tramrunner Posted July 5, 2008 Share #1 Posted July 5, 2008 I am interested because of 2 reasons. First I hope to see the streetcars in Brooklyn, in my current life. Not in my next life, not in a life after next. I know what is the perfect place to run Light rail Service in Brooklyn. If you look on a map carefully, you will find a big hole in East New York Area. In a neighborhood where I live, the subway was planned to be built according to some old maps, while plans did not come true now. Riding B36 bus from subway to home, I feel that during peek hours it is so crowded that the long LRV will be just enough to cary that passenger loads. And it s so not only about B36. Here is my plan. I guess that it will cover up all the east New York areas, which are not covered by subways. The future of this plan is to be extended to Jamaica, Forest Hills, and Flushing. the hand-drawn lines are my project Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted July 5, 2008 Share #2 Posted July 5, 2008 I agree light rails in NYC would be nice. I think the BX12 should be turned into an light rail route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion Posted July 5, 2008 Share #3 Posted July 5, 2008 I would love to see the B68 replaced with a light rail system, but only on Coney Island avenue, can't easily put it underneath the train stations and between the pillars, maybe a bus route being extended to replace the B68 underneath those stations... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlmerPark B6 Posted July 5, 2008 Share #4 Posted July 5, 2008 I am interested because of 2 reasons. First I hope to see the streetcars in Brooklyn, in my current life. Not in my next life, not in a life after next. I know what is the perfect place to run Light rail Service in Brooklyn. If you look on a map carefully, you will find a big hole in East New York Area. In a neighborhood where I live, the subway was planned to be built according to some old maps, while plans did not come true now. Riding B36 bus from subway to home, I feel that during peek hours it is so crowded that the long LRV will be just enough to cary that passenger loads. And it s so not only about B36. Here is my plan. I guess that it will cover up all the east New York areas, which are not covered by subways. The future of this plan is to be extended to Jamaica, Forest Hills, and Flushing. the hand-drawn lines are my project OMG i would lovew to see that. but it might never happen because of geogeological strucutre. the south part of brooklyn can not sustain any weight underground or above ground. and what orion said about B68, there are schools and murrow kids that are gonna ruin it. sometrhing like ps 99, 199, 98 and then cunningham, boddy , and murrow, trust me i know every school on CI avenue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted July 5, 2008 Share #5 Posted July 5, 2008 I would love to see the B68 replaced with a light rail system, but only on Coney Island avenue, can't easily put it underneath the train stations and between the pillars, maybe a bus route being extended to replace the B68 underneath those stations... Light rail systems often have a 4 piece track bed using poured concrete to tie it all together. The depth of the track system would only have to be 8 inches. This means they could put it a lot of places where the rail + tie system won't work, plus you'd get more even weight distribution and no chance of shifting. As for between pillars, the EMU and DMU (NJT) uses are narrower than IRT trains at i believe 7 something feet. You could easily put an electric system in place and isolate the system from the main grid so it still works in outages similar to the ROIC tramway. If done properly and responsibly, NYC could have a large network of light rail to compliment the subway & use less diesel. - Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pablo M 201 Posted July 5, 2008 Share #6 Posted July 5, 2008 I agree light rails in NYC would be nice. I think the BX12 should be turned into an light rail route.I agree, but trying to plan it out is comlicated. So many things involved with having to probably run underground portions, elevated, and street running. Would make for a very interesting line. I would love to see the B68 replaced with a light rail system, but only on Coney Island avenue, can't easily put it underneath the train stations and between the pillars, maybe a bus route being extended to replace the B68 underneath those stations...Hell, you can street run on Coney Island Avenue. Use light rail trains the size like the NJT Kinkisharyos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3348 Posted July 5, 2008 Share #7 Posted July 5, 2008 I know what is the perfect place to run Light rail Service in Brooklyn. I love how you completely ignore pretty much all of Queens... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted July 5, 2008 Share #8 Posted July 5, 2008 I love how you completely ignore pretty much all of Queens... Seconded, especially northeast Queens, where there are no subway lines... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlmerPark B6 Posted July 6, 2008 Share #9 Posted July 6, 2008 Seconded, especially northeast Queens, where there are no subway lines... well the thinks they're good enought since the LIRR and Metro-north serves there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted July 6, 2008 Share #10 Posted July 6, 2008 Light rail to connect terminal subway stations would be an awesome utilization of the type (both EMU and track system) used by (NJT). It would be good for heavy traffic bus routes, and in combination with subway service in the rockaways & coney island. - Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted July 6, 2008 Share #11 Posted July 6, 2008 well the thinks they're good enought since the LIRR and Metro-north serves there. Ummm... Metro-North doesn't go into Queens... and only one branch of the LIRR (Port Washington) goes even remotely close. What about the huge swath of city between the PW and the line? Covered? I think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted July 6, 2008 Share #12 Posted July 6, 2008 Ummm... Metro-North doesn't go into Queens... and only one branch of the LIRR (Port Washington) goes even remotely close. What about the huge swath of city between the PW and the line? Covered? I think not. A similar situation east of the lex in parts of manhattan, gotta walk half a mile for subway. - Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlmerPark B6 Posted July 6, 2008 Share #13 Posted July 6, 2008 well it's up to the to brighten up thier minds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted July 6, 2008 Share #14 Posted July 6, 2008 well it's up to the to brighten up thier minds E-mails & letters do help! - Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tramrunner Posted July 6, 2008 Author Share #15 Posted July 6, 2008 "...the south part of brooklyn can not sustain any weight underground or above ground. ....." ? I guess that you mean the constructions of tunnels or elevated structures. They are not part of my plans. Or do you means that putting tracks on the gorund level may coause soil to crack down? Or do you mean the weight of LRVs? An I am sure that the heavy trucks weight more then LRVs. Yes, the geological structure of South Brooklyn consists of Salt Marshes. And no tunnels can be constructred through them. But the streets are good. Laying the concrete blocks into the ground, in order to make an LRT roadbed can be a hard talk considering South Brooklyn geology. However, a lot of houses, and building are ever built in that part of Brooklyn. The geology does not disturb the construction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted July 6, 2008 Share #16 Posted July 6, 2008 "...the south part of brooklyn can not sustain any weight underground or above ground. ....." ? I guess that you mean the constructions of tunnels or elevated structures. They are not part of my plans. Or do you means that putting tracks on the gorund level may coause soil to crack down? Or do you mean the weight of LRVs? An I am sure that the heavy trucks weight more then LRVs. Yes, the geological structure of South Brooklyn consists of Salt Marshes. And no tunnels can be constructred through them. But the streets are good. Laying the concrete blocks into the ground, in order to make an LRT roadbed can be a hard talk considering South Brooklyn geology. However, a lot of houses, and building are ever built in that part of Brooklyn. The geology does not disturb the construction. Re-enforcing piles would solve any concerns of structural stability. As i said above, the track system only has to be 8 inches from top of rail to base of bed, and the weight of the whole thing would be spread out, and because the track system can be made lightweight with low density concrete, you lessen the chances of any unforeseen settling etc. - Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlmerPark B6 Posted July 6, 2008 Share #17 Posted July 6, 2008 "...the south part of brooklyn can not sustain any weight underground or above ground. ....." ? I guess that you mean the constructions of tunnels or elevated structures. They are not part of my plans. Or do you means that putting tracks on the gorund level may coause soil to crack down? Or do you mean the weight of LRVs? An I am sure that the heavy trucks weight more then LRVs. Yes, the geological structure of South Brooklyn consists of Salt Marshes. And no tunnels can be constructred through them. But the streets are good. Laying the concrete blocks into the ground, in order to make an LRT roadbed can be a hard talk considering South Brooklyn geology. However, a lot of houses, and building are ever built in that part of Brooklyn. The geology does not disturb the construction. no i meant the tunnels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tramrunner Posted July 7, 2008 Author Share #18 Posted July 7, 2008 You are right, tunneles are not needed in Southeastern Brooklyn. Elevated culd be a solution of a light rail system, but not in all places. I am speaking ony regards a Light Rail System and the roadbed it may need. So, if its so easy as metsfan says, why not do it. When, hope any time before my 65th birthday, which will be like in another 25years, plus three days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted July 7, 2008 Share #19 Posted July 7, 2008 You are right, tunneles are not needed in Southeastern Brooklyn.Elevated culd be a solution of a light rail system, but not in all places. I am speaking ony regards a Light Rail System and the roadbed it may need. So, if its so easy as metsfan says, why not do it. When, hope any time before my 65th birthday, which will be like in another 25years, plus three days. From wiki... A different type: Obviously the top of the tracks would be even with the road surface, but you get the general idea. - Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tramrunner Posted July 11, 2008 Author Share #20 Posted July 11, 2008 I obviously see the construction photos, and realize that in order to provide a high speed and quiet ride, tracks sould be rested on concrete roadbed. This is the way some of the streetcar trackage rebuilt in Odessa, Ukraine. (My birhtplace) And I hope, that the soil in the Southeastern Brooklyn will withstand this kind of construction. However it will just take time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jchillin Posted July 11, 2008 Share #21 Posted July 11, 2008 I agree light rails in NYC would be nice. I think the BX12 should be turned into an light rail route. I couldn't agree more but I'm sure you are referring to the Pelham Pkwy run only since I cannot imagine them getting up and down the hills between Webster and the 207th St. bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted July 12, 2008 Share #22 Posted July 12, 2008 I obviously see the construction photos, and realize that in order to provide a high speed and quiet ride, tracks sould be rested on concrete roadbed. This is the way some of the streetcar trackage rebuilt in Odessa, Ukraine. (My birhtplace) And I hope, that the soil in the Southeastern Brooklyn will withstand this kind of construction. However it will just take time. If they can build an airport on a swamp, i think a light rail track would be fine. - Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sebbieprops Posted July 16, 2008 Share #23 Posted July 16, 2008 I couldn't agree more but I'm sure you are referring to the Pelham Pkwy run only since I cannot imagine them getting up and down the hills between Webster and the 207th St. bridge. I was going to say the same thing. It would be impossible to build a light rail on Pelham Parkway/Fordham Road west of White Plains Road. It's too hilly and narrow. Even on Pelham Parkway, any light rail proposal would likely be shut down by the local community board, since it would require the destruction of the park area on the median. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted July 16, 2008 Share #24 Posted July 16, 2008 I was going to say the same thing. It would be impossible to build a light rail on Pelham Parkway/Fordham Road west of White Plains Road. It's too hilly and narrow. Even on Pelham Parkway, any light rail proposal would likely be shut down by the local community board, since it would require the destruction of the park area on the median. If it's a low traffic area they can put the tracks right on the traffic lane streetcar style. Keep in mind that LRV's that (NJT) uses can get up to 35-40 mph and have really good acceleration & braking. There are so many different systems and car types they can use it's not even funny. - Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43 Floral Park Posted July 16, 2008 Share #25 Posted July 16, 2008 I would love to see MTA even attempt to propose a light rail concept in Northeast Queens. The concept would be shutdown before the 1st press release. The perfect place for a light rail in Queens would be Union Tpke. The main problem other than the community boards would be the GCP/Van Wyck interchange. It would make things faster but there would be no cheap or efficient way to get the Light Rail from Glen Oaks to the & . You know what just do SBS on the Q46, it's cheaper. And the Bx12 is a no-go. Besides the hills, people pay no regard to the lights up there and the Bx12 Light Rail would surpass the BX10 as the Bx route with the most deaths. I can't see a Light Rail fuctioning in the City unless it was on some street that didn't see much traffic and was in a neighborhood where people wouldn't complain. which doesn't exist in the city. low traffic=nimby, high traffic=no light rail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.