|
|
| Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line (1155336) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue May 8 15:13:35 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue May 8 08:42:36 2012. I noticed a few errors in the reactivation study. First, it seems that whoever prepared the report was unaware of the partially completed tunnel sections already in place N/O 63 Dr on the IND subway since he/she refers to new construction from Woodhaven Blvd station. The report also states that the NYCTA purchased the property from the LIRR when in fact at the time, all subway purchases were done by the city of NY with the NYCTA merely being the operator but not the owner. Another error is the timeline between the LIRR abandonment of the branch and the city takeover. At the moment, I'm not sure of the exact year but I believe it was around 1952 which, by the way was before the creation of the NYCTA.If the takeover was in 1955 as the report indicated, there would not have been sufficient time for the city to remove the remains of the burned out LIRR trestle, create the landfill and build the completely new bridges in time for the IND opening of the Rockaway Line in the summer of 1956. Also, the photo of the A train crossing over the LIRR which supposedly dates from 1948 is definitely misdated since the A train did not start operating to Lefferts until 1956 and even if one could infer that the R-10 train in the photo was one of the ones assigned to the BMT (which didn't happen until the early 1950s), that would be highly unlikely since in 1948 when the R-10s were brand new they would have still shown the 2 tone grey paint scheme which would still be visible in a B/W photo and not the dark grey steel dust color evident in the photo. Additionally, before the IND connection was built, the only access to the Liberty Av portion of the Fulton el would nave been over the unrebuilt section of the el between Penna Av and Crescent St which would not have been able to sustain the weight of R-10s anyhow. I also think that although the "1948" photo is supposed to be looking south, It is more likely looking north since there wouldn't have been sufficient room between Liberty Av and the point where the IND tracks join the ROW for the number of LIRR cars that are in the photo. Also in several places in the report, mention is made of differences between LIRR specs and MTA specs apparently ignoring the fact that the LIRR is a constituent agency of the MTA. While I appreciate the efforts of individuals who wish to advocate what is or could be in the public interest, I should think that they would do their research more thoroughly so that their credibility would be so impeccable as to be difficult if not impossible to compromise. |
|
|
|