|
|
| Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q (1133001) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (1133253) | |
Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jan 19 20:39:19 2012, in response to Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by handbrake on Thu Jan 19 19:48:27 2012. If joint IRT/BMT operation were to take place as was proposed under the original dual contracts, either gantlet track or gap fillers at each station would have to be installed. The reason it was never done was due to conflict between the IRT and the BMT over which company would pay for it. The problem was eventually solved in 1949 by turning the Astoria Line completely over to the BMT and the Flushing Line completely to the IRT. Since the city of NY now operated both lines, it really made no difference which division operated which line since the fares were now all going to the same place. |
|
|
| (1133347) | |
Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Fri Jan 20 03:17:35 2012, in response to Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by R36 #9346 on Thu Jan 19 18:22:57 2012. O.O |
|
|
| (1133486) | |
Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Fri Jan 20 14:01:30 2012, in response to Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by via Pelham on Thu Jan 19 12:14:32 2012. There would be capacity issues in the 60th Street tunnel, which the Flushing trains would have to share with the R. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1133510) | |
Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q |
|
|
Posted by mike nash on Fri Jan 20 14:50:30 2012, in response to Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by SLRT on Fri Jan 20 14:01:30 2012. that can't be done it woood cost to much to convert to/from irt/bmt standard. |
|
|
| (1133563) | |
Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q |
|
|
Posted by shiznit1987 on Fri Jan 20 16:32:40 2012, in response to Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by handbrake on Thu Jan 19 18:26:14 2012. Maybe the PW line of the LIRR could tie into the QB line and run a subway service along the route using the existing stations. |
|
|
| (1133572) | |
Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Fri Jan 20 16:45:17 2012, in response to Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by shiznit1987 on Fri Jan 20 16:32:40 2012. Interesting thought. Is there capacity on the QB line? Where would the southern terminus be? I assume the "subway" service would go no further than Little Neck. How would the "subway" service coexist with PW trains that originate in Nassau County? Where would the connection to the QB line be? |
|
|
| (1133610) | |
Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Fri Jan 20 18:47:24 2012, in response to Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by shiznit1987 on Fri Jan 20 16:32:40 2012. If you were going to turn PW into a subway line, run it along the LIRR row and then follow the new ESA route to the 63rd tunnel upper level. |
|
|
| (1133672) | |
Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jan 21 00:43:00 2012, in response to Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by handbrake on Thu Jan 19 18:26:14 2012. Given the cost of subway construction, even a four track elevated line would have been better than the existing three track elevated mishap into Flushing.In contrast, I'm probably the only person here that thinks the whole four-track network concept is massively over-hyped, and that we needed the commuter networks to step-up in terms of performance to provide the additional capacity and speed for the outlying areas of the city along with additional lines under new corridors*. All of those riders crowding the 7 at Main Street and E and F from Jamaica should really be on the commuter rail networks, not NYCTA. *For the money we blew on the four track Fulton, we could have blown on connecting LIRR from Flatbush into Manhattan. Instead, we blew up a perfectly good el, then cursed the Rockaways with a slow ride to Manhattan, and it's not like the A and C are taxing the capacity of the network there to require four tracks... |
|
|
| (1133674) | |
Re: MTA Officials Face (7) Line Riders At Town Hall Meeting |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Sat Jan 21 01:39:20 2012, in response to Re: MTA Officials Face (7) Line Riders At Town Hall Meeting, posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Jan 19 00:01:19 2012. As for the people at Queens stops west of QBP, the shuttle buses don't seem that badOn paper it doesn't seem bad. In practice, it could be better. It's usually one or two buses, and they're sometimes crowded. That, and the bus stop placement could be improved. And the buses aren't coordinated with the trains. The LIRR could help by running special trains between Long Island City and Flushing. Regularly scheduled service between Penn and Port Washington would continue as normal. |
|
|
| (1133697) | |
Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Jan 21 06:23:14 2012, in response to Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jan 21 00:43:00 2012. <<*For the money we blew on the four track Fulton, we could have blown on connecting LIRR from Flatbush into Manhattan. Instead, we blew up a perfectly good el, then cursed the Rockaways with a slow ride to Manhattan, and it's not like the A and C are taxing the capacity of the network there to require four tracks... >>That very possibly could change if Genting (casino operator) gets what they really want, and that is more direct service from the (A)/(C) to Aqueduct. |
|
|
| (1133698) | |
Re: Building new tunnels for the 7 |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Jan 21 06:31:27 2012, in response to Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by R36 #9346 on Thu Jan 19 18:22:57 2012. If that can be done AND the underground (7) stations can be reconfigured and extended for BMT/IND trains, then what I would be looking to do is move back the Times Square station enough so that it would allow for a connection to/from there in both directions to/from the 8th Avenue (A) express tracks going to 34th Street and beyond. That would give this incarnation a connection to Penn Station and lower Manhattan from the Flushing Line. |
|
|
| (1133727) | |
Think Outside of the Box |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 21 10:20:28 2012, in response to Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by PATHman on Thu Jan 19 11:13:48 2012. To speed up service on the (7) <7> trains during the AM rush takethe 7 Express out of service after reaching Times Square. Run them "OUT OF SERVICE" to Hunters Point, passing all stations. After Hunters Point, send them none stop on the LIRR Port Washington line to the Corona Yard for Layup , maybe some for a return run to Manhattan as a 7 Express. Reverse the process in the PM Rush. I'm just sayin...... |
|
|
| (1133836) | |
Re: Think Outside of the Box |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 21 15:04:18 2012, in response to Think Outside of the Box, posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 21 10:20:28 2012. Great Idea! |
|
|
| (1133848) | |
Re: Think Outside of the Box |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Jan 21 15:29:40 2012, in response to Think Outside of the Box, posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 21 10:20:28 2012. Problem with FRA regulatiomns. |
|
|
| (1133849) | |
Re: Think Outside of the Box |
|
|
Posted by BLE-NIMX on Sat Jan 21 15:33:36 2012, in response to Re: Think Outside of the Box, posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 21 15:04:18 2012. Yeah. Plugging an 80+ MPH railroad with a train barely making 50 is like putting the Sperry Rail Car in front of the Acela |
|
|
| (1133864) | |
Re: Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Jan 21 15:56:26 2012, in response to Flip Flopping the 7 and N/Q, posted by PATHman on Thu Jan 19 11:13:48 2012. The whole elevated line needs to be relocated to the yards area...from hunters point..a massive station TOGETHER with the LIRR,and a connection to the 63rd st tunnel for the Astoria line. |
|
|
| (1133867) | |
Re: Think Outside of the Box |
|
|
Posted by Fisk ave Jim on Sat Jan 21 16:01:30 2012, in response to Re: Think Outside of the Box, posted by BLE-NIMX on Sat Jan 21 15:33:36 2012. MAS on the Port Washington branch between Harold & Corona is nowhere near 80. |
|
|
| (1133925) | |
Re: Think Outside of the Box |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 21 19:48:09 2012, in response to Re: Think Outside of the Box, posted by Fisk ave Jim on Sat Jan 21 16:01:30 2012. Perhaps we headed with one of those Diesels with the compatible Couplers, and they get dragged there.Something like Staten Island. I'm looking for an unused or little used route to the same place. Those hours should be low traffic in that direction. These things will be going against the heavy flow. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
