pelhamlocal Posted August 28, 2012 Share #1 Posted August 28, 2012 Anyone know the purpose or meaning to this, was it maybe a early proposal/precursor for the ? thnx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brighton Express Posted August 28, 2012 Share #2 Posted August 28, 2012 Anyone know the purpose or meaning to this, was it maybe a early proposal/precursor for the ? thnx I do not think so. They might have been proposing running the a along the from 59 St to 34 St, and the from 34 St to Jay St, then along the . I know the R110B had plenty bullets and programs, but no, I don't think it has anything to do with the . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Railfan Posted August 28, 2012 Share #3 Posted August 28, 2012 If i remember , the Orange A was placed in in case of the A running to Coney Island. It's yellow since it would run via 6 ave from 59 st to Brooklyn then down to CI. I forgot which line it was supposed to run down to CI by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express Posted August 28, 2012 Share #4 Posted August 28, 2012 There was an incident that required Penn Station to be shut at that time. One of the suggested alternatives was merging the and the , resulting in an orange A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lance Posted August 28, 2012 Share #5 Posted August 28, 2012 The full story (some of it courtesy of Eric B's Line by Line History) is that asbestos was found on the 8th Avenue line in the fall of '89, forcing the shutdown of the A and a reroute of the orange Q up to 207 St from 57 St/6 Av. Since folks weren't feeling the love for the orange Q rolling up the Central Park West line, similar to how the M/V debate went in early 2010, when there were calls for budgetary reductions, the orange A was created to quell the cries of the loss of the legendary A. The line would've run from 207 St to either Brighton Beach or Coney Island via Central Park West local and 6th Avenue express. The rollsign was on the 110Bs in anticipation of such a service. Of course, since none of that ever came to pass, it doesn't matter. Oddly enough, the bullet for a line that will never run is only on a train that will never run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brighton Express Posted August 28, 2012 Share #6 Posted August 28, 2012 The full story (some of it courtesy of Eric B's Line by Line History) is that asbestos was found on the 8th Avenue line in the fall of '89, forcing the shutdown of the A and a reroute of the orange Q up to 207 St from 57 St/6 Av. Since folks weren't feeling the love for the orange Q rolling up the Central Park West line, similar to how the M/V debate went in early 2010, when there were calls for budgetary reductions, the orange A was created to quell the cries of the loss of the legendary A. The line would've run from 207 St to either Brighton Beach or Coney Island via Central Park West local and 6th Avenue express. The rollsign was on the 110Bs in anticipation of such a service. Of course, since none of that ever came to pass, it doesn't matter. Oddly enough, the bullet for a line that will never run is only on a train that will never run. Good story. How about that. So my to Brighton Beach did exist after all. It just never got a chance to see the light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted August 28, 2012 Share #7 Posted August 28, 2012 The full story (some of it courtesy of Eric B's Line by Line History) is that asbestos was found on the 8th Avenue line in the fall of '89, forcing the shutdown of the A and a reroute of the orange Q up to 207 St from 57 St/6 Av. Since folks weren't feeling the love for the orange Q rolling up the Central Park West line, similar to how the M/V debate went in early 2010, when there were calls for budgetary reductions, the orange A was created to quell the cries of the loss of the legendary A. The line would've run from 207 St to either Brighton Beach or Coney Island via Central Park West local and 6th Avenue express. The rollsign was on the 110Bs in anticipation of such a service. Of course, since none of that ever came to pass, it doesn't matter. Oddly enough, the bullet for a line that will never run is only on a train that will never run. I didn't know he had a website. It's very informative, with even dates included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted August 28, 2012 Share #8 Posted August 28, 2012 Indeed. I also didn't know he had a website, very informative indeed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted August 28, 2012 Share #9 Posted August 28, 2012 Man, I didn't even know they tried 11-car trains on the . How did that work? Are there any photos? His website: http://www.erictb.info/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brighton Express Posted August 29, 2012 Share #10 Posted August 29, 2012 Man, I didn't even know they tried 11-car trains on the . How did that work? Are there any photos? His website: http://www.erictb.info/ 11 Car trains? R160 length I hope. If they were R46 length that would be complete HELL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express Posted August 29, 2012 Share #11 Posted August 29, 2012 They tried 11 R160s along the , and concluded that the resignalling and platform extensions (and switch relocation at certain places) needed would be too much of a bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted August 29, 2012 Share #12 Posted August 29, 2012 They tried 11 R160s along the , and concluded that the resignalling and platform extensions (and switch relocation at certain places) needed would be too much of a bother. Did they? I was actually referring to some trials they did in the 1950s: 10-30-54, cut back to Broadway-Lafayette rush hours, 34th St other times when D is extended via Culver. (May have been done due to use of 11 car trains which are too long for Culver stations). http://www.erictb.in...inehistory.html Also, he has this article about some East River Crossing Studies. Look at all the possibilities that might have been done if the Manhattan Bridge was entirely closed, half-opened (North or South side) or if an extra connection from DeKalb was made to the Rutgers tunnel: http://www.erictb.info/erc.html There are some things that seem strange or bizarre: - (QS) from Franklin Avenue to Brighton Beach - from Coney Island to 179th Street - from Coney Island to 57th Street - and from Coney Island to Ditmars Blvd - from Coney Island to 168th Street via 6th Avenue - from 95th Street to Metropolitan Avenue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express Posted August 29, 2012 Share #13 Posted August 29, 2012 I think that's a typo and Eric meant 10-car trains, as the BMT originally had 8-car platforms and maybe they weren't extended along the Culver yet. And yes, there was a trial of an 11-car (OOS of course) a few years ago. There's info on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted August 29, 2012 Share #14 Posted August 29, 2012 The full story (some of it courtesy of Eric B's Line by Line History) is that asbestos was found on the 8th Avenue line in the fall of '89, forcing the shutdown of the A and a reroute of the orange Q up to 207 St from 57 St/6 Av. Since folks weren't feeling the love for the orange Q rolling up the Central Park West line, similar to how the M/V debate went in early 2010, when there were calls for budgetary reductions, the orange A was created to quell the cries of the loss of the legendary A. The line would've run from 207 St to either Brighton Beach or Coney Island via Central Park West local and 6th Avenue express. The rollsign was on the 110Bs in anticipation of such a service. Of course, since none of that ever came to pass, it doesn't matter. Oddly enough, the bullet for a line that will never run is only on a train that will never run. It should be added here, that that asbestos reroute became the model for the proposed 1991 service cuts, which proposed the back to 207th. Then, they decided to make it an orange A (And this was also programmed onto the R44/46 side signs, but not the rollsign).The bullet wasn't made for the asbestos reroute, it's just that that emergency route gave them the idea for a simplified scaleback of service. Also apart of that, there would be no more , no Concourse express, the would go to 21st all times it ran, and the would be the local to 168. When they decided to keep the as the express, but move it to 6th Ave. the would have replaced it on 8th Ave. (But I think I remember the being express to 34th which would be its north terminal instead, so I forget what was supposed to be the CPW local at this point). As for the 11 cars, I know they couldn't run on the Culver, so that's why it said that this was probably why the was extended at that point instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agonyisfun Posted August 30, 2012 Share #15 Posted August 30, 2012 Here's a photo I found that's from nycsubway.org of the the Q train using A train equipment during the time of the asbestos problem http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?127666 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted August 30, 2012 Share #16 Posted August 30, 2012 Here's a photo I found that's from nycsubway.org of the the Q train using A train equipment during the time of the asbestos problem http://www.nycsubway...erl/show?127666 Nice find. Funny thing is, living in IRT country (the northeast Bronx), I never knew they ran the ( Q ) to 207th Street in 1989 (well, I was 11 years old at the time and my parents hated taking the subway in general, so I rarely rode the subway back then). It should be added here, that that asbestos reroute became the model for the proposed 1991 service cuts, which proposed the back to 207th. Then, they decided to make it an orange A (And this was also programmed onto the R44/46 side signs, but not the rollsign). The bullet wasn't made for the asbestos reroute, it's just that that emergency route gave them the idea for a simplified scaleback of service. Also apart of that, there would be no more , no Concourse express, the would go to 21st all times it ran, and the would be the local to 168. When they decided to keep the as the express, but move it to 6th Ave. the would have replaced it on 8th Ave. (But I think I remember the being express to 34th which would be its north terminal instead, so I forget what was supposed to be the CPW local at this point). As for the 11 cars, I know they couldn't run on the Culver, so that's why it said that this was probably why the was extended at that point instead. Excellent account of proposed service changes from 22 years ago that fortunately didn't have to be implemented. Perhaps the might have been the local to/from 168 if the ( A ) had been implemented. I doubt they would have made the the CPW local, especially because it would not have been able to serve 163rd St-Amsterdam Ave or 155th-St Nicholas Ave. And I'm guessing the would have been the sole Fulton Street local service with no express. The MTA would never have been able to implement these routings today. And who knows what they would have done with the ( A ) once the south side Manhattan Bridge tracks reopened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted August 30, 2012 Share #17 Posted August 30, 2012 Here's a photo I found that's from nycsubway.org of the the Q train using A train equipment during the time of the asbestos problem That looks nice. So it looks like it really ran to Inwood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted August 30, 2012 Share #18 Posted August 30, 2012 Nice find. Funny thing is, living in IRT country (the northeast Bronx), I never knew they ran the ( Q ) to 207th Street in 1989 (well, I was 11 years old at the time and my parents hated taking the subway in general, so I rarely rode the subway back then). Excellent account of proposed service changes from 22 years ago that fortunately didn't have to be implemented. Perhaps the might have been the local to/from 168 if the ( A ) had been implemented. I doubt they would have made the the CPW local, especially because it would not have been able to serve 163rd St-Amsterdam Ave or 155th-St Nicholas Ave. And I'm guessing the would have been the sole Fulton Street local service with no express. The MTA would never have been able to implement these routings today. And who knows what they would have done with the ( A ) once the south side Manhattan Bridge tracks reopened? I remember the as the express terminating at 34th. They may have put the back as the local in that plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted August 30, 2012 Share #19 Posted August 30, 2012 Were there any maps showing, and/or brochures of, the Inwood ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Concourse Express Posted August 30, 2012 Share #20 Posted August 30, 2012 This is truly fascinating (I also didn't know about Eric B's site until now; added the link on my blog). As this to 207 deal occurred before my 4th birthday, I don't remember it (though my first memories of the subway were from around '89 or '90 - a ride on the redbirds on the comes to mind)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted August 30, 2012 Share #21 Posted August 30, 2012 There weren't any maps, as it did not last long enough. (It's not like 9-11, which lasted for months, and the service was changed a bit a few time, so they kept updating the map with temporary ones). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Far Rock Depot Posted August 30, 2012 Share #22 Posted August 30, 2012 Lance, was the whole "A to Brighton Beach" proposal the reason for the infamous "D to Far Rockaway" program on the 46s and 160s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brighton Express Posted August 30, 2012 Share #23 Posted August 30, 2012 Lance, was the whole "A to Brighton Beach" proposal the reason for the infamous "D to Far Rockaway" program on the 46s and 160s? I know I am not Lance, but I think that those are two separate things. The to Far Rockaway is just in case the crazy happens. I believe there is a program for the to Lefferts. I know this is pretty normal, but did you know the has a program for Flatbush Av, Utica Av, and New Lots Av? And the to New Lots Av? I think that it is pretty cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted August 30, 2012 Share #24 Posted August 30, 2012 I know I am not Lance, but I think that those are two separate things. The to Far Rockaway is just in case the crazy happens. I believe there is a program for the to Lefferts. I know this is pretty normal, but did you know the has a program for Flatbush Av, Utica Av, and New Lots Av? And the to New Lots Av? I think that it is pretty cool. They use that program every day... :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngblaze Posted September 1, 2012 Share #25 Posted September 1, 2012 I know I am not Lance, but I think that those are two separate things. The to Far Rockaway is just in case the crazy happens. I believe there is a program for the to Lefferts. I know this is pretty normal, but did you know the has a program for Flatbush Av, Utica Av, and New Lots Av? And the to New Lots Av? I think that it is pretty cool. When I was younger and lived in Far Rockaway there was an instance where a was sent to the rockaways due to mechanical issues with the ... it was an R68 signed as an Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.