Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[Tokkemon]

No it's not because no IND train would have ever run on those tracks.

[VWM]

It's technically IND trackage, but yes an IND train would never realistically use it.

[Threxx]

Connecting 2nd Avenue to other yet to be built lines:

I commend your creativity, really I do, but doesn't the idea of connecting the yet to be completed 2nd Avenue to the yet to be rebuilt Rockaway Beach line seem just a bit like wishful thinking? I mean, we haven't even gotten this line up to 96th Street yet, the extension to 125th Street is the only other section that's semi-guaranteed (and that's because parts of the line were already dug out) and plans for the southern portion are pretty much DOA until further notice. Then, you want to connect it to the Rockaway Beach line (another line that will need to be extensively rehabbed or more likely, rebuilt). And that's if the project gets the green light in the first place. Remember, there's nothing outside a few editorials and blogs about the line and there's absolutely nothing saying the powers that be are about to throw any money into this. Just saying.

 

 

It is a bit far-fetched, but the SAS, with the planned 63rd Street connnection in Phase 3, needs a line going to Queens to be of any help. The would go to 179th if the Rockaway RoW was not reactivated.

 

It's technically IND trackage, but yes an IND train would never realistically use it.

 

 

It is IND trackage in the books, but it should be BMT trackage.

[Threxx]

SMH at the debating about reality vs fantasy. Can people reach a middle ground anymore without taking the extreme sides of the issue?

 

 

I have tried, but some have still been on an extreme side.

 

My is an example. Yes, I want it to use the Rockaway RoW, but that's only if it gets reactivated. Otherwise, it's going to 179th Street on the .

[m7zanr160s]

Does anyone think that the SAS, in current form, is slightly redundant? People on the Upper East Side don't even like to take the subway. I don't see how it will possibly be useful in its current form without some connection to The Bronx.

 

 

People further east than Second Avenue won't have to walk those long blocks to Lexington Avenue. I use to go to school on the UES. I had to walk from Lex. to Second Ave. every morning. If there was a fully operational SAS back then, I wouldn't have used the Lexington Avenue line.

[m7zanr160s]

I am not going to do any more idea things, but to increase construction speeds I often suggest the order of a second TBM. Why isn't that done?

 

 

Interestingly enough, the tunnel boring is the fastest part of the whole project. I thought it would be the longest. But all the excavating and moving of utilities are the thing that's taking the longest time. This is why I'd like to see the work on projects that are easier, such as rebuilding of abandoned RoWs. The infrastructure is there, all that needs to be done is a little planning and renovation. Then move on to the brand new stuff. Although, some parts of SAS are already built so, in a way, they're already doing that.

[Roadcruiser1]

The Second Avenue Subway is most certainly needed. Every time I need to travel to the East Side I am forced to use the Lexington Avenue Line which has almost no breathing room due to the heavy amount of passengers. You can easily feel crushed. For those that don't believe me you will have to ride the line during rush hour. During that time it is the worse. The Second Avenue Subway is desperately needed. I just wished they weren't so stupid in tearing down the Third Avenue Elevated. If it wasn't torn down then the Second Avenue Subway would not be needed.

 

People did see this and they tried to save it. I guess they had nothing to Robert Moses, and his minions.

 

Edited May 25, 2012 by Roadcruiser1

[Tokkemon]

People did see this and they tried to save it. I guess they had nothing to Robert Moses, and his minions.

 

 

Yes, because it was specifically Robert Moses who tore it down.

 

Learn some history, bub.

[Roadcruiser1]

Yes, because it was specifically Robert Moses who tore it down.

 

Learn some history, bub.

 

 

It wasn't Robert Moses exactly, but if you look through history you would see that his supporters, and the people that work for him are responsible.

 

Also the Second Avenue Subway is an IND line. The is the new IND Second Avenue Line service. That is the reason why it is IND.

Edited May 25, 2012 by Roadcruiser1

[Tokkemon]

Had far more to do with Real Estate values than anything. Robert Moses had no vested interest in tearing it down.

[Wallyhorse]

Had far more to do with Real Estate values than anything. Robert Moses had no vested interest in tearing it down.

 

Real estate back then had a lot to do with it because other than the major thoroughfares (72nd, 79th, 86th, etc.) and East End Avenue, the neighborhoods were much different in those days. It was only after the El was torn down did that change.

 

That said, even if the El had not been torn down in 1955, by the mid-to-late-1970's it would have had to undergo a complete rebuild like I mentioned previously.

[Threxx]

The Second Avenue Subway is most certainly needed. Every time I need to travel to the East Side I am forced to use the Lexington Avenue Line which has almost no breathing room due to the heavy amount of passengers. You can easily feel crushed. For those that don't believe me you will have to ride the line during rush hour. During that time it is the worse. The Second Avenue Subway is desperately needed. I just wished they weren't so stupid in tearing down the Third Avenue Elevated. If it wasn't torn down then the Second Avenue Subway would not be needed.

 

People did see this and they tried to save it. I guess they had nothing to Robert Moses, and his minions.

 

 

 

As Wally said, the whole line would have to be reinforced, and a connection would probably have to be made to the White Plains line, and here are some key differences:

 

Express service going both ways would have to be Double-Decked, with one express track over the other, and the two local tracks on the side.

 

Here are the services I would run:

 

(0): Woodlawn-Downtown via Local

(8): Gun Hill Road or 238th Street-Brooklyn via new tunnel. Express

: Dyre Avenue-Brooklyn via new tunnel. Express

 

This, while still requiring the reinforcement and construction of new infrastructure, would be cheaper than building the subway.

[Far Rock Depot]

The SAS has always been IND since it was first planned in the 20s. The Independent Subway System was always run by the City. Its always been planned as a 2 track line with a 3 track station at 72nd and a 4 track 2 level station at Wall/Pine (Hanover Sq) until now.

As far as local stops, not needed. When "final" planning and initial construction was finally taking in the 70s, the current stops were pretty much already planned. Although its a "local" line, stations are placed about a half a mile apart due to the idea of building a "high speed" (70+MPH) line. "Local" service can still be available by the Lex. Think of SAS as a kind of "LTD". The R44s were originally designed for SAS (hence its speed record and ATO features-the latter of which made them "lemons"). Adding stops such as 28th and St marks or 60th sts would make the line almost as slow as the Lex.

 

Provisions for a possible future extention to the bronx is in the plans for phase 2 In the form of layup tracks under second ave from 125th to 129th sts just north of the turn west on 125th St.

As with other threads, i cant understand the logic of those who deem a line "useless" if it a) doesnt leave manhattan or B) doesnt go to manhattan.

The point of the current SAS is to of course, releive congestion along the Lex in the form of a transfer at 125th. Theres your Bronx Service. THose of us who have frequently rode the Lex during Rush hours from the north would noticed that the upper east side stops provide most of the congestion. Trains dont usually reach crush load untill south of 125th. The SAS even as Phase one alone will see consistant relief of the Lex South of 103rd.

 

WHy the need to connect them to current routes for outer boro service i cant understand. At 2nd Ave and Houston, the SAS is planned for below the Houston St tunnel. and the Next stop will be Grand St where riders can transfer to Brooklyn service via the B/D. You want to go to queens from the east side, take the Q to Lex for the F. Every line does not need to go to every boro or connect to EVERY route. Currently, Phase 1 will suit the needs for the moment when it initially opens in a few years.

 

The fact of why the Els were torn down, first, cars got heavier. Second, quality of life in the neighborhoods they served. Who wants the sky blocked out. The Els were torn down because the Subway was built (or planned to be built) in their place(think Fulton St in Brooklyn). EVen if second/ Third aves didnt have a subway built/ Planned back in the 50s when they were torn down, The shift from above ground to below ground was an "investment" in operations year round. Here's a trivial fact: The original subway line that opened in 1904 was a call for a more reliable mass transit system via rail after the Blizzard of 1886(?) crippled everything. And when London built theirs, We saw it was possible. But instead of their Deep Boring method, we opted for the "Cut and cover".

 

Overall, extra stops, transfers of having the route flow into a current route just to expedite outer boro service will be the downsides of the SAS. Not the other way around.

[Roadcruiser1]

The Second Avenue Subway proposed by the IND in the 1920's and the 1930's was supposed to have 6 tracks. 2 of them local, 2 of them express, and 2 of them super express. The plan basically called for making the Second Avenue Subway a super trunk line and have it serve almost every part of the city. This plan was never built because of the Great Depression, Robert Moses and the automobile, and World War 2. When World War 2 ended the Second Avenue Subway was proposed again. This time it would have 4 tracks and would have been a normal trunk line. This would have also included the IND Queens Boulevard super express. Again it didn't work because of Robert Moses and the automobile, a lack of funding, and the Korean War. The last proposal was in the 1970's. Again it would have been a 4 tracked trunk line. This didn't happen because of the Vietnam War, and the city's fiscal crisis. Finally we are in the time period of 2008 to now and the future and the Second Avenue Subway was/is proposed again and is being constructed. Originally proposed to be a 3 tracked line this time with the being in financial trouble the tracks have been reduced to 2, and the future of the Second Avenue Subway is still in doubt.

Edited May 25, 2012 by Roadcruiser1

[Grand Concourse]

@Far Rock, I totally understand your point, but assuming the SAS consists of just phase 1 and (at best) 2, the line won't do much for those wanting a ride to say Wall St or Lower Manhattan. Even if they live east of Lexington av, I don't see them taking the and then the when they can take the directly and without the curve west and gradual return east as on the . If the SAS at least goes to 3rd av 149th with a transfer to the , it might help take off the load of riders wanting to get to the west side in Midtown Manhattan.

[Threxx]

For the SAS to be remotely useful, Phase 3 must be built. From there, we can connect with Brooklyn via Rutgers & Queens via 63rd. That way, it can actually take some of the load off of Lex and maybe even the , since there will be a connection to Grand Central.

[Brighton Express]

About what Lance said, adding in an extra track just in case something were to happen, or a yard move, this is what I was trying to say.Sure we don't need Local stops, I am all for it, but we need an extra track.

[Threxx]

About what Lance said, adding in an extra track just in case something were to happen, or a yard move, this is what I was trying to say.Sure we don't need Local stops, I am all for it, but we need an extra track.

 

 

The extra track may not come in Phase 1, but it could come in Phase 2 & 3, since Phase 2's existing sections were built for 4 tracks and Phase 3 hasn't been built yet.

[Grand Concourse]

Just because 'phase 2' was built with 4 tracks in mind, it won't mean that 4 tracks will be built. But I guess some segments could be used for layups, but just at those segments. If phase 1, the important segment of the line (due to Lexington av being the only trunk line there vs Midtown where there are plenty of other parallel lines) didn't get at least a 3rd set of tracks, then I have my doubts about track 3 being any different*.

 

*unless they were to connect it to 63rd st and run into Queens

[VWM]

Yup, even if they don't use it for express service, the will need a 3rd Track or layup track for G.O.s unless they want to shut down the whole second avenue line.

[Roadcruiser1]

Here is the track map for the Second Avenue Subway. I don't know if it is recent, but it is the track map.

 

[NX Express]

That thing is ancient. 72 St is now two tracks, not four.

 

57 St is now 55 St and 48 St is now 42 St.

Edited May 26, 2012 by NX Express

[Brighton Express]

And Whitehall is Hanover Sq...

[Threxx]

That thing is ancient. 72 St is now two tracks, not four.

 

57 St is now 55 St and 48 St is now 42 St.

 

 

However, this is a good example on how they should build the line, with the extra stations.

[Grand Concourse]

How would extra stations make a difference? You still have 2 tracks.