LGA Link N Train Posted May 30, 2018 Share #18626 Posted May 30, 2018 11 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said: Crescent... I really want to get rid of that curve... what the hell was the BMT thinking when they built it? Anyways, if political opposition is overcome, the structure would run diagonally from Crescent/Fulton to 75th/Jamaica. Crescent will be replaced with a stop at Ridgewood Av. Cypress is closed outright. The old 75th station will be closed for a new one at Eldert Lane on the new structure. As part of this plan, I think that the stations should be rebuilt with the typical local-3 tracked layout (if possible) as I would look to build a center express track. Woodhaven and Ridgewood (or Norwood) would be built as express stops. The problem with that is that the or someone else would have to buy the property in that area TO THEN demolish it in order to ease the curve, and I'm trying to figure out a plan with that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peacemak3r Posted May 30, 2018 Share #18627 Posted May 30, 2018 So who did I see today at Kings Highway taking photos of the terminating there? 😁 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18628 Posted May 31, 2018 3 hours ago, LGA Link N train said: The problem with that is that the or someone else would have to buy the property in that area TO THEN demolish it in order to ease the curve, and I'm trying to figure out a plan with that. The Crescent curve is a legacy of the old El system which frankly moved so slowly curves like that didn't matter much. For years (from 1893 to 1917, when Dual Contracts extended it) the Jamaica line ended at a 2 track/1 island platform station perpendicular to Jamaica Ave over Crescent -- that south curve was built to serve 1893's trains. When they built out to Jamaica in 1917, they included provisions for a 3rd track, but the only places it was actually installed were at 111 (where IIRC they used it to turn trains off of the Lexington Avenue el, and they now store trains), and out by the now-demolished 168th St. Moving forward thirty or forty years, your plan was actually proposed. Transit wanted to add a middle track on the Jamaica El while eliminating that curve, fixing stop spacing, etc. They planned to accomplish this by cutting diagonally from 80th St/Jamaica Ave to Grant Ave/Fulton St, and then reconnecting with the current el over Fulton. They would have then proceeded to replace all the island plats with side plats, while combining Alabama and Van Siclen and moving the others around a bit. They would have also built an express station at Woodhaven Boulevard. Of course, this was all shot down by the community, so we're stuck for now with what we have. What I'd do is re-examine the possibility of a flyover express track between Bway Jct and Crescent. I know the BMT deemed such a plan impossible for structural reasons, but I'd imagine with the 80 or so intervening years, that may have changed. Not at all an expert, just thinking... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
officiallyliam Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18629 Posted May 31, 2018 10 hours ago, RR503 said: What I'd do is re-examine the possibility of a flyover express track between Bway Jct and Crescent. I know the BMT deemed such a plan impossible for structural reasons, but I'd imagine with the 80 or so intervening years, that may have changed. Not at all an expert, just thinking... The BMT thought that the vibrations from express trains on a flyover would be too much for the structures at stations to handle, but they left the provision for this track sticking out just west of Alabama Avenue. If built today, we could use low-vibration track and a concrete structure for the flyover, which produce far less vibration and noise that the steel elevated structures we're used to. I see no reason this couldn't work; we'd need build out the flyover track from Alabama to Crescent, have the track return to normal level between Crescent and Cypress Hills, and then carry on in the center of the Jamaica tracks between Cypress Hills and 121. It would be possible to make Woodhaven an express station, too - the platform could be built above the existing station, the same way the old Third Avenue elevated express stops were designed. But again, we run into the issue of capacity over the bridge. If we run a local making all stops, and a express stopping only at Jamaica Center, Sutphin, 121 (?), Woodhaven, Broadway Junction, Myrtle, and Marcy, we have the problem of both providing decent headways at local stops and fitting all of this plus the over the bridge. If we have 10 tph local, 10 tph express, and 12 tph on the , that's 32 an hour over the bridge - even with CBTC, can we do that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18630 Posted May 31, 2018 These aren't bad ideas, not in the slightest. The problem unfortunately lies in getting the residents in the area to go along with this. When the idea for triple-tracking Jamaica and rerouting the line to run entirely on Jamaica Ave was floated back in the '50s, residents were opposed to the idea entirely, which is partly why the idea never gained any real traction in the first place. I doubt this sentiment will have changed that much in the intervening decades to allow for such construction to take place. It's easier to justify the blight of an existing elevated line as it's always been there, which is why the existing lines continue to stand today. A brand new structure in an area that previously did not have one, good luck on that front. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18631 Posted May 31, 2018 2 hours ago, officiallyliam said: The BMT thought that the vibrations from express trains on a flyover would be too much for the structures at stations to handle, but they left the provision for this track sticking out just west of Alabama Avenue. If built today, we could use low-vibration track and a concrete structure for the flyover, which produce far less vibration and noise that the steel elevated structures we're used to. I see no reason this couldn't work; we'd need build out the flyover track from Alabama to Crescent, have the track return to normal level between Crescent and Cypress Hills, and then carry on in the center of the Jamaica tracks between Cypress Hills and 121. It would be possible to make Woodhaven an express station, too - the platform could be built above the existing station, the same way the old Third Avenue elevated express stops were designed. But again, we run into the issue of capacity over the bridge. If we run a local making all stops, and a express stopping only at Jamaica Center, Sutphin, 121 (?), Woodhaven, Broadway Junction, Myrtle, and Marcy, we have the problem of both providing decent headways at local stops and fitting all of this plus the over the bridge. If we have 10 tph local, 10 tph express, and 12 tph on the , that's 32 an hour over the bridge - even with CBTC, can we do that? Logically, that low vibration track should work. You make a good point about bridge cap. You could cut the (M) to 10 or the (J) to 9 each -- the latter of which should work -- but long term, such service design isn't too sustainable, especially if ridership grows due to express service. I'd also wonder if the express would be better off running local from Jamaica to Woodhaven, then express from there on, with locals relaying east of the station a la Parkchester. That'd bring some benefit to those stops beyond Woodhaven, and may help take a load off of the buses that run from those areas to QB. This also keeps the load off of Jamaica Center, which can't turn more than 12 tph. 1 hour ago, Lance said: These aren't bad ideas, not in the slightest. The problem unfortunately lies in getting the residents in the area to go along with this. When the idea for triple-tracking Jamaica and rerouting the line to run entirely on Jamaica Ave was floated back in the '50s, residents were opposed to the idea entirely, which is partly why the idea never gained any real traction in the first place. I doubt this sentiment will have changed that much in the intervening decades to allow for such construction to take place. It's easier to justify the blight of an existing elevated line as it's always been there, which is why the existing lines continue to stand today. A brand new structure in an area that previously did not have one, good luck on that front. That's the genius of the flyover from Alabama to Crescent. Same structural footprint, minimal disruption. Realistically, of course, the chances of the MTA doing this are nil. They treat the (J) like an elevated bus, so I really don't see them wanting to spend a cool half bil on adding an express track on it -- especially given that such an improvement would be predicated on capacity improvements on the WillyB. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwwnyc123 Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18632 Posted May 31, 2018 Funny thing is that in between Crescent St and Cypress Hills has center tracks they should've continued it passed Cypress Hills until either 111 St or 121 St. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coney Island Av Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18633 Posted May 31, 2018 This is a fantasy map diagram I'm currently working on: What do ya'll think of it so far? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
officiallyliam Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18634 Posted May 31, 2018 1 hour ago, Coney Island Av said: This is a fantasy map diagram I'm currently working on: What do ya'll think of it so far? In many ways, it's overkill. In many ways, it's a good thing that much of the IND Second System was left unbuilt, as it largely exacerbates the issues we have today regarding reverse-branching and piling too much service through a handful of interlockings. Even if we cast aside the fact that bulldozing South 4th Street, Beaver Street, and Bushwick Avenue to accommodate a six(?)-track subway politically (and physically) not feasible today, most of the capacity problems that this proposal solves by building new track can be mitigated by changing operational practice and through minor construction. The line across Worth Street doesn't really add much service coverage that can't be handled by the existing Nassau line; it's not useful for getting uptown, and the only area that gains direct access to northern Brooklyn, the Lower East Side, isn't going to be enough of a ridership generator to warrant it. And from an operational perspective, the junction in which the must merge with the and , then subsequently with the and away from the - seems like a merging nightmare. We don't need all this to get more cross-river capacity. The largest added transit value in this proposal is the ability to transfer between Crosstown and Jamaica lines at Union & Broadway, but that could be added today either using a passageway between Broadway and the east end of Hewes , or through stop consolidation on the Jamaica line. CBTC should raise the speed limit over the bridge to 30 mph, which will significantly shorten crossing times and add more capacity. Tail tracks on the past 8th Avenue could add more service to 14th Street. All this could be done for a fraction of the money - and in a fraction of the time - compared to engineering a brand-new trunk subway line under Brooklyn and two new river tunnels. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coney Island Av Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18635 Posted May 31, 2018 46 minutes ago, officiallyliam said: Even if we cast aside the fact that bulldozing South 4th Street, Beaver Street, and Bushwick Avenue to accommodate a six(?)-track subway politically (and physically) not feasible today, most of the capacity problems that this proposal solves by building new track can be mitigated by changing operational practice and through minor construction. The line across Worth Street doesn't really add much service coverage that can't be handled by the existing Nassau line; it's not useful for getting uptown, and the only area that gains direct access to northern Brooklyn, the Lower East Side, isn't going to be enough of a ridership generator to warrant it. And from an operational perspective, the junction in which the must merge with the and , then subsequently with the and away from the - seems like a merging nightmare. We don't need all this to get more cross-river capacity. The largest added transit value in this proposal is the ability to transfer between Crosstown and Jamaica lines at Union & Broadway, but that could be added today either using a passageway between Broadway and the east end of Hewes , or through stop consolidation on the Jamaica line. CBTC should raise the speed limit over the bridge to 30 mph, which will significantly shorten crossing times and add more capacity. Tail tracks on the past 8th Avenue could add more service to 14th Street. All this could be done for a fraction of the money - and in a fraction of the time - compared to engineering a brand-new trunk subway line under Brooklyn and two new river tunnels. I'm still not finished with it yet, and the cross-river capacity isn't my actual intention of building this. This is just a "stepping stone" for other branches off the South 4 St trunk that would serve East Flatbush, Glen Oaks, and Fresh Meadows, all of which are heavily underserved. Plus, the runs local, so it'll only merge with the , as Berry St would be a four-tracked station, with the stopping on the middle pair and on the outer pair. I do see your point about the subway under South 4 St/Bushwick, however, only Union Av (the existing S 4 St shell) would be six tracks. Berry St, as mentioned above, will be a four-tracked express station, while the rest of the stations will have double-stacked express/local tracks (eg. local is on the upper level while express is on the lower). That might make it more feasible. I'll update it later. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNewYorkElevated Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18636 Posted May 31, 2018 (edited) I love hearing this conductor during the morning commute to school. Edited May 31, 2018 by TheNewYorkElevated 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W4ST Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18637 Posted May 31, 2018 1 hour ago, TheNewYorkElevated said: I love hearing this conductor during the morning commute to school. I agree! Once for a few days in a row, I got on his train, and it was great. I like how he says, "New Jersey" very enthusiastically 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimB Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18638 Posted May 31, 2018 1 hour ago, TheNewYorkElevated said: I love hearing this conductor during the morning commute to school. This was on a train? I thought the has all R142s. Why was there manual announcements? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W4ST Posted May 31, 2018 Share #18639 Posted May 31, 2018 1 minute ago, EphraimB said: This was on a train? I thought the has all R142s. Why was there manual announcements? He adds his own announcements. I hear this sometimes on the R160s as well when the route map messes up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
officiallyliam Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18640 Posted June 1, 2018 3 hours ago, Coney Island Av said: I'm still not finished with it yet, and the cross-river capacity isn't my actual intention of building this. This is just a "stepping stone" for other branches off the South 4 St trunk that would serve East Flatbush, Glen Oaks, and Fresh Meadows, all of which are heavily underserved. But why should we do this in the most expensive way possible? East Flatbush would be covered by IRT extensions down both Nostrand and Utica; northeastern Queens can be served by IND extensions from Forest Hills up Jewel Avenue, along Hillside, and possibly an extension of IRT Flushing as well. If the goal of this South 4th line is to serve new areas, why should we be doing it this way when we can get all of these areas on the subway in a much quicker and cheaper fashion? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIP Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18641 Posted June 1, 2018 They’re finally running the R179’s overnight. 👌🏽 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brakethrow Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18642 Posted June 1, 2018 What is it that limits terminals to only being able to turn a certain amount of trains per hour ? I'm guessing the slow communication between signals ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gong Gahou Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18643 Posted June 1, 2018 A couple of things are taken into account. Some of the factors: Crossover design: Generally speaking, the size of the crossover affects the speed trains can traverse through them; longer crossovers will mean higher speeds. Also, if no double crossover(s) is/are used, multiple single crossovers are used to compensate; this can affect terminal capacity. Crossover location: The further away it is from the terminal, the longer it takes for trains to traverse the distance between it and the terminal. Stub-end tracks: Because tracks end at the station instead of continuing several feet beyond the station, trains must enter the station very slowly for safety reasons. That's all I can think of right now. Those who know more about this subject, feel free to add on to or correct my response. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itmaybeokay Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18644 Posted June 1, 2018 15 hours ago, TheNewYorkElevated said: I love hearing this conductor during the morning commute to school. 14 hours ago, W4ST said: I agree! Once for a few days in a row, I got on his train, and it was great. I like how he says, "New Jersey" very enthusiastically I have to try and get a recording of an equally jovial C/R I sometimes have on the He always sounds upbeat and goes above and beyond with the I/C. Notes the museum of natural history and planetarium at 79 st for instance. My personal favorite is he'll say at Columbus circle, in the kindest tone of voice "Good morning everyone, please try and move all the way into the car so everyone can ride the choo-choo" it's goofy, but it makes me crack a smile. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W4ST Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18645 Posted June 1, 2018 31 minutes ago, itmaybeokay said: I have to try and get a recording of an equally jovial C/R I sometimes have on the He always sounds upbeat and goes above and beyond with the I/C. Notes the museum of natural history and planetarium at 79 st for instance. My personal favorite is he'll say at Columbus circle, in the kindest tone of voice "Good morning everyone, please try and move all the way into the car so everyone can ride the choo-choo" it's goofy, but it makes me crack a smile. I have had him too! Around 11 AM on Saturdays, going southbound. He said that quote, "so the baby in the stroller can ride the choo-choo" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGA Link N Train Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18646 Posted June 1, 2018 Hey, anyone going to the Parade of trains this year? I'm trying to go on the 16th, if not the 17th 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimB Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18647 Posted June 1, 2018 11 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said: Hey, anyone going to the Parade of trains this year? I'm trying to go on the 16th, if not the 17th I trying to go on the 17th. The 16th isn't an option for me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 6 Ave Local Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18648 Posted June 1, 2018 5 hours ago, LGA Link N train said: Hey, anyone going to the Parade of trains this year? I'm trying to go on the 16th, if not the 17th Totally going, maybe on the 17th 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coney Island Av Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18649 Posted June 1, 2018 5 hours ago, LGA Link N train said: Hey, anyone going to the Parade of trains this year? I'm trying to go on the 16th, if not the 17th I'm definitely going. I'll be there on the 16th (albeit only a few hours), however on the 17th, I'll be there all day. We could even possibly run in to each other there lol. BTW, I went to every single one of them since 2015, when the first BMT Parade of Trains was held. P.S. I'll also be going on all nostalgia rides this summer! These include the BMT Standards/D-Types to Coney Island, and the R1-9s to Rockaways. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNewYorkElevated Posted June 1, 2018 Share #18650 Posted June 1, 2018 5 hours ago, itmaybeokay said: I have to try and get a recording of an equally jovial C/R I sometimes have on the He always sounds upbeat and goes above and beyond with the I/C. Notes the museum of natural history and planetarium at 79 st for instance. My personal favorite is he'll say at Columbus circle, in the kindest tone of voice "Good morning everyone, please try and move all the way into the car so everyone can ride the choo-choo" it's goofy, but it makes me crack a smile. 5 hours ago, W4ST said: I have had him too! Around 11 AM on Saturdays, going southbound. He said that quote, "so the baby in the stroller can ride the choo-choo" I have ridden his train during the AM rush as well. Great to hear his voice too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.