geoking66 Posted March 5, 2012 Share #26 Posted March 5, 2012 I thought the Eastern Division platforms (except Metropolitan Ave) could hold nine 60-footers. I saw pictures in "Subway Cars of the BMT" that showed trains made up of eight 67-foot Standards (536 ft). A train made up of nine 60-footers is just four feet longer (540 ft). If the (M)'s ridership continues to grow like this, the MTA will need to take a serious look at running longer trains on the line. They already need to do this on the line. Ridership on the subway is growing, yet we still have pretty much the same subway infrastructure we had 30 years ago when ridership was declining. We can't afford to continue down that same (pardon the pun) track. If we're going to do anything about increasing the (L)'s capacity, it's going to need to be a serious push to add express tracks for most or all of it. That would mean another set of 14th Street crosstown trains (they'd have to stack the platforms in a way that one level is towards 8th Avenue on both sides and towards Brooklyn on the other). However, this would be mind-bogglingly difficult and expensive, and I'm of the belief it can't happen. Unfortunately, there's nothing we can do about extending trains since no one wants to pay to extend platforms as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted March 5, 2012 Share #27 Posted March 5, 2012 I thought the Eastern Division platforms (except Metropolitan Ave) could hold nine 60-footers. I saw pictures in "Subway Cars of the BMT" that showed trains made up of eight 67-foot Standards (536 ft). A train made up of nine 60-footers is just four feet longer (540 ft). If the (M)'s ridership continues to grow like this, the MTA will need to take a serious look at running longer trains on the line. They already need to do this on the line. Ridership on the subway is growing, yet we still have pretty much the same subway infrastructure we had 30 years ago when ridership was declining. We can't afford to continue down that same (pardon the pun) track. I do believe that is correct about those platforms being able to handle up to 9 cars. The problem is having odd number car trains. It is a shame when they were doing the rennovations, they didn't bother to extend the platforms (for eastern division as a whole) so this oddity of shorter trains could be resolved. For the Manhattan stations, that might be tricky to extend the platforms. Metropolitan, well that's gonna need a total revamp. What they could do is move the switch further south as well as extending the platform south over the current Manhattan bound track (turn the station into a temporary 1 track terminal). Then build a deck over that slope near the parking lot to build the track connection back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted March 5, 2012 Share #28 Posted March 5, 2012 I thought the Eastern Division platforms (except Metropolitan Ave) could hold nine 60-footers. I saw pictures in "Subway Cars of the BMT" that showed trains made up of eight 67-foot Standards (536 ft) coming off the Williamsburg Bridge. A train made up of nine 60-footers is just four feet longer (540 ft). If the (M)'s ridership continues to grow like this, the MTA will need to take a serious look at running longer trains on the line. They already need to do this on the line. Ridership on the subway is growing, yet we still have pretty much the same subway infrastructure we had 30 years ago when ridership was declining. We can't afford to continue down that same (pardon the pun) track. Your correct, but... there are no 67' cars in service anymore and there are no 5 car R160 or R143 sets on the Eastern Div. and no single SMEE cars so weather the can hold 9 60' cars or not is pointless. Even if they ran some R160s as ABBBAABBA, drilling would be a pain in the ass since you could never run two 5 car sets together. That and where would any extra B cars come form. So as it is, the and will only run 8 car trains. I don't think we will ever see 10 car trains there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1447 Posted March 6, 2012 Share #29 Posted March 6, 2012 Love the current , idc who don't like it. The ain't needed. Moving on... And congrats to the NYCT gaining ridership! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lance25 Posted March 6, 2012 Share #30 Posted March 6, 2012 Reminds me of a certain former poster who's still against the via 63rd Street ten years after the fact. What are you gonna do? You can't change everyone's opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1447 Posted March 6, 2012 Share #31 Posted March 6, 2012 Reminds me of a certain former poster who's still against the via 63rd Street ten years after the fact. What are you gonna do? You can't change everyone's opinion. Ah yes... I remember this. TBH, the has ALWAYS(or near almost) been apart of the 63rd Street Line. Pretty much late night service back then was sent there and ended at 21st Street to replace the ( orange, when service did not run or run fully. Its a line, what can we do about it. Same for all the fuss of Old vs New train cars. The New cars will take over every car in this system someday, its already happening. Its all about the passengers, not us buffs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.