Jump to content

Triboro Subway Line


7 Densha Master

Recommended Posts

As continuously mentioned there are ideas out to use an old freight line to connect the Bronx, Queens, and Brooklyn to give more connections towards subway lines in the outer boroughs. Currently known as "Triboro X Line" it will connect to all except for 3 subway lines. The route since the majority of the route is essentially built already only stations and 3rd rail would have to be installed. However certain sections of the planned route only singles track and curves are extremely sharp leaving no availability for B division trains to be used leaving only 2 options: Return the 8 train and have 11 car trains operate the route or option 2 would be to have it operate as a light railway line. Your thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


If the tracks can run mainline stock, it can run BMT stock. To be honest, it should just run adapted mainline stock, since there is absolutely no operational benefit for interlining subway trains on the Triboro RX.

 

The main issue is that you would need to quadruple track in certain sections that don't have space for that right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if you did it as a 12-car train running 630 feet or so? Would that work if you had to use IRT cars on such a line?

Any new subway construction dating back to the Dual Contracts is automatically built to B division specs. Only time you would see a new A division line is an extension of a pre-existing one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every time this is brought up there seems to be this notion that it would be "easy" to build because there is already railroad right-of-way for most of the route. 

 

While the construction costs would be cheaper than Second Ave Subway - and I don't think you're going to see a 500 million per station cost for above ground stations - there are some serious hurdles here. 

 

North of metropolitan ave the line would follow the CSX fremont secondary. If you were to use existing tracks and trackways, you would be interlining with freight service. Currently, trains on the line are run under Yard rule and can't exceed like, 15mph. So, you'd have to get CSX on board with sharing the line, and you'd have to signal it such for both classes of train, and you'd have to set it up so the freight service can share tracks without severely disrupting service. 

 

Theoretically this isn't insurmountable, but you're not talking about a standard subway line. It would basically be a Railroad operating as a Rapid Transit line. Now, the MTA does this in Staten Island, so - theoretically possible. But quite challenging. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we keep having these conversations and the same points keep getting brought up. IT's post is basically the issues of this service in a nut shell. CSX and Amtrak would need to be on board or this will not work, period, end of story. 

 

And wally, I keep telling you, no subway trains can be longer than the current B division standard. Contract rules. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we keep having these conversations and the same points keep getting brought up. IT's post is basically the issues of this service in a nut shell. CSX and Amtrak would need to be on board or this will not work, period, end of story. 

 

And wally, I keep telling you, no subway trains can be longer than the current B division standard. Contract rules. 

The Southern end of the Line is LIRR correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Things on paper (like rules and regulations) can be modified or bent at will given enough support. What we should be worried about instead are the physical impediments. I notice that the right-of-way is almost always 4 to 6 tracks wide. That's basically from observing the southwestern Brooklyn portion of the line. I don't know about the right-of-way east of the Brighton line, but in general, railroad right-of-ways are wider than they need to be. At Watkins Glen State Park, for example, a railroad owned by Norfolk Southern runs overhead. I went up to take pictures, and while there was only a single track in sight, the bridge structure carrying the tracks over the water was capable of supporting 2. The land around that single track appeared to be able to support 3 more tracks given the extra space between the track and the trees around it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ROW has room for 4 tracks on most of the Brooklyn end. And at least 3 til the BQE crossing. Worst case 2 for service and one for freight. MTA owns the southern end. The line for the most wouldn't tie in with any other subway lines besides transfers. FRA could give a waver i.e. SIRT or PATH worst case you end service on the Queens side near or at LGA. and work something out with CSX. Its a doable plan. Solid Eastern end option from Brooklyn to Queens 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the purpose of the Triboro Rx (to connect radial lines in the outer boroughs), and the advantageous alignment relative to the Belt Parkway or the Brooklyn–Queens Expressway, such a line would serve a passenger anywhere in the middle of Brooklyn or Queens better than any highway. There would be no need to drive along local streets to destinations or to drive through local streets to get to the highway. The Triboro Rx would win hands down in any speed competition.

 

The ROW has room for 4 tracks on most of the Brooklyn end. And at least 3 til the BQE crossing. Worst case 2 for service and one for freight. MTA owns the southern end. The line for the most wouldn't tie in with any other subway lines besides transfers. FRA could give a waver i.e. SIRT or PATH worst case you end service on the Queens side near or at LGA. and work something out with CSX. Its a doable plan. Solid Eastern end option from Brooklyn to Queens

A tie-in with any existing or planned line would be counterproductive given the purpose of the Triboro Rx. All the existing lines that the Triboro Rx could possibly connect to cater to Manhattan. I'd modify the RPA's suggested alignment a bit, and have it run perpendicular to all the other lines in the Bronx. The Second Avenue Subway can take care of the gaps in between the Manhattan feeder lines.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the purpose of the Triboro Rx (to connect radial lines in the outer boroughs), and the advantageous alignment relative to the Belt Parkway or the Brooklyn–Queens Expressway, such a line would serve a passenger anywhere in the middle of Brooklyn or Queens better than any highway. There would be no need to drive along local streets to destinations or to drive through local streets to get to the highway. The Triboro Rx would win hands down in any speed competition.

A tie-in with any existing or planned line would be counterproductive given the purpose of the Triboro Rx. All the existing lines that the Triboro Rx could possibly connect to cater to Manhattan. I'd modify the RPA's suggested alignment a bit, and have it run perpendicular to all the other lines in the Bronx. The Second Avenue Subway can take care of the gaps in between the Manhattan feeder lines.

 

Just saw the RPA plan. The Hell gate would defenetly be a challenge you'd have to have shared trackage Either with freight or the NEC. The cars for this line would have to be modified for higher speeds? Do you think it would be easier to parallel the NEC to Co-Op City?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we keep having these conversations and the same points keep getting brought up. IT's post is basically the issues of this service in a nut shell. CSX and Amtrak would need to be on board or this will not work, period, end of story. 

 

And wally, I keep telling you, no subway trains can be longer than the current B division standard. Contract rules. 

Obviously, they would have to get a waiver for something like this if it can't be built to B divisions standards and would have to use IRT-sized cars so such trains can be long enough (in this, 12-car IRT trains).  In a perfect world, they would be able to use B-division sized cars on it so it can be 10 card and a nice, tidy 600' but apparently it may not be possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously, they would have to get a waiver for something like this if it can't be built to B divisions standards and would have to use IRT-sized cars so such trains can be long enough (in this, 12-car IRT trains).  In a perfect world, they would be able to use B-division sized cars on it so it can be 10 card and a nice, tidy 600' but apparently it may not be possible.

Why do you think they couldn't use B division cars?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously, they would have to get a waiver for something like this if it can't be built to B divisions standards and would have to use IRT-sized cars so such trains can be long enough (in this, 12-car IRT trains). In a perfect world, they would be able to use B-division sized cars on it so it can be 10 card and a nice, tidy 600' but apparently it may not be possible.

Once again, any and every new subway construction since the Dual Contracts have and will be built to B Division standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where the Triboro Rx right-of-way meets the Brooklyn–Queens Expressway, the subway tracks would ramp up over the Brooklyn–Queens Expressway and run along the median. There shouldn't be any complaints since the cars would be louder than any train running over the expressway in any case. In that area, the Triboro Rx would have a transfer to the (7) at 69 Street and the (M)(R) at 65 Street. The Triboro Rx would continue along the Brooklyn–Queens Expressway until Astoria Boulevard, where it switches over to the Grand Central Parkway towards Randall's Island. It would have convenient transfer to the (N)(Q) at Astoria Boulevard before heading over Randall's Island and to the Bronx where the right-of-way is definitely wide enough to host a subway above (if not alongside) the railroad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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