Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
kingal11234

L train to bay ridge?

Recommended Posts

if dont like the forum u dont have to respond or read it.

I can't say I have any training in mental health, but in simple words, I'd say you need some sort of internal uprising, revolution, or enlightenment. A lot of people who post on the internet with your kind of attitude have some kind of personality disorder—saying things they would not say to people face-to-face. I used to do that 10 years ago (as do most teens on gaming forums).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say I have any training in mental health, but in simple words, I'd say you need some sort of internal uprising, revolution, or enlightenment. A lot of people who post on the internet with your kind of attitude have some kind of personality disorder—saying things they would not say to people face-to-face. I used to do that 10 years ago (as do most teens on gaming forums).

first of all i said that because people are complaining about the post and yet continue to read it. If someone does not like a forum they can simply read another one. This site allows for many topics regarding public transportation so anybody can choose a topic that interests them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now getting back to the topic, I always supported the  idea of a outer borough subway. However given all the challenges that it would take to build the x i was wondering would it be better in the short term to utilize the LIRR row for and extension of the L.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still impossible. The (L) can't use railroad tracks without modifying 'em but then it would cause confusion for t/o's as they have to work with 2 different systems on one line. And besides: those tracks are used for overnight freight service so no overnight service. And most of all: no electrification. You'd have to electrificate the ROW and that's a waste of money IMHO. If you want to electificate something, start off with some important branches/lines of the LIRR and MNRR (like the LIRR Oyster Bay branch or the MNRR northern end of the Poughkeepsie line for example).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first of all i said that because people are complaining about the post and yet continue to read it. If someone does not like a forum they can simply read another one. This site allows for many topics regarding public transportation so anybody can choose a topic that interests them.

Better idea create the X line instead then merge it with SIR which is already a railroad leave the (L) alone.

Still impossible. The (L) can't use railroad tracks without modifying 'em but then it would cause confusion for t/o's as they have to work with 2 different systems on one line. And besides: those tracks are used for overnight freight service so no overnight service. And most of all: no electrification. You'd have to electrificate the ROW and that's a waste of money IMHO. If you want to electificate something, start off with some important branches/lines of the LIRR and MNRR (like the LIRR Oyster Bay branch or the MNRR northern end of the Poughkeepsie line for example).

Electrification of that ROW does make sense as it would allow a radial line to be made overnight service may not be needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still impossible. The (L) can't use railroad tracks without modifying 'em but then it would cause confusion for t/o's as they have to work with 2 different systems on one line. And besides: those tracks are used for overnight freight service so no overnight service. And most of all: no electrification. You'd have to electrificate the ROW and that's a waste of money IMHO. If you want to electificate something, start off with some important branches/lines of the LIRR and MNRR (like the LIRR Oyster Bay branch or the MNRR northern end of the Poughkeepsie line for example).

 

Most of the ROW is big enough for four tracks.

Better idea create the X line instead then merge it with SIR which is already a railroad leave the (L) alone.

 

Electrification of that ROW does make sense as it would allow a radial line to be made overnight service may not be needed.

 

...what exactly about a line from Canarsie to Bay Ridge is 'radial'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the ROW is big enough for four tracks.

 

 

...what exactly about a line from Canarsie to Bay Ridge is 'radial'?

He was probably thinking about the TriboroRX, which is a radial line. Canarsie to Bay Ridge would only be half of it as the (L) roughly divides Brooklyn and Queens. The right-of-way is also large enough for 6 tracks in many segments so there is plenty of leeway (2 tracks with a 2-track-wide island platform for stations).
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the ROW is big enough for four tracks.

 

Space isnt a problem, electrification which is better being done on important parts of the LIRR/MNRR and the fact that the subway cars need to be converted to run on there is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still impossible. The (L) can't use railroad tracks without modifying 'em but then it would cause confusion for t/o's as they have to work with 2 different systems on one line. And besides: those tracks are used for overnight freight service so no overnight service. And most of all: no electrification. You'd have to electrificate the ROW and that's a waste of money IMHO. If you want to electificate something, start off with some important branches/lines of the LIRR and MNRR (like the LIRR Oyster Bay branch or the MNRR northern end of the Poughkeepsie line for example).

Why would it cause confusion? Obviously the tracks would be converted to subway. As Censin pointed out most of the area  has space for 4-6 tracks  so you can build a subway down there with little problem. Concerning electrification it might be expensive , but anytime you extend or  a subway line you have to electrify it so it's useless bringing it up. It's worth the effort to extend subway lines to underserved Carnarsie and unserved Flatlands.

 

He was probably thinking about the TriboroRX, which is a radial line. Canarsie to Bay Ridge would only be half of it as the (L) roughly divides Brooklyn and Queens. The right-of-way is also large enough for 6 tracks in many segments so there is plenty of leeway (2 tracks with a 2-track-wide island platform for stations).

Part of the line from schenectady ave/ave H to New Utchect Ave is only two  tracks wide. So some widening of ROW or building under may have to occur  if you are going to keep freight service

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but you don't understand the problem. The ROW isn't owned by the (MTA) so they first need to buy it or license it but the current owner may not want that because of aforementioned overnight service. They need the current track layout at least for the overnight freight service. Even if they add extra tracks then the owner still has the right to refuse (MTA)'s bid.

Also, I still stand by my point: first electrificate things like the Poughkeepsie ROW and the Oyster Bay Branch (which badly need electrification).

Edited by Vistausss
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was probably thinking about the TriboroRX, which is a radial line. Canarsie to Bay Ridge would only be half of it as the (L) roughly divides Brooklyn and Queens. The right-of-way is also large enough for 6 tracks in many segments so there is plenty of leeway (2 tracks with a 2-track-wide island platform for stations).

 

Its actually an orbital line, since it 'orbits' the subway system instead of going into Manhattan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its actually an orbital line, since it 'orbits' the subway system instead of going into Manhattan.

I see radial and circumferential used as well. Here's "raidal" in use:

 

Known as the Triboro RX route in planning circles, this train line would use preexisting rights-of-way to connect Outer Borough neighborhoods with radial subway lines, and if the city could enjoy it by 2048, we’d be golden.

The term "orbital line" is also used and contrasts with "radial line" since the line being describes actually "orbits" a center by making a complete circle.

Edited by CenSin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see radial and circumferential used as well. Here's "raidal" in use:

The term "orbital line" is also used and contrasts with "radial line" since the line being describes actually "orbits" a center by making a complete circle.

 

Not to be that really pedantic, pain in the ass guy, but the description of radial is being used to describe the connecting lines.

 

To basically sum up what everyone has said about the Bay Ridge Line, here's the thing.

 

There are three basic operational segments that you could logically divide the RX into:

 

  • Bay Ridge to Broadway Junction
  • Broadway Junction to Queens Blvd
  • Queens Blvd to the Bronx

These should all be pursued because each links very important, heavily used corridors (and parallel heavily used bus lines, besides that Queens Blvd-Bronx segment). The first two are operationally the most likely to happen, since the Bronx connection involves working on the very active Hell Gate Line (tracks need to be built, a station at 31st to change to the Astoria Line is required, etc.), but none should be an extension of the (L), since no one is going to loop through Canarsie to get to Manhattan, and the (L) already has capacity issues of its own.

 

I'm also not too crazy about the author changing his plans to have the line go to Hunts Point in the Bronx - I think a more useful connection would be to go over or under the MNRR line to Marble Hill, or at least Yankee Stadium. But I digress.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be that really pedantic, pain in the ass guy, but the description of radial is being used to describe the connecting lines.

Not a problem at all… I would have found it more annoying if you dropped out of the thread altogether and didn't mention it. That's how ignorance spreads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard that there was a plan to extend the L train to Bay Ridge using the former LIRR Branch. Im trying to find out more information about this. Could this be done? What are the pros and cons of doing this? What do you guys think about it?

I think it would be good for thoes who live in Bay Ridge but if they have R train why should L train go there.  I think they should get read of Z train and put that one there in stead or the V train. One those deleted train should be in that place if this should happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but you don't understand the problem. The ROW isn't owned by the (MTA) so they first need to buy it or license it but the current owner may not want that because of aforementioned overnight service. They need the current track layout at least for the overnight freight service. Even if they add extra tracks then the owner still has the right to refuse (MTA)'s bid.

Also, I still stand by my point: first electrificate things like the Poughkeepsie ROW and the Oyster Bay Branch (which badly need electrification).

You are mistaken the ROW is still owned by the LIRR which belongs to the MTA. In fact the Mta owns the ROW from the Brooklyn Army Terminal to Freemont Junction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are mistaken the ROW is still owned by the LIRR which belongs to the MTA. In fact the Mta owns the ROW from the Brooklyn Army Terminal to Freemont Junction.

 

"still owned" Uhm, the line wasn't always owned by the LIRR. And the ROW is currently owned by various owners. LIRR owns part of the ROW (the part we're talking about in this topic), PA NYNJ owns part of the row and the lead into the Bay Ridge Yard is owned by NYA. And NYA is the one who does most of the freight on the branch and they have a 20 year lease.

 

But even then: the line is FRA-compliant, like I tried to point out earlier. So even if you lay a second track where possible you still need FRA-compliant subway cars. And don't go talk about fully seperating that track, there's not enough space on quite some parts of the ROW to build and meet FRA clearance. (and by converting cars to be FRA-compliant you may also run the risk to put the entire subway system under FRA control)

Edited by Vistausss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But even then: the line is FRA-compliant, like I tried to point out earlier. So even if you lay a second track where possible you still need FRA-compliant subway cars. And don't go talk about fully seperating that track, there's not enough space on quite some parts of the ROW to build and meet FRA clearance. (and by converting cars to be FRA-compliant you may also run the risk to put the entire subway system under FRA control)

Do the regulations say anything about overhead clearance? A lot of vertical space seems to be available (or so it seems from the Sea Beach or West End lines). It's a long way down when looking from above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But even then: the line is FRA-compliant, like I tried to point out earlier. So even if you lay a second track where possible you still need FRA-compliant subway cars.

 

A lot of the ROW is four tracks wide, so you could just build a completely separate pair of tracks.

 

That bit about FRA-compliant subway cars is also not true, because the Boston Orange Line runs alongside the Northeast Corridor and is not FRA compliant at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of the ROW is four tracks wide, so you could just build a completely separate pair of tracks.

 

That bit about FRA-compliant subway cars is also not true, because the Boston Orange Line runs alongside the Northeast Corridor and is not FRA compliant at all.

 

I didn't say all of the ROW, I said some parts. If you want an example, look at the area of the old Parkville Junction where the F train crosses over it. It would take condeming property and widening the ROW to get more tracks in there.

 

Regarding FRA regulation: there is NO physical connection between any railroad and the NYC subways due to FRA regulations. And the tracks cannot be laid on the ROW because by federal law, a subway line would not be able to share a right of way with a railroad line without a large scale devider seperating the property.

Edited by Vistausss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be good for thoes who live in Bay Ridge but if they have R train why should L train go there.  I think they should get read of Z train and put that one there in stead or the V train. One those deleted train should be in that place if this should happened.

Why get rid of the Z? Skip stop service is needed, plus there are some unused letters that can be used.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say all of the ROW, I said some parts. If you want an example, look at the area of the old Parkville Junction where the F train crosses over it. It would take condeming property and widening the ROW to get more tracks in there.

 

Regarding FRA regulation: there is NO physical connection between any railroad and the NYC subways due to FRA regulations. And the tracks cannot be laid on the ROW because by federal law, a subway line would not be able to share a right of way with a railroad line without a large scale devider seperating the property.

 

You don't actually need a large scale divider. Boston's Orange Line runs alongside the Northeast Corridor, and the Green Line extension, also in Boston, will run alongside the Lowell commuter rail line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be that really pedantic, pain in the ass guy, but the description of radial is being used to describe the connecting lines.

 

To basically sum up what everyone has said about the Bay Ridge Line, here's the thing.

 

There are three basic operational segments that you could logically divide the RX into:

 

  • Bay Ridge to Broadway Junction
  • Broadway Junction to Queens Blvd
  • Queens Blvd to the Bronx

These should all be pursued because each links very important, heavily used corridors (and parallel heavily used bus lines, besides that Queens Blvd-Bronx segment). The first two are operationally the most likely to happen, since the Bronx connection involves working on the very active Hell Gate Line (tracks need to be built, a station at 31st to change to the Astoria Line is required, etc.), but none should be an extension of the (L), since no one is going to loop through Canarsie to get to Manhattan, and the (L) already has capacity issues of its own.

 

I'm also not too crazy about the author changing his plans to have the line go to Hunts Point in the Bronx - I think a more useful connection would be to go over or under the MNRR line to Marble Hill, or at least Yankee Stadium. But I digress.

Then the so called X would need M9 commuter rail cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.