|
|
| Re: Essex- Before the IND (1244100) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Essex- Before the IND |
|
|
Posted by Handbrake on Sun Aug 25 21:12:42 2013, in response to Re: Essex- Before the IND, posted by randyo on Sun Aug 25 20:30:33 2013. Hyland may have hated the BMT & IRT operators, but on individual alone can not alter policy. Hyland was well on his way out when the third system was being built.Elevated transit lines were targeted for replacement by underground subways. The Manhattan El's had to go in order to develop the east side of Manhattan in the manner that it became today. The problem with transit in NYC was that the automobile won out on available monies that resulted in little to no transit growth while highway construction boomed. The unfortunate fact is that the auto capitalized on the strong post war US economy that existed up until the 1970's. Prior to this our competitors in Europe, and Asia, notably Japan, were still recovering from war devastation. The US had an economic head start after WW2. Unfortunate the auto was in the right place at the right time to shape how we live today at the expense of mass transit, and US railroads. The auto made development of the suburban us landscape take place. The thinking with the dual contracts, and the building of what is known as the IND was based on the predominant transportation mode of the day, rail. In the 1920's NYC still had vast open parcels of land, similar in scope to what suburbia looked like in the 1950's. When NYC filled up, the move was to develop outwardly. The auto became the preferred mode of transportation as US affluence increased post WW2. If memory serves me correct. The IND was built to the same specifications as the BMT. While there was consideration of a subway car that could be universally used on both the IRT and BMT line tunnels, it was eventually determined that the IND would be BMT like in terms of compatibility. The BMT, I believe, was approached to operate the new system, but what turned down the offer. Preliminarily based on not being able to get the fare raised above five cents. Had the BMT did operate what we know as the IND, i suspect that the IND would not have looked much different than what it looked like in 1940. In fact connections between the two systems, assuming that would have been part of the operating deal, would have given NYC line integrations similar to what is in place today. |
|
|
|