Bridge reopening. Yeah, that would make sense, because it was a couple years later that the Broadway side did reopen, and I had wished they would start the up early, from 21st to 2nd Av or even Church Av. so the could go back to Bway (as many of us wished).

But instead, they kept the (Q6) as it was, and ran only the on the other side of the bridge; the reasoning being it was only a temporary reprieve, and it ended up ending only after about a month.

 

So perhaps the X was an early plan for that resumption of full bridge service with the going back to Bway, but then they dropped it by the time that went into effect. Perhaps if the work had been fully finished at that time, and the change would be permanent (It wasn't planned to go on another 10 years, but probably assumed to just take two years like the 6th Av side work did!)

 

The X then would have just been a temporary (decade long) filler-in for the later .

[R44 5278]

I agree with Eric B. The plan was vetoed perhaps due to the Manhattan Bridge Reconstruction. With the Q shifted to 6th Avenue, 6th Avenue was already at full capacity at the time. And since the Q couldn't terminate uptown or terminate with the F on Queens Blvd, the best plan was to send it through the unfinished 63rd St line. Regarding the designation 'X,' would it be very confusing considering the fact that garbage/work trains also have that designation? Anyhow, excellent story to bring to the spotlight!

[Miaaa]

an X train sounds so cool... hehe B)

[N-Trizzy2609]

The (X) train only existed in Fabulous's "Young'n" video. I remember they used a green (X) on a R62A running down Track 4 of the 42nd Street (S)huttle. I think that will be the only time we see an (X) train.

[KTrainExp]

The (X) train only existed in Fabulous's "Young'n" video. I remember they used a green (X) on a R62A running down Track 4 of the 42nd Street (S)huttle. I think that will be the only time we see an (X) train.

 

If those girls were on the same train as me, I'd ride the subway the whole day!

[Maserati7200]

If those girls were on the same train as me, I'd ride the subway the whole day!

 

hehe