Tokkemon Posted June 1, 2012 Share #551 Posted June 1, 2012 (edited) Well I hope the MTA gets it right this time. Edited June 1, 2012 by Tokkemon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted June 6, 2012 Share #552 Posted June 6, 2012 Based On Roadcrusers track map that he showed us even though it's outdated, Lenme point out something. If the configuration at Grand Street is suppose to be built like this, then If anything happens on Broadway, then the can go on the Northern Side of the Bridge and go up 2 Avenue. Also, if the were to be rerouted onto 6 Avenue, it can either go on the to 2 Avenue then the route to Houston, then the northern bridge tracks. Maybe it can also be connected to the 8 Avenue line via 125 to Probably connect for a routing to The Bronx rather then build a whole new line. Concourse can be enlargened, and Maube Send the via Concourse to the Bronx and the to 168 street Washington Heights The can terminate at Bedford Park at all times it operates if the connector is built as well. This can call for the fully express. Maybe built a new express track under the local station and run the in the expresses, the and on the local. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted June 6, 2012 Share #553 Posted June 6, 2012 Based On Roadcrusers track map that he showed us even though it's outdated, Lenme point out something. If the configuration at Grand Street is suppose to be built like this, then If anything happens on Broadway, then the can go on the Northern Side of the Bridge and go up 2 Avenue. Also, if the were to be rerouted onto 6 Avenue, it can either go on the to 2 Avenue then the route to Houston, then the northern bridge tracks. Maybe it can also be connected to the 8 Avenue line via 125 to Probably connect for a routing to The Bronx rather then build a whole new line. Concourse can be enlargened, and Maube Send the via Concourse to the Bronx and the to 168 street Washington Heights The can terminate at Bedford Park at all times it operates if the connector is built as well. This can call for the fully express. Maybe built a new express track under the local station and run the in the expresses, the and on the local. Not really. The water table, steepness, and the TPH prevents any of your idea from happening. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VWM Posted June 6, 2012 Share #554 Posted June 6, 2012 There is no need for a on 6th Avenue... You have the and Broadway needs the Service 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterious2train Posted June 6, 2012 Share #555 Posted June 6, 2012 (edited) Based On Roadcrusers track map that he showed us even though it's outdated, Lenme point out something. If the configuration at Grand Street is suppose to be built like this, then If anything happens on Broadway, then the can go on the Northern Side of the Bridge and go up 2 Avenue. Also, if the were to be rerouted onto 6 Avenue, it can either go on the to 2 Avenue then the route to Houston, then the northern bridge tracks. Maybe it can also be connected to the 8 Avenue line via 125 to Probably connect for a routing to The Bronx rather then build a whole new line. Concourse can be enlargened, and Maube Send the via Concourse to the Bronx and the to 168 street Washington Heights The can terminate at Bedford Park at all times it operates if the connector is built as well. This can call for the fully express. Maybe built a new express track under the local station and run the in the expresses, the and on the local. If I'm not mistaken, the current plans call for the tracks at Grand St to be built below the tracks with no physical connection. Granted, Phase 4 isn't coming around any time soon, so there is time for plans to be changed... Edited June 6, 2012 by Mysterious2train 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanTheTransitMan Posted June 8, 2012 Share #556 Posted June 8, 2012 The future 86th street station... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted June 9, 2012 Share #557 Posted June 9, 2012 Wow, things have changed a lot. I remember the chase bank used to be on the north side of 86th or basically right across from where it is now 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted June 9, 2012 Share #558 Posted June 9, 2012 The MTA just posted data about the air quality near the SAS stations: http://www.mta.info/capital/future/sasair.php 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted June 10, 2012 Share #559 Posted June 10, 2012 There is no need for a on 6th Avenue... You have the and Broadway needs the Service What I'm saying is weekend diversions only. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted June 10, 2012 Share #560 Posted June 10, 2012 No, and why deprive Broadway of that line? Even with no , it's 3 6th av vs 3 Broadway services. Why confuse the masses just to fill the void of the on weekends? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted June 11, 2012 Share #561 Posted June 11, 2012 It's one thing for a reroute, its another for that to be regular service. I still highly doubt a will ever happen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brighton Express Posted June 11, 2012 Share #562 Posted June 11, 2012 6 Av? Never happening. No matter what they say, I hope the gets some Express tracks still. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted June 11, 2012 Share #563 Posted June 11, 2012 I highly doubt express tracks will happen too for the same reason. Face it . The has no money. We are lucky if the whole length of the Second Avenue Subway is completed and sees the light of day. It has been delayed for decades already. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterious2train Posted June 11, 2012 Share #564 Posted June 11, 2012 (edited) Sucks that it has to come to this, but why not leave provisions for express tracks in a tunnel underneath? This way, express tracks can possibly be built in the future, like on 6th Avenue. Even if it takes 50 years, that extra capacity will come in handy. Edited June 11, 2012 by Mysterious2train 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted June 11, 2012 Share #565 Posted June 11, 2012 Sucks that it has to come to this, but why not leave provisions for express tracks in a tunnel underneath? This way, express tracks can possibly be built in the future, like on 6th Avenue. Even if it takes 50 years, that extra capacity will come in handy. The spacing between stations will make express service pretty much something that is not needed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express Posted June 11, 2012 Share #566 Posted June 11, 2012 Capacity is the issue, not even speed of service. And still, you can't compare 125 St 116 St 106 St 96 St 86 St 72 St 55 St 42 St to 125 St 86 St 59 St 42 St. The make fewer stops. Compromises don't work to well in this case. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted June 12, 2012 Share #567 Posted June 12, 2012 It's one thing for a reroute, its another for that to be regular service. I still highly doubt a will ever happen. I mean it for the diversions on weekend, during G.O'S . This wont be a repeated thing. 6 Av? Never happening. No matter what they say, I hope the gets some Express tracks still. Like I said, this is just in Case of G.O's 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VWM Posted June 12, 2012 Share #568 Posted June 12, 2012 The make fewer stops. Compromises don't work to well in this case. I really think people on the East Side won't care how many stops it makes, just that it's there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted June 14, 2012 Share #569 Posted June 14, 2012 Plus, do we really need the circus of people switching from express to local and vice versa? I like having express and local trains, but it does have a problem: you have one train that's too slow, and another train that skips popular stops. It might be more convenient to have just one train that straddles between the two. Express service works really well when you have a lot of peak-direction travel, IMO; let's say everyone wants to get from the vicinity of points B and C, to point A. The local can run from point B to point A; the express can run from point C to A, making all stops from C to B, then express from B to A. Thus, you have no crowds of transferring passengers, because riders at local stops (between B and A) will reach their destination before the next express stop. Passengers further from point A (between B and C), who really need express service, will have it, and local riders won't add additional crowds to it. Additionally, it keeps the running time of the local shorter; the express goes a further distance. I don't think the SAS has this setup where express service would work really well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterious2train Posted June 16, 2012 Share #570 Posted June 16, 2012 I can understand the pros of a "semi-express" like what SAS is supposed to be but at the same time the lack of capacity I think will be really problematic down the line. I can understand why it's being two-tracked, with money constraints and all that, and maybe one could make the argument that as long as Lex trains aren't overflowing, the SAS is successful and I guess that's true to an extent, but that's kinda setting the bar low, isn't it? Personally I think the lack of stops at places like 50th St and 79th St and a potential stop like 61st St is doing more harm than good, but who knows? I guess it's not so bad, since the and M15 stop at those places, but that kinda goes against the point of SAS, doesn't it? Unrelated, I understand the idea of a Hanover Square station as being in-between Wall St and South Ferry, but at the same time the lack of a station at South Ferry would no doubt be inconvenient. But I guess the walk won't be too far. If you're wondering where Hanover Square is: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted June 16, 2012 Share #571 Posted June 16, 2012 Lower Manhattan is already saturated with lines. Why not send it to Brooklyn from the Lower East Side? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterious2train Posted June 16, 2012 Share #572 Posted June 16, 2012 That plan has its pros and cons. Nassau St sounds good on paper, it would send the Downtown with minimal construction and re-vitalize an underutilized line, but the stations would need to be an extended and apparently some condition with the earth makes a connection to Nassau St unfeasible. The Manhattan Bridge is a no-go, just trying to figure out all the spacing would be an academic exercise. Rutgers sounds nice, especially with the impending completion of the Culver rehabilitation. But, the Lex line gets pretty packed in Lower Manhattan (with people coming off the Ferry at Bowling Green and people coming off the at Fulton St heading uptown, and going down there to work from Uptown/Bronx, and vice-versa in the evening) Sure, the as planned won't actually connect directly to the ferry or the .... but I think it's still important to serve Lower Manhattan. I wouldn't rule out the idea of a quick connection to another line, though. Especially since an outer borough on the 's own trunk line really is far-off. I wonder where the Transit Museum would go in such a case. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted June 16, 2012 Share #573 Posted June 16, 2012 Isn't Seaport station supposed to be connected to the Fulton Street Transit Center? If not, it should be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterious2train Posted June 16, 2012 Share #574 Posted June 16, 2012 I disagree. The distance is longer than it looks. Just going from Water St to the at Williams St would be the length of the Port Authority to Times Square transfer, if not longer. And that's just going to the . The transfer between the and the at Fulton St is long too, longer than you'd think it be, since the and platform doesn't actually reach William St. (If you have to transfer between the two lines, you always do it at Park Place, but that's another story). If you go by the subway map, the distance between the Fulton St complex and the future Seaport station is enormous 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted June 16, 2012 Share #575 Posted June 16, 2012 Lower Manhattan is already saturated with lines. Why not send it to Brooklyn from the Lower East Side? Some of which are crowded; I don't think we want SAS riders transferring to the to get to Lower Manhattan. 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.