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.
EE Broadway Local

SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, biGC323232 said:

If i had to make a guess...I'll say its cheaper doing underground than aboveground...

No way. Digging tunnels is very expensive. The only reason why we build subways underground is because of noise concerns and subways above ground look ugly. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Missabassie said:

That Bramhall is a hoot 🤣 🤣. Quite accurate though....

I love the rat that's in the same pose.  So many of them down there that they basically call the shots. lol

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, transitfan111 said:

No way. Digging tunnels is very expensive. The only reason why we build subways underground is because of noise concerns and subways above ground look ugly. 

Relax...Its just my assumption to his question..Not a fact of mine...How u so sure its cheaper that way....And i disagree to the reason you said about the only reason subways are underground...Lot more reasons beside those...:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, EphraimB said:

I just can't stand this anymore!

**image**

The first post of yours I actually don't have a problem with...

Pun unintended, but sometimes you gotta talk with your feet.... I did just that with my old morning commute & are no longer taking public transportation to do so.... If you're tired of walking 1+ miles or whatever every day, there has to be something you can think of to make life easier... Invest in a bike, or have someone (relative, close friend) drop you off at the train station, something... There's more people than you might think that are doing the latter of the two (for more reasons than just quelling the amt. of daily walking)....

side note: that's a pretty impressive walking speed....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

The first post of yours I actually don't have a problem with...

Pun unintended, but sometimes you gotta talk with your feet.... I did just that with my old morning commute & are no longer taking public transportation to do so.... If you're tired of walking 1+ miles or whatever every day, there has to be something you can think of to make life easier... Invest in a bike, or have someone (relative, close friend) drop you off at the train station, something... There's more people than you might think that are doing the latter of the two (for more reasons than just quelling the amt. of daily walking)....

side note: that's a pretty impressive walking speed....

Everyone else drives to work or drives to the LIRR at an earlier time. I have a part-time job. Starting October 3rd, I'm working from 10AM-4PM. No one is available at those times. My bike's left gears are broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder, not to repeat this thought: Was the maintenance on the (6) with the R142As better than the R62As? or there was no change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, transitfan111 said:

I wonder why trains maintained at the Coney Island yard are so much cleaner than trains maintained elsewhere... anyone know why?

I presume they have better and more plentiful equipment and staff at the sight than some of the other... more questionable yards (looking at you, Pitkin!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Calvin said:

I wonder, not to repeat this thought: Was the maintenance on the (6) with the R142As better than the R62As? or there was no change. 

It’s was far worse. From what I hear, with the R62A’s they’re on top of mechanical maintenance because those cars are “older and (6) riders need reliable service” 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to point out: on one of the R142s  there's a program now that  Velma speaks as to stepping in the train moving backpacks to make room for other passengers to fit the train: on the (5) today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Calvin said:

I wonder, not to repeat this thought: Was the maintenance on the (6) with the R142As better than the R62As? or there was no change. 

It was worse, the R142A’s on the (6) had a very low MDBF for cars that are still young. They have been doing better on the (7) thanks to Corona’s good maintenance but you can always tell that they are hand me downs from the dirty interiors and the crazy jerking the cars make when they accelerate. I’ve noticed the R62A’s are doing good on the (6) minus the A/C problems but maybe this is because they haven’t been on the (6) long enough to get messed up lol. 

  • LMAO! 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I decided to check out Cortlandt Street on the (1) today. The conductor referred to it as "WTC Cortlandt Street". I wonder how long it'll be until they finally call it Cortlandt Street - World Trade Center on the announcements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, P3F said:

I decided to check out Cortlandt Street on the (1) today. The conductor referred to it as "WTC Cortlandt Street". I wonder how long it'll be until they finally call it Cortlandt Street - World Trade Center on the announcements.

Most conductors on the line have been calling it "World Trade Center-Cortlandt Street"

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Does anyone know why there was a middle platform built at 59th St?

As I understand it, the concept was that this platform would be used for unloading passengers from the express trains, with the standard island platforms used only for the locals and boarding the expresses. 

In some respects, that does make sense - as passengers can board and disembark at the same time without mashing into each other - but in practice, significant numbers of express passengers want to transfer to the local, and it's a substantial pain to open doors on both sides of the train (and close doors on both sides of the train). 

Edit: Brennan says similarly - but notes it was actually used until 1981. 

http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/abandoned/59st.html

 

Quote

The center platform at 59 St was probably built to handle rush hour crowds changing trains. It was built as part of the line, the original Independent (IND) subway line that opened in September 1932, but was probably not used until 1953. Express trains opened doors on both sides in rush hours. On the old subway cars, conductors stood between cars to open doors and could do both sides from the same location. On newer cars, conductors had to open doors from an inside cab, and move to the next car to open the other side, so use of the center platform was discontinued in 1981 because it delayed train service at the busiest time of day.

Some fan trips now depart from the center platform, since it provides a place to segregate special ticket holders.

It does make a very tiny bit of sense in terms of transfers, if, say, you were on an uptown 6th ave express and you wanted a downtown 8th ave express - but like - those seem like outlier trips. 

 

anyway check that link he has fun photos of when the platform was half-heartedly closed with a plastic chain, before they built that little fenced in underpass for the 1 riders. 

Edited by itmaybeokay
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, itmaybeokay said:

As I understand it, the concept was that this platform would be used for unloading passengers from the express trains, with the standard island platforms used only for the locals and boarding the expresses. 

In some respects, that does make sense - as passengers can board and disembark at the same time without mashing into each other - but in practice, significant numbers of express passengers want to transfer to the local, and it's a substantial pain to open doors on both sides of the train (and close doors on both sides of the train). 

Edit: Brennan says similarly - but notes it was actually used until 1981. 

http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/abandoned/59st.html

 

It does make a very tiny bit of sense in terms of transfers, if, say, you were on an uptown 6th ave express and you wanted a downtown 8th ave express - but like - those seem like outlier trips. 

 

anyway check that link he has fun photos of when the platform was half-heartedly closed with a plastic chain, before they built that little fenced in underpass for the 1 riders. 

In a perfect world, it would make sense.

Another thing, why does the (6) not go straight after Astor Place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, NoHacksJustKhaks said:

I presume they have better and more plentiful equipment and staff at the sight than some of the other... more questionable yards (looking at you, Pitkin!)

Speaking of Pitkin. I'm very confused by it. Every time I look at it on sattlelight I only see the tracks diverge from one another. Is it some sort of underground yard that has something built on top of it?

6 hours ago, P3F said:

I decided to check out Cortlandt Street on the (1) today. The conductor referred to it as "WTC Cortlandt Street". I wonder how long it'll be until they finally call it Cortlandt Street - World Trade Center on the announcements.

I'd rather call it 

(*grabs microphone*)

"World Trade Cortlandt"

It's much easier than saying "World Trade center - Cortland Street" or "WTC Cortlandt" and whatnot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Speaking of Pitkin. I'm very confused by it. Every time I look at it on sattlelight I only see the tracks diverge from one another. Is it some sort of underground yard that has something built on top of it?

It's not underground. It's simply hidden under the Linden Plaza Apartment Complex, kind of like in a similar fashion to Harlem-148 St on the (3)

In reality, while it may seem to be underground, it's actually at-grade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Speaking of Pitkin. I'm very confused by it. Every time I look at it on sattlelight I only see the tracks diverge from one another. Is it some sort of underground yard that has something built on top of it?

Look at the 1966 imagery here for how it looked pre-overbuild. Then look at the '54 aerials and peep the incomplete Liberty El connection... 

https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2018 at 10:46 AM, Cabanamaner said:

Curious, did Broadway Junction ((A)(C) platforms) ever have a full length mezzanine? I see some evidence of it on the ceilings, but I can't find any records of it online. I refuse to believe that such a massive station was built with only one entrance/exit, but I can't imagine where any other exits could've been before being closed.

Well, you had better believe it now. I am very certain there is no full length mezzanine because the station is too close to the surface. This is evident by looking at how close the platforms are to the station house, which is generally at street level.

img_145940.jpg

The "evidence" that you mentioned - and I believe I know what you are referring to, after close examination of the station - is not actually evidence of any mezzanine (or former station house, in case you might be wondering). Its really just a plain ventilation structure, its function exactly the same as the grates you see on the sidewalk. Further proof that this is a ventilation structure can be seen east of the station, where a similar structure exists above the tracks. In addition, if you examine the ventilation structure closely, both inside and outside of the station, you can also see just how close the western portion of the station is to street level.

 

 

 

On 9/12/2018 at 8:56 AM, biGC323232 said:

If i had to make a guess...I'll say its cheaper doing underground than aboveground...

On 9/12/2018 at 9:07 AM, biGC323232 said:

...How u so sure its cheaper that way...

transitfan111 is correct. Think about the work needed to construct an elevated line as opposed to building a subway. For a subway line, long stretches of public land needs to be excavated for tunnel construction and covered up when complete, plus extra work needs to be done to relocate/modify any utilities blocking the way and allow pedestrians and vehicles to cross over the construction area. With elevated railways, work would be limited to the erection of columns on ground level to support the elevated structure as well as the rest of the elevated structure itself.

I'm speaking generalities here; you can find more information here since it has been discussed before on this forum. As for a reliable source on the cost issue, I think this excerpt from an Engineering News article drives this home. It is dated 1915, after the Dual Contracts was signed, and it focuses on the topic of building elevated railways in New York.

Quote

A subway is preferable to an elevated line from the standpoint of the property owners along the route, and a general policy of not constructing elevated lines in the central congested districts has been followed. On the other hand, the cost of a subway is so great that, with the city's present financial condition, a universal subway system is out of the question. The program therefore provides trunk-line subways through the central districts of Manhattan and Brooklyn, with elevated feeders in the outlying districts.

The open-floor construction would cost about $16,000,000 less than the solid-floor and from $37,000,000 to $69,000,000 less than the subway. It is therefore evident why open-floor elevated construction was used for the feeders in outlying districts.

Cost of Subway and Elevated Structure

                                   Per Lin.Ft. of Structure          Total
Three-track subway........................$300 to $500      $63,000,000 to 105,000,000
Three-track elevated -Solid floor.            $200                 42,000,000
                     -Open floor.              125                 26,000,000 

Note: nearly all of the elevated lines in the NYC subway system is of the open-floor type. Examples of closed-floor would be the elevated portion between the Williamsburg Bridge ramp and Marcy Av, where the trackbed contains ballast; as well as the reconstructed portion of the Myrtle Avenue Viaduct, which has a concrete trackbed.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Another thing, why does the (6) not go straight after Astor Place?

South of Astor Place the line runs under Lafayette Avenue, and north of Astor Place it runs under Fourth Avenue. Take a look at the street grid at that location to understand why the line must make those turns.

 

Edited by Gong Gahou
Added extra space between replies for better readability
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gong Gahou said:

Well, you had better believe it now. I am very certain there is no full length mezzanine because the station is too close to the surface. This is evident by looking at how close the platforms are to the station house, which is generally at street level.

img_145940.jpg

The "evidence" that you mentioned - and I believe I know what you are referring to, after close examination of the station - is not actually evidence of any mezzanine (or former station house, in case you might be wondering). Its really just a plain ventilation structure, its function exactly the same as the grates you see on the sidewalk. Further proof that this is a ventilation structure can be seen east of the station, where a similar structure exists above the tracks. In addition, if you examine the ventilation structure closely, both inside and outside of the station, you can also see just how close the western portion of the station is to street level.

 

 

 

transitfan111 is correct. Think about the work needed to construct an elevated line as opposed to building a subway. For a subway line, long stretches of public land needs to be excavated for tunnel construction and covered up when complete, plus extra work needs to be done to relocate/modify any utilities blocking the way and allow pedestrians and vehicles to cross over the construction area. With elevated railways, work would be limited to the erection of columns on ground level to support the elevated structure as well as the rest of the elevated structure itself.

I'm speaking generalities here; you can find more information here since it has been discussed before on this forum. As for a reliable source on the cost issue, I think this excerpt from an Engineering News article drives this home. It is dated 1915, after the Dual Contracts was signed, and it focuses on the topic of building elevated railways in New York.


Cost of Subway and Elevated Structure

                                   Per Lin.Ft. of Structure          Total
Three-track subway........................$300 to $500      $63,000,000 to 105,000,000
Three-track elevated -Solid floor.            $200                 42,000,000
                     -Open floor.              125                 26,000,000 

Note: nearly all of the elevated lines in the NYC subway system is of the open-floor type. Examples of closed-floor would be the elevated portion between the Williamsburg Bridge ramp and Marcy Av, where the trackbed contains ballast; as well as the reconstructed portion of the Myrtle Avenue Viaduct, which has a concrete trackbed.

 

 

 

South of Astor Place the line runs under Lafayette Avenue, and north of Astor Place it runs under Fourth Avenue. Take a look at the street grid at that location to understand why the line must make those turns.

 

No no, I meant this:

BPgqZjG.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, transitfan111 said:

What’s up with the stupid timer on the northbound R platform at Atlantic Avenue? I’ve missed my express train so many times because of that...

Its a curve right after the station, the N/B express track have timers for the very same reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Gong Gahou said:

transitfan111 is correct. Think about the work needed to construct an elevated line as opposed to building a subway. For a subway line, long stretches of public land needs to be excavated for tunnel construction and covered up when complete, plus extra work needs to be done to relocate/modify any utilities blocking the way and allow pedestrians and vehicles to cross over the construction area. With elevated railways, work would be limited to the erection of columns on ground level to support the elevated structure as well as the rest of the elevated structure itself.

I'm speaking generalities here; you can find more information here since it has been discussed before on this forum. As for a reliable source on the cost issue, I think this excerpt from an Engineering News article drives this home. It is dated 1915, after the Dual Contracts was signed, and it focuses on the topic of building elevated railways in New York.


Cost of Subway and Elevated Structure

                                   Per Lin.Ft. of Structure          Total
Three-track subway........................$300 to $500      $63,000,000 to 105,000,000
Three-track elevated -Solid floor.            $200                 42,000,000
                     -Open floor.              125                 26,000,000 

Note: nearly all of the elevated lines in the NYC subway system is of the open-floor type. Examples of closed-floor would be the elevated portion between the Williamsburg Bridge ramp and Marcy Av, where the trackbed contains ballast; as well as the reconstructed portion of the Myrtle Avenue Viaduct, which has a concrete trackbed.

In general, this is true, except for the following features:

  • Unless you want to create a shuttle, pretty much all elevated rail lines will need to go underground to connect to the existing subway. Land acquisition to demolish for tracks is very unpopular and expensive. (Parks are not a solution because under state law, to use parkland the City must create parkland equivalent to what is lost.)

It's also worth noting that the solid/open floor is dated from 1915, when the most common structures would be made of cast iron and steel. Today, reinforced concrete is much more common; if you were to build a rail line today, that's what you would go with. No one is building open-floor railways anywhere in the world today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

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