Culver Express?

[Roadcruiser1]

I actually suggested connecting the to the Culver Express tracks in the past, but it was labeled as stupid and I canceled the idea.

[TwoTimer]

I actually suggested connecting the to the Culver Express tracks in the past, but it was labeled as stupid and I canceled the idea.

 

Yay, lol but again almost all fantasy stuff is labeled as "stupid".

[Roadcruiser1]

The subway was built purely out of fantasy. Many people said that it would be infeasible to put a tunnel underground for trains, and guess what it worked lol.

[TwoTimer]

There was always two camps on this site and others, Fantasy and Reality. Fantasy says "it can be done" while reality says "too expensive" and "not enough reach". The "not enough reach" argument is what usually derails fantasy thought, as megaprojects nowadays have to benefit more than just one community or a group of riders.

 

SAS not only benefits 2Av in the long run, it also has the added effect of reducing congestion (and capital expense) on the Lex once it actually gets far enough north. So the reach is beyond just the UES. The same thing with ESA, it reduces congestion into Penn AND its benefits transcend the entirety of Long Island (one could imagine those riders who live east of the Clearview opting to take LIRR into Grand Central instead of the bus to , possibly reducing ridership there). FSTC represents a rebuilding and a revitalization of the entirety of lower Manhattan, with people hopefully opting to use underground concourses to get to the line of their choice instead of clogging the streets above. The transfers are just an added bonus, as those going from outerboro to outerboro have easier ways to get to their destination. Even the South Ferry station without that connection to Whitehall would make people question whether it was a necessary expense.

[2Line1291]

It really is not worth the cost of connecting tunnels so commuters south of Church Av can have express... that's realistic right there. There's always CBTC!! Speaking of that, still plan to make Queens Blvd CBTC?

[MikeGerald]

The new terminal for the #1 and connection to the R-train at the Whitehall Street - also makes possible a streamlined set of G.O.'s that was not possible under the previous arrangement. Remember when there was track work on the #2 and #3 Park Place or Wall Street stations, the TA would have to create various schemes to route trains to/from Brooklyn. Now it is simple, just send #2 trains to South Ferry, use a straight distance walk between that station and the Bowling Green station, and all Brooklyn service can use the Lexington Avenue line to/from the Bronx.

 

No more #2 running down the westside, but back up the eastside, while #5 trains run down the east side, curve around South Ferry for a ride up the west side - completely confusing the riders. And there were other schemes.

 

Just a thought.

Mike

[TwoTimer]

The new terminal for the #1 and connection to the R-train at the Whitehall Street - also makes possible a streamlined set of G.O.'s that was not possible under the previous arrangement. Remember when there was track work on the #2 and #3 Park Place or Wall Street stations, the TA would have to create various schemes to route trains to/from Brooklyn. Now it is simple, just send #2 trains to South Ferry, use a straight distance walk between that station and the Bowling Green station, and all Brooklyn service can use the Lexington Avenue line to/from the Bronx.

 

No more #2 running down the westside, but back up the eastside, while #5 trains run down the east side, curve around South Ferry for a ride up the west side - completely confusing the riders. And there were other schemes.

 

Just a thought.

Mike

I remember the to times sq, down lex both directions, didnt run at all

[Jamaica Express]

the ridership south of Church Ave does not call for an express service, its pretty well statistically proven that the majority of ridership on the line in brooklyn comes from the Jay St - Church Ave segment and the express tracks a significant amount of these stops, as said before having an additional manhattan bound service would help enable express service, but honestly, is it needed? not at the cost of eliminating the .

[CenSin]

I actually suggested connecting the to the Culver Express tracks in the past, but it was labeled as stupid and I canceled the idea.

I still argue against it. The Montague Tunnel leads right up to one of the slowest segments of the subway between Whitehall Street and Canal Street. There is no logic behind connecting it to the express tracks.

[2Line1291]

It would be money saving to build a new 2-level East River tunnel that'll carry the LIRR extension to WTC and a subway tunnel that will have the and bypassing Lower Manhattan below City Hall & WTC. The would connect to Culver Express tracks and onto Coney Island and the would connect to Court St station and onto Euclid Av. This alone would....

 

 

• Guareentee the southern half of Culver with a reliable express service
  
• northern half of Culver still have the local.
  
• LIRR riders now have a one-seat ride to Lower Manhattan instead of transferring at Atlatic Av onto the subway
  
• Fulton local riders now have one-seat access to Broadway and Queens
  
• Lefferts and Far Rockaway riders now have more frequent service since the is at Lefferts the doesn't have to split it's headways with Far Rockaway and Lefferts
  

 

 

The Jamaica-179th St to Coney Island, the Astoria-Ditmas to Euclid Av, the 168th St to Lefferts, the Jamaica Center to Church Av, and the Inwood to Far Rockaway. LIRR Flatbush to WTC is not fantasy so the haters can wrap that through their heads http://www.mta.info/mta/planning/lmlink/

[Roadcruiser1]

Actually a better idea would be to deepen, and to change the angle of the City Hall lower level to allow two express tracks to run below city hall and on to the Montague Street Tunnel which was proposed back in the old days.

[2Line1291]

 

Actually a better idea would be to deepen, and to change the angle of the City Hall lower level to allow two express tracks to run below city hall and on to the Montague Street Tunnel which was proposed back in the old days.

And all that construction just so southern Culver residents would have the benefit of express service? "rolling on the floor laughing"

[Roadcruiser1]

Nope. It increases tunnel capacity for your idea. Your idea would jam up the Montague Street Tunnel at current configuration.

[2Line1291]

 

Nope. It increases tunnel capacity for your idea. Your idea would jam up the Montague Street Tunnel at current configuration.

The is running via a new tunnel bypassing all the stations in Lower Manhattan into Brooklyn with the LIRR extension under it having the running on the Montague tunnel by itself.

[Roadcruiser1]

Not possible. The LIRR is a railroad. Federal law doesn't allow railroads and subways to mingle.

[overclocked]

Not possible. The LIRR is a railroad. Federal law doesn't allow railroads and subways to mingle.

 

He probably means to have a tunnel similar to the one at 63rd street, which has two levels, upper for subways and lower for LIRR to GCT.

[2Line1291]

 

He probably means to have a tunnel similar to the one at 63rd street, which has two levels, upper for subways and lower for LIRR to GCT.

That's exactly what I mean!!

[MikeGerald]

A few years ago, under Governor Pataki there was talk of extending the Atlantic Avenue branch of the LIRR that ends at "Atlantic Avenue" into the Financial District of Manhattan - rather than having riders change to the subways at the station complex that may be called Barkley Center (or whatever). Anyhow in all of the discussion someone forget to mention that the LIRR tracks literally end just at the platforms for the #2 and #3 platforms. So any extensions would have to somehow by-pass the current Atlantic Avenue/Pacific Street complex.

 

A most folks know the IND lines were often set up to target - displace and replace the several of the elevated lines, and subways. In the case of the Hudson Terminal station now called World Trade Center - the current E-train tracks are in a direct line up for the R-train tracks at the Cortlandt Street station. Even though there were proposed plans for an extension of those tracks in a new tunnel to the Court Street station (now home of the Transit Museum) as part of the IND Second System (which was mostly un-built), there's still some questions about how it would actually be achieved.

 

Frankly sometimes - there's stuff in the way of the various proposals . For example - the idea of using and connecting the express stub tracks at the lower level of City Hall with the local tracks at the southern end of the station with the sharp curving local tracks that are also rising to the upper level of the station.

 

Frankly a lot of these ideas simply mean the spending of millions, if not billions to achieve. The cost of a new east river subway tunnel, or even a double deck subway and LIRR tunnel is going to cost billions. Just think about the whole ARC project to create a new two-track train tunnel between New York and New Jersey. Just keep some idea of the costs involved as these plans are made.

 

Mike

[Roadcruiser1]

With so many subway extensions that might be needed even in the future I am confident that a new East River tunnel for rail traffic would be built. It might not be in our lifetimes, but there is need for it.

[alejr88]

If only certain northbound trains (those that would run express via Culver) could terminate at the 2 Avenue "express track". If that happened, riders could transfer to the Queens bound across the platform. However, that would never happen.

[CenSin]

A few years ago, under Governor Pataki there was talk of extending the Atlantic Avenue branch of the LIRR that ends at "Atlantic Avenue" into the Financial District of Manhattan - rather than having riders change to the subways at the station complex that may be called Barkley Center (or whatever). Anyhow in all of the discussion someone forget to mention that the LIRR tracks literally end just at the platforms for the #2 and #3 platforms. So any extensions would have to somehow by-pass the current Atlantic Avenue/Pacific Street complex.

<del>One of the tracks definitely hit close to the platform of the local, but I doubt all 6 tracks are impeded. What's the orientation of the tracks?</del>

http://world.nycsubway.org/us/lirr/lirr-flatbush.html

http://www.arrts-arrchives.com/irtconn.html

^ subway history

 

There is an ample amount of room.

 

If only certain northbound trains (those that would run express via Culver) could terminate at the 2 Avenue "express track". If that happened, riders could transfer to the Queens bound across the platform. However, that would never happen.

Why would that be a good idea?

[MikeGerald]

From a previous message: "There is an ample amount of room."

 

Response: So you're going to suggest that the LIRR rails, platforms, etc would have to be massively re-configured, as well as all of the subway station entrances (immediately for both the #2, #3, #4, and #5 lines as well as the current B and Q Atlantic Avenue station). Seems like an awful amount of work. I've seen the planning documents that was initially done, and the Atlantic-Pacific complex was my home station - I knew it well. There really is not a "lot of room", not even to dip the LIRR tracks down bypass other underground structures. That is why the initial planning documents proposed a track turn off a) near Nostrand Avenue or under Atlantic Avenue (near the train yards) for the tracks that would-might-maybe someday travel to Manhattan at a cost of billions of dollars. Would you believe that they even proposed taking over either the R-train Montague Street tunnel or the A and C train Cranberry Street tunnel for LIRR trains until somebody informed the group that the train clearances of the tunnels prohibit LIRR trains in subway tunnels.

 

From a previous message: "If only certain northbound F trains (those that would run express via Culver) could terminate at the 2 Avenue "express track". If that happened, riders could transfer to the Queens bound across the platform. However, that would never happen."

 

Just a reminder that the Second Avenue station can only terminate and relay trains traveling EAST from the Broadway-Lafayette Street station TOWARD Second Avenue. The Second Avenue station can not terminate and relay any trains traveling WEST from the Delancy - Essex Street complex. Check your track maps before making such proposals.

 

Mike

[CenSin]

From a previous message: "There is an ample amount of room."

 

Response: So you're going to suggest that the LIRR rails, platforms, etc would have to be massively re-configured, as well as all of the subway station entrances (immediately for both the #2, #3, #4, and #5 lines as well as the current B and Q Atlantic Avenue station). Seems like an awful amount of work. I've seen the planning documents that was initially done, and the Atlantic-Pacific complex was my home station - I knew it well. There really is not a "lot of room", not even to dip the LIRR tracks down bypass other underground structures. That is why the initial planning documents proposed a track turn off a) near Nostrand Avenue or under Atlantic Avenue (near the train yards) for the tracks that would-might-maybe someday travel to Manhattan at a cost of billions of dollars. Would you believe that they even proposed taking over either the R-train Montague Street tunnel or the A and C train Cranberry Street tunnel for LIRR trains until somebody informed the group that the train clearances of the tunnels prohibit LIRR trains in subway tunnels.

Are there any studies I can refer to, or did they never get to that point?

[alejr88]

Forget what I said last night, it was late Saturday night and I did not clearly think about it.

[VWM]

obviously no one is for peak direction express south of church av. however, you can run half or a third (whatever #) of trains Exp NORTH of Church Av...