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.
Around the Horn

Bay Ridge area politicians call for split R train

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, bulk88 said:

1968 Plan For Action which involved converting northern half of Pelham line to Div B, Whitlock Avenue going north, to go down NEC to Oak Point yard to SAS, but the 6 train stub that ended at Hunts Point Avenue would deadhead with Div A stock to Westchester Yard every day down the now Div B Pelham express El track.

Those are very different (💩) ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 7/1/2019 at 4:22 PM, bulk88 said:

WillyB was built with SIX tracks. Right now it has two tracks.

https://cdn.newsday.com/polopoly_fs/1.10694988.1439322907!/httpImage/image.JPG_gen/derivatives/display_960/image.JPG

I've heard of a napkin proposal to rebuild from Marcy to Myrtle to be 4 tracks. J train skips Marcy and Flushing Ave after Myrtle making the J faster for eastern riders. Deinterlining M and J except for going over the bridge (balloon loop).  Lorimer and Hewes are closed/combined/rebuilt into a Union Ave, ADA, transfer to G, 2 island new express stop. Flushing Ave has an express track built over the current express track. Myrtle either has a separate M platforms or Islands. Possibly stacked islands (think Queensboro Plaza). Essex Street is rebuilt to 4 tracks so M and J never have a conflict for a platform. There already is a little bit of balloon loop operations already at Essex Street with how M will wait doors open at Essex taking on additional customers while a J passes infront onto WillyB. MacArthur, 12 street ,19 street BART has something similar. 

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rail_Tracks_map_pattern_24A.svg

 

An example of balloon looping or simultaneous loading, but most metros that do that only do it for the merge (3 tracks) not for split direction for cost reasons. Since train separation distance is 10-15 seconds, platform dwell time becomes highest capacity limit, not ATP. ^^^^ track layout allows huge dwell times without affecting TPH.

If all this were to happen, may as well bury the Jamaica Line under Broadway so Bushwick and Bed-Stuy lose an eyesore viaduct.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Lex said:

Those are very different (💩) ideas.

But the proposal of Flushing Line converted to Div B with Main Street being destination of either N/W/Q, and leaving Queensboro Plaza to 34 Hudson Yards with Steinway Tubes as Div A, means the IRT Flushing line stub will deadhead to corona yard over Div B tracks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bulk88 said:

But the proposal of Flushing Line converted to Div B with Main Street being destination of either N/W/Q, and leaving Queensboro Plaza to 34 Hudson Yards with Steinway Tubes as Div A, means the IRT Flushing line stub will deadhead to corona yard over Div B tracks.

And that's all they have in common.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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