#7 to NJ or lower manhattan.

[bobtehpanda]

There's also the idea of tying together the and . It would be done in phases. The Steinway Tunnel would have to be completely replaced, and in the years it takes to do that, the current from Grand Central to the new section would be increased to BMT standards and become the . The Queens portion could also be converted to BMT, and become the (Astoria would have to go on only one service at this time. QBP to Vernon-Jackson could be a shuttle if used at all).

 

Then when it's all finished, you would have Main St. to Canarsie, and diamond express in Queens to Myrtle-Wyckoff.

 

This would be a sure-fire way to permanently depress subway ridership in Queens for years. The numerous times that the MTA has only run QBP-Main St service during the peak hour have been absolutely horrendous, because QBP and Roosevelt simply do not have the designed capacity to hold that many people. (Roosevelt barely has enough room as it is, and QBP only manages because of the quick cross-platform transfer.)

 

As a cautionary tale, after the Green Line in Chicago was shut down for several months for a full-scale rehab, ridership never recovered to pre-shutdown levels. The same would happen with the , because there is only so much waiting and transferring that people are willing to do. (You'd be asking someone who probably came in from a bus into Flushing, to transfer to the , and then make a third transfer to whatever trunk line they have to get to.)

[Vistausss]

Funny you mention another city but it doesn't have to happen that ridership never recovers. Sure, Chicago's Green Line may have had bad luck, and I've seen it happen myself in Amsterdam with street car route 25 which recently died after being rerouted for 11 years because of slowly progressing track work and therefore losing almost all commuters. But the East Line on the Amsterdam subway has been shut down the previous two summers and ridership after re-opening is still at the same level.

 

So I do share your concerns but it's a 50/50 chance. Ridership may never recover but it could also work out right.

[realizm]

This would be a sure-fire way to permanently depress subway ridership in Queens for years. The numerous times that the MTA has only run QBP-Main St service during the peak hour have been absolutely horrendous, because QBP and Roosevelt simply do not have the designed capacity to hold that many people. (Roosevelt barely has enough room as it is, and QBP only manages because of the quick cross-platform transfer.)

 

As a cautionary tale, after the Green Line in Chicago was shut down for several months for a full-scale rehab, ridership never recovered to pre-shutdown levels. The same would happen with the , because there is only so much waiting and transferring that people are willing to do. (You'd be asking someone who probably came in from a bus into Flushing, to transfer to the , and then make a third transfer to whatever trunk line they have to get to.)

 

We had several long term projects over the years on the including the IRT Queens Bvld Viaduct project severely affecting the efficiency of service for months upon months, (in a way much more severe then currently in the light of the upgrades to the infrastructures making up the line including the new subway), and the line did bounce back in ridership and continued to rise. The neighborhoods and business districts it serves are expanding dramatically, I'd say particularly Flushing, Elmhurst, Corona, and LIC, , not to mention the business districts in Manhattan, and alst but not least the major public stadiums such as the USTA National Tennis Center, also CitiField for the Mets games so I think that over time ridership will definitely increase. 

 

That was what happened with the in recent memory with its CBTC installation and major overhaul of the tubes, Manhattan terminal and on the BMT Eastern Division major reconstruction of the elevated/at grade side of the subway line causing massive disruptions in service during those capital construction projects. Afterwards ridership increased dramatically.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Chicago's Green Line riders were able to use the faster and more-frequent Red Line just a few blocks away when the Green was shut down 1994-96. line riders in Corona, Elmhurst and Jackson Heights don't have a parallel subway line they can take if the is shut down in their neighborhoods. So ridership will not suffer if the and were to be combined into one line.

[realizm]

Which is another good point.

[bobtehpanda]

 

We had several long term projects over the years on the including the IRT Queens Bvld Viaduct project severely affecting the efficiency of service for months upon months, (in a way much more severe then currently in the light of the upgrades to the infrastructures making up the line including the new subway), and the line did bounce back in ridership and continued to rise. The neighborhoods and business districts it serves are expanding dramatically, I'd say particularly Flushing, Elmhurst, Corona, and LIC, , not to mention the business districts in Manhattan, and alst but not least the major public stadiums such as the USTA National Tennis Center, also CitiField for the Mets games so I think that over time ridership will definitely increase. 

 

That was what happened with the in recent memory with its CBTC installation and major overhaul of the tubes, Manhattan terminal and on the BMT Eastern Division major reconstruction of the elevated/at grade side of the subway line causing massive disruptions in service during those capital construction projects. Afterwards ridership increased dramatically.

 

Well, yes, but what he's talking about (shutting the Steinway tubes and converting the 7 line west of QBP to BMT standard) would take months or years, and would definitely not be limited to weekends the way the disruptions were (at least, I don't think there were month-long weekday disruptions, but I could be wrong).

 

Chicago's Green Line riders were able to use the faster and more-frequent Red Line just a few blocks away when the Green was shut down 1994-96. line riders in Corona, Elmhurst and Jackson Heights don't have a parallel subway line they can take if the is shut down in their neighborhoods. So ridership will not suffer if the and were to be combined into one line.

 

Are you proposing that everyone would be able to suffer through their normal commutes? The 60th St tubes are already at capacity, and the is essentially crushloaded in the tubes. We'd see at least some mode-shifting as people tried to get a more convenient commute.

[NYSubwayBuff]

Why would u combine the L and 7? The problem I have w/ this is that it would be a pain for those going midtown from canarsie or downtown from main st since the train would have to loop around 11 ave. If it was possible to send the trains through lex and then on to main st it would be easier to combine the 2 and relieve the strain on lex if sending them local. This would require the L to be IRT and there would have to be a shuttle on 14th to make up for lost service. Also switches might have to be built to connect the two corridors to lex.

 

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now Free

[NYSubwayBuff]

According to Wikipedia the extension will have two stops 10 th ave/42st and 10ave/34 st Javits. I thought it was one. Is it two or is that a Wikiscrewup

 

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now Free

[realizm]

Are you proposing that everyone would be able to suffer through their normal commutes? The 60th St tubes are already at capacity, and the is essentially crushloaded in the tubes. We'd see at least some mode-shifting as people tried to get a more convenient commute.

The BMT and IRT lines in question will work on different CBTC technologies that's an additional issue. The CBTC from signal block system conversion on the IND Queens Bvld line to start next year will also have differences as it is for many reasons which I can elaborate on.

[realizm]

According to Wikipedia the extension will have two stops 10 th ave/42st and 10ave/34 st Javits. I thought it was one. Is it two or is that a Wikiscrewup

 

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now Free

 

Only the shell with provisions for a two track platform has been built for the proposed station @ 10th ave and 42nd Street:

 

(Credits: MTA - http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3082/5836661114_0651db90e9_z.jpg)

[Vistausss]

@realizm: No shell has been built there. I thought AndrewJC had made that pretty clear earlier on.

[realizm]

@realizm: No shell has been built there. I thought AndrewJC had made that pretty clear earlier on.

 

This is what Ben Kabek stated on Second Ave Sagas:

 

"I’ve long been critical of the approach to this project. Losing the station at 41st St. and 10th Ave. is a mistake New York City will live to regret, and I’m skeptical that, even with provisioning in place for two side platforms there, we’ll live to see the 7 make that stop. Additionally, the train could continue south (or even west, if Mayor Bloomberg has his druthers), but for now, we get one stop. That said, that stop will be key in bringing people to one the underdeveloped areas of Manhattan, and growth will boom with a new subway stop. "

 

Thats my source as Mr Kabek was actually in the tunnels to see this for himself to make that comment:

 

 http://secondavenuesagas.com/2013/06/24/photos-the-latest-from-inside-the-7-line-extension/#sthash.i9gtspVM.dpuf

 

 

[Vistausss]

He may have been in the tunnels but so has the . A few of these photos were taken at 10th Ave. Maybe you could point out which one shows the shell?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mtaphotos/sets/72157634304964966/

[realizm]

At the location but ABOVE ground in the last few photos. Those photos BTW shows the station at 34th Street under construction.

You know this.

[Vistausss]

Nope. The option to build a shell *expired* in 2008. No funding = no shell. And that photo set proves it.

[realizm]

Nope. The option to build a shell *expired* in 2008. No funding = no shell. And that photo set proves it.

 

Allow me to clarify I wasn't clear, a provision as shown by the posted pic. I realize that funding was cut off and as of 2010 at least. The MTA was still seeking funding for a complete shell but it did start the work for it.

 

Know what? Email Ben Kabek and ask him about it since he toured the platform and seen the provisions hence the source of my information. Get back to me, if I am wrong, then I will admit I stand corrected. But this is what I am reading and the pics I am seeing.

[Eric B]

This would be a sure-fire way to permanently depress subway ridership in Queens for years. The numerous times that the MTA has only run QBP-Main St service during the peak hour have been absolutely horrendous, because QBP and Roosevelt simply do not have the designed capacity to hold that many people. (Roosevelt barely has enough room as it is, and QBP only manages because of the quick cross-platform transfer.)

 

As a cautionary tale, after the Green Line in Chicago was shut down for several months for a full-scale rehab, ridership never recovered to pre-shutdown levels. The same would happen with the , because there is only so much waiting and transferring that people are willing to do. (You'd be asking someone who probably came in from a bus into Flushing, to transfer to the , and then make a third transfer to whatever trunk line they have to get to.)

Did you think I was suggesting a shuttle from QBP to Main? When I said the , I meant the line all the way to Whitehall (hence, instead of it going to Astoria. The only shuttle I mentioned was QBP to Vernon Jackson).

So the line would still have full service to Manhttan; only diverted to Bway for a few years.

  

Why would u combine the L and 7? The problem I have w/ this is that it would be a pain for those going midtown from canarsie or downtown from main st since the train would have to loop around 11 ave. If it was possible to send the trains through lex and then on to main st it would be easier to combine the 2 and relieve the strain on lex if sending them local. This would require the L to be IRT and there would have to be a shuttle on 14th to make up for lost service. Also switches might have to be built to connect the two corridors to lex.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now Free

It's not really for through service like that, though it would still benefit those riders going those places who don't feel like getting up and changing (as they do now anyway). It would tie together two isolated lines, (and further justify converting the to B Div). It would also increase capacity on the Williamsburg portion of the line, because the extra service short turned at Myrtle would have another function, and all the terminals (with all the backlog waiting to get into them) would no longer be in Manhattan.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

The problem is where the hell you would put a new line. The most obvious choice for a West Side Line, 11th Avenue (to tie into the ) is not optimal - the 7 needs all the train capacity it can get, and cannot split tracks between services - look at the to see what happens when a crowded Queens service shares tracks with a Manhattan local service. In addition, north of 72nd St it parallels broadway by less than a full block, and completely merges with Broadway at Cathedral Pkwy.

 

Building under the West Side Highway is not recommended, particularly because its northern portion is bordered by a park on one side and the Hudson on the other. In addition, at least a significant portion of the West Side Highway was built on fill, so it would not be wise. It would also be an absolute disaster in the event of a severe rainstorm - West St was designed specifically to act as a collecting area for water so that building infrastructure would not be damaged.

 

The does run very frequently - probably on the tightest headways of any line, A or B division. But won't the new system allow additional trains per hour to be run? And if so, I think it should be able to accommodate a ( 9 ) West Side Local service for two or three stations. I stated upthread (and in another topic) that the ( 9 ) run up 11th Ave as far as 57th St then shift one block over to 10th/Amsterdam Ave and turn north up Amsterdam. Then merge with the at 72nd St and continue uptown from there to 137th St or 242nd St. Above 72nd St, there's no need for a third parallel subway line on the West Side and no really good place to put it, so just let the ( 9 ) join the at 72nd St. There's also no need for a far West Side line below 14th St, so just have the and ( 9 ) end there. It should turn eastward a bit below 23rd St, so it can steers clear of the water.

[realizm]

Here's another monkey in the wrench with the / combo - The Steinway Tubes.

 

As originally designed to be operated by the New York & Queens County also the New York & Long Island Railroad in the late 19th century  it was never designed for railroad car clearances but rather street car cleaance. Because of legalistic problems it was not finished by Queens County and was therefore, purchased midway through construction under the direction of August Belmont and its new owner, the IRT, for service under the same clearances which is way too small for today's B divison cars.

 

It will be impossible for B division cars to run through the Steinway tubes despite the fact that the rest of the line is technically built to  BMT division clearances, elevated and underground otherwise, as a condition of the Dual Contracts. The concreted sections and cast iron rings locked in many areas of the tunnels will not allow sufficient clearence for 60' x 9.77' or 75' x 10' cars.

[Vistausss]

... which can be solved by just adjusting the platforms (or installing automatic gap fillers on the trains, under the doors) allowing the (7)'s cars to serve the stations.

[Eric B]

Here's another monkey in the wrench with the / combo - The Steinway Tubes.

 

As originally designed to be operated by the New York & Queens County also the New York & Long Island Railroad in the late 19th century  it was never designed for railroad car clearances but rather street car cleaance. Because of legalistic problems it was not finished by Queens County and was therefore, purchased midway through construction under the direction of August Belmont and its new owner, the IRT, for service under the same clearances which is way too small for today's B divison cars.

 

It will be impossible for B division cars to run through the Steinway tubes despite the fact that the rest of the line is technically built to  BMT division clearances, elevated and underground otherwise, as a condition of the Dual Contracts. The concreted sections and cast iron rings locked in many areas of the tunnels will not allow sufficient clearence for 60' x 9.77' or 75' x 10' cars.

I had said the tubes would have to be completely replaced. That's why it would be phased in, with the line split ( picking up as far as GCT) for several years. 

[NYSubwayBuff]

This would be a sure-fire way to permanently depress subway ridership in Queens for years. The numerous times that the MTA has only run QBP-Main St service during the peak hour have been absolutely horrendous, because QBP and Roosevelt simply do not have the designed capacity to hold that many people. (Roosevelt barely has enough room as it is, and QBP only manages because of the quick cross-platform transfer.)

 

As a cautionary tale, after the Green Line in Chicago was shut down for several months for a full-scale rehab, ridership never recovered to pre-shutdown levels. The same would happen with the , because there is only so much waiting and transferring that people are willing to do. (You'd be asking someone who probably came in from a bus into Flushing, to transfer to the , and then make a third transfer to whatever trunk line they have to get to.) Did you think I was suggesting a shuttle from QBP to Main? When I said the , I meant the line all the way to Whitehall (hence, instead of it going to Astoria. The only shuttle I mentioned was QBP to Vernon Jackson).

So the line would still have full service to Manhttan; only diverted to Bway for a few years.

  Why would u combine the L and 7? The problem I have w/ this is that it would be a pain for those going midtown from canarsie or downtown from main st since the train would have to loop around 11 ave. If it was possible to send the trains through lex and then on to main st it would be easier to combine the 2 and relieve the strain on lex if sending them local. This would require the L to be IRT and there would have to be a shuttle on 14th to make up for lost service. Also switches might have to be built to connect the two corridors to lex.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now FreeIt's not really for through service like that, though it would still benefit those riders going those places who don't feel like getting up and changing (as they do now anyway). It would tie together two isolated lines, (and further justify converting the to B Div). It would also increase capacity on the Williamsburg portion of the line, because the extra service short turned at Myrtle would have another function, and all the terminals (with all the backlog waiting to get into them) would no longer be in Manhattan.

I understand it is not going to be used mich for through service but those people who use it might as well have stops on lex instead of looping around 11ave. Let's say this was created and someone coming from canarsie wants to go GCT they would rather take the 4/5 from 14th instead of taking the 7/L around through 11 ave

 

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now Free

[Eric B]

Not all people. I'm one to take shortcuts like that involving more transfers, but then I find other people I've traveled with don't want to be bothered with that.

 

But yes, I did think it would be nice if there was a shorter loop. Either Lex or maybe even Second Ave. On the Lex, it would be a new line below the existing one, which would also take people off of the current line, who are only going between 14th and 42nd. A new, B Div. Lower level Lex line was also part of an idea I had to tie together the Dual Contracts portions of the IRT so they could be converted, and the original Contract 1 system go back to the original lower East side-crosstown-upper west side alignment.

[realizm]

I had said the tubes would have to be completely replaced. That's why it would be phased in, with the line split ( picking up as far as GCT) for several years. 

 

Sorry about that, oversight on my part.

[Grand Concourse]

I had said the tubes would have to be completely replaced. That's why it would be phased in, with the line split ( picking up as far as GCT) for several years. 

Amen. I've said this many times they need to replace those tunnels. They were meant for trolley cars, not subways. They ran it for 100yrs. I think it's time to build tunnels that can accommodate actual subway cars than to make subway cars accommodate the tunnel. b division cars have better capacity and is what's needed for Flushing. Enough with the 11 car trains crap. Keep it simple with 10 car trains.

 

As for a 7-L 'merge', not a big deal as people who ride say the D or F aren't likely to stay on the train for the whole way. If a person on the 7 needed to get to Canarsie, they'd probably transfer to the G and bypass Manhattan entirely. though I think it'd be easier to just keep them separate since the Javits center stop is going to be a 3 track station.