Around the Horn Posted January 11, 2017 Share #14701 Posted January 11, 2017 My priority would be toward people who lost their transit options like the East Side and the Bronx or those who never had the option (after being promised ) like Archer Avenue, Utica Avenue, Throgs Neck, Bayside, or the Borough of Richmond. Those folks I haven't mentioned are welcome to take a spot at the very end of the line. Carry on. That's all well and good in theory, however in order to deal with all these additional passengers and trains entering the CBD, you would also need new Manhattan trunk lines, like 2nd Avenue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted January 11, 2017 Share #14702 Posted January 11, 2017 That's all well and good in theory, however in order to deal with all these additional passengers and trains entering the CBD, you would also need new Manhattan trunk lines, like 2nd Avenue. I'm giving them a Second Avenue trunk line but it's starting in the Bronx. In other words I'm trying to recreate a part of what they've lost.since 1955. The Lexington Avenue lines weren't hit with overcrowding until the demise of the Third Avenue El which came from the Bronx. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R10 2952 Posted January 11, 2017 Share #14703 Posted January 11, 2017 True, demolishing the Third Avenue El without a replacement was one of the biggest mistakes the TA ever made. But again, it boils down to them pursuing a real-estate agenda when they should be focusing on actual transit issues. Although even if the El in Manhattan had lasted longer (say into the late '70s or early '80s), I'm skeptical as to how they would have resolved the equipment issues. The Composites were retired in 1950 and I doubt the MUDCs were in better shape at the time. The Low-Vs would still have been too heavy for the el below 149th Street. And even if the TA had ordered the R39s, I imagine they would've had to be particularly lightweight to run on 3rd, such as having aluminum carbodies and space-age material trucks or something.. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted January 11, 2017 Share #14704 Posted January 11, 2017 Elevated lines in Manhattan were doomed long before Third Avenue finally came down in '55. When the BoT decided to shut down the "redundant" elevated lines after unification, the Second Avenue line was chosen as a prime candidate, despite being the younger of the east side lines. Retaining the older Third Avenue line was supposed to mean that a subway replacement for the demolished line on Second Ave would be forth-coming. Also, it would've allowed construction of said subway without that pesky underpinning, much like how the Sixth Avenue subway was built as a replacement for the eponymous el. Of course, we all know the end result there. However, if the Second Avenue line was kept over Third Avenue, it would've likely been easier to upgrade it to handle the heavier subway cars. Third Avenue would've probably required a complete rebuild in sections to bring it up to the standards of the day. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulrivera Posted January 11, 2017 Share #14705 Posted January 11, 2017 What's this I'm hearing about a 207/CI yard swap? Or was it Pitkin? Which is the one that has the ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R10 2952 Posted January 11, 2017 Share #14706 Posted January 11, 2017 Elevated lines in Manhattan were doomed long before Third Avenue finally came down in '55. When the BoT decided to shut down the "redundant" elevated lines after unification, the Second Avenue line was chosen as a prime candidate, despite being the younger of the east side lines. Retaining the older Third Avenue line was supposed to mean that a subway replacement for the demolished line on Second Ave would be forth-coming. Also, it would've allowed construction of said subway without that pesky underpinning, much like how the Sixth Avenue subway was built as a replacement for the eponymous el. Of course, we all know the end result there. However, if the Second Avenue line was kept over Third Avenue, it would've likely been easier to upgrade it to handle the heavier subway cars. Third Avenue would've probably required a complete rebuild in sections to bring it up to the standards of the day. Honestly, it would've been a lot easier if the Metropolitan Railway Co. had simply built the el down First Avenue instead (this of course was in the times before Queensborough Bridge was built, so it would've made sense). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted January 12, 2017 Share #14707 Posted January 12, 2017 What's this I'm hearing about a 207/CI yard swap? Or was it Pitkin? Which is the one that has the ? Pitkin has the ... But why in the world would they swap with CI? Maybe you were thinking about the whole R32 to the thing? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted January 12, 2017 Share #14708 Posted January 12, 2017 True, demolishing the Third Avenue El without a replacement was one of the biggest mistakes the TA ever made. But again, it boils down to them pursuing a real-estate agenda when they should be focusing on actual transit issues. Although even if the El in Manhattan had lasted longer (say into the late '70s or early '80s), I'm skeptical as to how they would have resolved the equipment issues. The Composites were retired in 1950 and I doubt the MUDCs were in better shape at the time. The Low-Vs would still have been too heavy for the el below 149th Street. And even if the TA had ordered the R39s, I imagine they would've had to be particularly lightweight to run on 3rd, such as having aluminum carbodies and space-age material trucks or something.. The Market-Frankford El in Philly was rebuilt completely from 1988 to 2009. It wouldn't have been outside the realm of possibility. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted January 12, 2017 Share #14709 Posted January 12, 2017 The Market-Frankford El in Philly was rebuilt completely from 1988 to 2009. It wouldn't have been outside the realm of possibility. And in my opinion, they did it well, with mosaic art at intersections... IIRC, the new MFL cars are the same weight or slightly heavier than the R142... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted January 12, 2017 Share #14710 Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) And in my opinion, they did it well, with mosaic art at intersections... IIRC, the new MFL cars are the same weight or slightly heavier than the R142... Could they have re-strengthen the EL right? Part's of the Broadway El was built in 1885 how different was that originally from the 2nd and 3rd ave elevated? IMO they doomed the 3rd when cut the South Ferry branch all down hill from there along with 179th yard. Cut capacity majorly. Here's a flowchart from 54 right before the 3rd came down. Edited January 12, 2017 by RailRunRob 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted January 12, 2017 Share #14711 Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) Could they have re-strengthen the EL right? Part's of the Broadway El was built in 1885 how different was that originally from the 2nd and 3rd ave elevated? IMO they doomed the 3rd when cut the South Ferry branch all down hill from there along with 179th yard. Cut capacity majorly. Here's a flowchart from 54 right before the 3rd came down. I have no idea. I assume that the girders were either strengthened or completely replaced around the time of the Dual contracts, but I'm not sure which they actually did. Edited January 12, 2017 by Around the Horn 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallyhorse Posted January 12, 2017 Share #14712 Posted January 12, 2017 There were switching problems at Whitehall Street, then an incident (12-9?) at Lex/59. It's completely possible that a that was unable to terminate at Whitehall during the switch issue went into Brooklyn, then when it turned back it was unable to go up Broadway because of the other incident, so up the north side of the bridge and 6th Avenue it went. Keep in mind, you can't turn trains at 57th Street/7 Avenue anymore with 2nd Avenue service up and running, and you already had trains going up 2nd Avenue and whatever trains that stayed on Broadway going via 63rd Street to Queens (some went via Bridge/6 Av/53 St)... Since this was happening during the height of the PM rush, I'm willing to bet that went up CPW since QBL doesn't have the capacity and 53rd and 63rd were both maxed out. CPW is the only reasonable place since there's *some* capacity to spare heading up that way at that hour... Yes, because in theory, the in that scenario could run to 168th and terminate with the there, then return to Coney Island via the or . It's a shame they did not extend the 63rd Street tunnel to Broadway/CPW because they could then have that to send the via 8th Avenue or any of the 8th Avenue lines to 96th/2nd in a emergency for example. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted January 13, 2017 Share #14713 Posted January 13, 2017 I just found this in the Capital Dashboard. Something I have wondered is how the Chambers Street station will become ADA Accessible. I hope that they clean that station up. It is one of my favorites. New York City Transit Project: T7041317 Description: ADA Systemwide Study Category: Passenger Stations Element: Passenger Stations This project will study ADA feasibility and layouts at non-accessible stations systemwide. Some schedule dates are not available, due to project being under development. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B46 via Utica Posted January 13, 2017 Share #14714 Posted January 13, 2017 I tought all maps were updated. This map here at Union turnpike hasn't updated to show the to 2nd Ave. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayParkwayW Posted January 13, 2017 Share #14715 Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) I just found this in the Capital Dashboard. Something I have wondered is how the Chambers Street station will become ADA Accessible. I hope that they clean that station up. It is one of my favorites. New York City Transit Project: T7041317 Description: ADA Systemwide Study Category: Passenger Stations Element: Passenger Stations This project will study ADA feasibility and layouts at non-accessible stations systemwide. Some schedule dates are not available, due to project being under development. In my opinion, the only way Chambers Street can ever go back to the state it was in when it opened is to close the entire station. Edited January 13, 2017 by BayParkwayW 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted January 13, 2017 Share #14716 Posted January 13, 2017 I tought all maps were updated. This map here at Union turnpike hasn't updated to show the to 2nd Ave. Nope. There are still several stations with the old one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted January 13, 2017 Share #14717 Posted January 13, 2017 Hi, when did the MTA officially become the MTA? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted January 13, 2017 Share #14718 Posted January 13, 2017 Hi, when did the MTA officially become the MTA? In 1968, the city-operated New York City Transit Authority was placed into the then-recently formed Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Authority (MCTA), which had the LIRR in it, and then it was recreated as the MTA. Metro-North came into the fold as well as MTA Bus. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amtrak706 Posted January 14, 2017 Share #14719 Posted January 14, 2017 I tought all maps were updated. This map here at Union turnpike hasn't updated to show the to 2nd Ave. There is still a map that doesn't even have the extension at the south end of 125 St on the IND. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Posted January 14, 2017 Share #14720 Posted January 14, 2017 All of the R142s (1101-1250, 6301-7180) and R142As (7591-7810) have the destination signs updated. The R142s have the train missing at 59 St, but it'll be added eventually 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayParkwayW Posted January 14, 2017 Share #14721 Posted January 14, 2017 All of the R142s (1101-1250, 6301-7180) and R142As (7591-7810) have the destination signs updated. The R142s have the train missing at 59 St, but it'll be added eventually What about the r188's? Last time I checked, the still had announcements for the at Queensboro Plaza. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bstar1 Posted January 14, 2017 Share #14722 Posted January 14, 2017 R142/r188 are late with updating signs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTK246 Posted January 14, 2017 Share #14723 Posted January 14, 2017 CI Yard is going nuts with signage. Weekend program now says CONEY ISLAND BWAY LCL/4 AV EXP VIA SEA BEACH 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MysteriousBtrain Posted January 14, 2017 Share #14724 Posted January 14, 2017 CI Yard is going nuts with signage. Weekend program now says CONEY ISLAND BWAY LCL/4 AV EXP VIA SEA BEACH Speaking of interesting updates, guess what other announcement is messed up now? 59th Street. Looks like the update made the announcements play at where it originally played at (or in other words, a bit later than now). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTK246 Posted January 14, 2017 Share #14725 Posted January 14, 2017 CI Yard is going nuts with signage. Weekend program now says CONEY ISLAND BWAY LCL/4 AV EXP VIA SEA BEACH Can't figure out how to edit on mobile but the program now saysBAY RIDGE-95 ST QUEENS BLVD LOCAL 59 ST / BWAY LCL 59 ST / BWAY LCL scrolls. 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.