|
|
| Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) (1134929) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
|
| (1135414) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Jan 28 08:09:00 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by tunnelrat on Fri Jan 27 11:04:25 2012. That is correct. The provision for making the station two island platforms was left, but nothing was ever built. |
|
|
| (1135421) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 28 08:50:54 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Jan 28 08:07:10 2012. Location, Location, Location.Broad St, and Fulton St. are beneath a very narrow street with buildings almost to the curbs. Platform lengthening would most likely take basement space. What is in those spaces? If the platforms are ever lengthened, they should go to 660 Ft. I do agree with the use of this line as part of S.A.S. J.I.C. avid |
|
|
| (1135488) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sat Jan 28 16:48:38 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Edwards! on Sat Jan 28 03:02:20 2012. If we dont jump into building complete useable sections of the SAS..we might never get it.Agreed. The idea to tie it into Montague St. is probably the most doable for interborough service. However, I'd still rather have my cake and eat it too - service to South Ferry to augment/replace the M15 as the SF/East Side route, AND a new tunnel to Governor's Island/Staten Island and maybe even Brooklyn as well. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1135490) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Jan 28 17:00:10 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms, posted by Avid Reader on Fri Jan 27 16:03:31 2012. It also would have been a transfer point between the express and the local when that was used. |
|
|
| (1135491) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Jan 28 17:00:58 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 28 08:50:54 2012. They did the entire IRT and BMT lengthening the platforms, I don't see how those few stations would be any different. |
|
|
| (1135505) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jan 28 17:56:15 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Edwards! on Fri Jan 27 22:21:45 2012. they should build the short line from Grand to South ferry..at least it will provide a tie in to the 6th avenue line to lower Manhattan..something we don't have today.A fellow railfan and I came up with this as an alternative project to the South Ferry replacement and Fulton Street. Mind you, I'm biased due to personal reasons to seeing such a project happen, but given what we blew the money on, I suspect that this extension is probably a better use of resources. At the time, because the V was running, we would have argued for some switches for the V to switch from the local to the express tracks, follow express tracks to Grand, and then build switches for an expanded four track station. Of course, it would have been nice to have that work coincide with Manhattan Bridge repair work... |
|
|
| (1135523) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 28 18:26:20 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Jan 28 17:00:58 2012. They can not platform 10 Car trains on the Eastern Division Els.When the "A' crawled into the sun from Grand Ave to Hudson Ave on Liberty Ave, All of the Liberty Ave Platforms from BMT Dual Contracts needed lengthening to platform 10 car "A" and "E" trains. |
|
|
| (1135543) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sat Jan 28 20:06:37 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 28 18:26:20 2012. And the Culver platforms over McDonald Ave were also lengthened. It can be done from Essex to Metropolitan, if they really wanted to! Plus, no more whining about too short 8 car "M" trains on 53rd Street! |
|
|
| (1135556) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Jan 28 21:16:56 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 28 18:26:20 2012. yes, and in the 60s, prepping for Chrystie, the plats along B'way in Manhattan were lengthened. |
|
|
| (1135576) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms |
|
|
Posted by N6 Limited on Sat Jan 28 22:28:07 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms, posted by Avid Reader on Fri Jan 27 16:03:31 2012. I think they're talking about 7th ave Culver. |
|
|
| (1135579) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Jan 28 22:37:03 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by 3-9 on Sat Jan 28 16:48:38 2012. The SI tunnel will never be built..unless the FEDS step up to build it.This tunnel is of great importance,which is why its taking so long for it to be constructed.. it would have to built with two levels like the 63rd st line..due to the much needed freight traffic not being able to directly access the city from new Jersey without trucks or car float.. 10 BILLION is alot of money for this route..but in the long run.it will be a vital link to the development of our transportation system and our city..especially Staten Island.. The SAS "tail tracks" are planned to run very deep under South Ferry,out into the Bay..where it would end abruptly at a rock wall.. My idea for that would be to continue the tunneling to Brooklyn to Atlantic avenue..continuing under that street to the Flatbush Terminal..where a track connection could be made to the IND CROSSTOWN or IND FULTON ST line and the LIRR. Using the Crosstown would increase its importance..giving it direct access to lower,Midtown and the upper regions of Manhattan..with the obvious links to the Bronx and Queens if the new station Complex is built in the Sunnyside Yards area for the LIRR/ NJ TRANSIT and NYCT The Fulton street branch is of course to divert the locals from the Cranberry st tunnel up second avenue..moving Fulton service to the East side..OR up water st to GRAND..to west fourth..back to 8th avenue. just saying.. |
|
|
| (1135582) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sat Jan 28 22:56:51 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Edwards! on Sat Jan 28 22:37:03 2012. And destroy Bob Diamond's historical tunnel- Never! Better idea- connect the SAS south of Wall St with a tunnel under Vietnam Vets Park, under the East River, to Pierrepont St in Brooklyn. Then right on Clinton, left on Schermerhorn to the Court St station (Yea, move the museum!) and into Hoyt/Schermerhorn. Or, Plan B, same tunnel to Pierrepont St, under the Civic center, to a terminal under Jay/Metrotech. There, transfers could be made to the A, C, F, and R. |
|
|
| (1135589) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Jan 28 23:30:34 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Avid Reader on Sat Jan 28 18:26:20 2012. They can not platform 10 Car trains on the Eastern Division Els.I know that, what do the Els on the Eastern Division have to do with this? When the "A' crawled into the sun from Grand Ave to Hudson Ave on Liberty Ave, All of the Liberty Ave Platforms from BMT Dual Contracts needed lengthening to platform 10 car "A" and "E" trains. Yes, the the entire BMT was lengthened. We know the Eastern Division wasn't done (that's the whole point of talking about having to lengthen the Nassau stations if the SAS was to go there. Since they did the whole rest of the BMT without trouble (as well as IRT stations having been extended too), I don't see why the Nassau stations would be any more trouble then any of the rest of the BMT was. |
|
|
| (1135592) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Handbrake on Sat Jan 28 23:41:33 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Jan 27 13:20:37 2012. The IND segment along the Grand Concourse in The Bronx is probably the most overbuilt in terms of station mezzanines and other passageway anxieties. With many of the mezzanines and passageways closed off due to high crime, and TA maintenance expense. The IND Concourse line is truly Grand in terms of its construction. |
|
|
| (1135593) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Jan 28 23:58:59 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Elkeeper on Sat Jan 28 22:56:51 2012. yup...!whatever ..fact is we know,[and im sure the MTA does also] that we need ever single mile of new subway that can be built. |
|
|
| (1135595) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jan 29 00:10:47 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Jan 28 23:30:34 2012. the stations that MIGHT be a problem is Myrtle/Broadway and Metropolitan avenue..and of course the subway stations along Centre/Nassau sts. |
|
|
| (1135610) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jan 29 02:09:43 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Elkeeper on Sat Jan 28 22:56:51 2012. Nah, I'm still against reopening Court St as a pasenger station. It's only 2-3 blocks away from Borough Hall. I would rather go under Court St, then ramp up and meet the local tracks before Hoyt St. |
|
|
| (1135614) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jan 29 02:14:11 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Edwards! on Sat Jan 28 22:37:03 2012. Agreed, getting rid of the choke point west of Hoyt would be a help. |
|
|
| (1135657) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Sun Jan 29 10:40:25 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Edwards! on Sun Jan 29 00:10:47 2012. Go all of the way to Jamaica Center with the platform extensions.NO MORE EIGHT CAR LIMITATIONS! |
|
|
| (1135663) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jan 29 10:58:16 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms, posted by randyo on Fri Jan 27 15:14:05 2012. My 1948 Hagstrom's IND map shows the Heaving Harry operating between Court St. (two years after it was abandoned, no less) and ENY. |
|
|
| (1135701) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sun Jan 29 14:01:23 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jan 29 10:58:16 2012. My great uncle's 1954 pocket map of Brooklyn still showed the Myrtle Ave el going to Park Row. and my 1972 hagstrom's map of the 5 boroughs still showed the Bridge-Jay station of the Myrtle Ave el on the downtown Brooklyn page. I'm sure that others here have plenty of examples of maps with abandoned trolleys and els still showing. |
|
|
| (1135705) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sun Jan 29 14:17:09 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by 3-9 on Sun Jan 29 02:09:43 2012. With the A and C tracks turning from Schermerhorn to go north to Jay/Metrotech and the G tracks going south from Schermerhorn to Smith St. Plus, the unused tracks from Hoyt to Court? Ain't gonna happen! My plan uses the existing and unused tracks from Court Street. Rumor has it that's why the Court St spur was built- for future expansion! |
|
|
| (1135717) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by tunnelrat on Sun Jan 29 15:13:23 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Elkeeper on Sun Jan 29 14:17:09 2012. no rumor,its in black & white. |
|
|
| (1135724) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 15:35:55 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms, posted by N6 Limited on Sat Jan 28 22:28:07 2012. There are 3 7 Av stations on the NYCTS. If they are to be discussed, then the location of the one or ones in question must be specified. |
|
|
| (1135727) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 15:38:59 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jan 29 10:58:16 2012. That would probably be the pocket edition of the one I mentioned as being in some of the R-1/9 subway cars. It could be possible that once the subway opened all the way to Euclid, the B of T planned on reintroducing the service as described and then changed its mind. |
|
|
| (1135730) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 15:44:12 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Jan 28 21:16:56 2012. Actually, the platform lengthenings in Manhattan and along 4 Av in Bkln didn't start until after Chrystie opened. When Chrystie opened in 1967, the only BMT platforms capable of accommodating 10 car rains were those on the Brighton Line. In the event of a reroute over any of the other lines only the first 5 cars of a rerouted train could open at the first station on the "foreign" line and passengers would then have to be discharged and the train run light. |
|
|
| (1135735) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 15:57:37 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Edwards! on Sun Jan 29 00:10:47 2012. If the express stations on the Culver and West End lines were no problem, then Bway/Myrtle should be no trouble. The switches at Met would have to be moved since even prior to reconstruction, that was about the only station on the BMT other than Franklin Shuttle stations that couldn't even hold a full 8 car train of steels. Chambers on the Nassau Line may present a problem depending on how far back towards Canal St the platform can be extended since it can't be extended towards Broad St due to the curve at the immediate end of the station. FUlton has its own issues due to the narrowness of the street and the tight building line. At one point, Walder had proposed extending IRT Platforms to hold 12 car trains, especially on Lex, but that line also has issues since Grand Central is sandwiched between curves at both ends of the station. Chambers St on the 7 Av line would also present a problem since when it was extended to accommodate full 10 car R type trains, the south end of the platform had to be split and the north end is close to the switches. 96 St has a similar problem but in that case, the S/E of the station has a staircase the entire width of the platform as does Times Sq at the north end. Both those stations have issues with switches at the opposite ends of the platform from the staircases. |
|
|
| (1135736) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 15:59:44 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by tunnelrat on Sun Jan 29 15:13:23 2012. Correct! |
|
|
| (1135737) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 16:03:29 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Handbrake on Sat Jan 28 23:41:33 2012. Except for its lack of an additional express track. |
|
|
| (1135740) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sun Jan 29 16:07:48 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 15:59:44 2012. thank you! Hope you guys like my Pierrepont St tunnel idea! |
|
|
| (1135746) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Sun Jan 29 16:43:26 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Elkeeper on Sat Jan 28 22:56:51 2012. Unfortunately, Pierrepont St. residents would never allow that and many of them are rich with connections. |
|
|
| (1135766) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sun Jan 29 17:54:08 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Wado MP73 on Sun Jan 29 16:43:26 2012. Wealthier than the ones on 2nd Ave, on the upper East Side? |
|
|
| (1135771) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Sun Jan 29 18:09:48 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Edwards! on Sat Jan 28 22:37:03 2012. The SI tunnel will never be built..unless the FEDS step up to build it. This tunnel is of great importance,which is why its taking so long for it to be constructed.. it would have to built with two levels like the 63rd st line..due to the much needed freight traffic not being able to directly access the city from new Jersey without trucks or car float..How would a tunnel from lower manhattan to Staten Island be able to address the freight issue? I do agree with your idea though. Activate the North shore SIR and build a new underground station @ St. George. Run the tunnel under the narrows to the Bay ridge line. Connect the line to the LL of the culver/crosstown line at Church. And why does it need to be double level? Build Rapid transit cars that can mix with freight and subway cars. It will make a lot more options feasible for the outerboroughs. |
|
|
| (1135772) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jan 29 18:20:11 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 15:44:12 2012. Interesting! That explains why I always expected N, B, and probably RR trains as being 8 cars (as a kid), but when I actually checked much later on, they were 10. |
|
|
| (1135775) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jan 29 18:24:48 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Elkeeper on Sun Jan 29 14:17:09 2012. No, I mean use part of the unused tracks from Court to Hoyt, the rest being used for the transit exhibit with a single connection to keep the exhibit connected to the system. Court St. is so close to Borough Hall, it's pretty useless, unless a free transfer is contructed. |
|
|
| (1135785) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 18:56:07 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by 3-9 on Sun Jan 29 18:20:11 2012. No probably about it. My first solo run as a M/M in 1968 was an 8 car RR. Even into the early 1970s as a M/M and T/D I dealt with 8 car Bs also. |
|
|
| (1135791) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jan 29 19:12:44 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 18:56:07 2012. Wowsers ... another reason why I'm glad I worked the IND. We got 10 cars, so we had more working motors. RR was a good run for rookies - you didn't really have to be anywhere on time. :) |
|
|
| (1135794) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jan 29 19:37:30 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jan 29 19:12:44 2012. The R/RR gets no respect 8-). |
|
|
| (1135797) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Sun Jan 29 19:46:14 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms, posted by Avid Reader on Fri Jan 27 16:03:31 2012. 7Th Ave on 53Rd St between 7th Ave and 6Th Ave.Double level station , island Platforms. MANHATTAN |
|
|
| (1135800) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jan 29 19:50:42 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by 3-9 on Sun Jan 29 19:37:30 2012. I imagine it would if it had to share its run. But lines that don't affect other ones are a good place to get your chops together when you come out. I got thrown on the D which had little room for error. |
|
|
| (1135810) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jan 29 20:31:58 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Jan 28 17:00:10 2012. 7th avenue was a planned transfer point for the PLANNED Bay Ridge/Staten Island routes[three branch lines,local and express].. |
|
|
| (1135834) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jan 29 22:02:25 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by J trainloco on Sun Jan 29 18:09:48 2012. I believe you misunderstood a portion of my suggestion,which is okay.I was pointing out how the SAS tail tracks would extend out under the bay just a bit.. Instead of ending it there..why not continue the line to the Atlantic terminal,but with a few more options..like the Crosstown or the Fulton. I don't believe a tunnel to SI from Manhattan would be "cost effective"...WHICH IS WHY I suggested the line could be routed through Brooklyn as originally pointed out in the second system plan of 1939.. Also,the SAS could be routed through NJ along Jersey City to Bayonne,then across the Kill Van Kull to Saint George. The reason as to why I said the Narrows Tunnel should be built like the 63rd st line is simple enough..keeping the FRA out of this. Overall..I think if sections can be built..a bit at a time..eventually we'll get the whole shebang one day if the funding can be found.I seriously recommend the Water st route from Grand street[double crossover or double decked like the Smith street line with ramps between each levels].. In any case,something must be done and I dont see why the earlier studies cant be included.. |
|
|
| (1135835) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jan 29 22:05:53 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by 3-9 on Sun Jan 29 02:14:11 2012. a BIG help indeed. |
|
|
| (1135839) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Jan 29 22:25:15 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Elkeeper on Sun Jan 29 17:54:08 2012. Probably. That's a pretty rich area. |
|
|
| (1135884) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jan 30 04:49:36 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms, posted by randyo on Sun Jan 29 15:35:55 2012. The context here made it somewhat clear. |
|
|
| (1135920) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Mon Jan 30 09:44:42 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Elkeeper on Sun Jan 29 17:54:08 2012. There are four, five-stories buildings that are one-family houses. So it compares more to the 60s between Fifth and Madison. That's how rich the wealthier on that street are. |
|
|
| (1135954) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Jan 30 13:26:28 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jan 29 19:12:44 2012. Sometimes even ten cars wasn't enough to make it over the bridge. Everybody out and push!:) |
|
|
| (1135955) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Mon Jan 30 13:26:47 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by Edwards! on Sun Jan 29 22:02:25 2012. I understand. For what it's worth, I have heard proposals to extend the SIR to lower manhattan via governor's island. You fund it with a public-private partnership where you let a private developer buy most of Governor's Island and then use the money for the construction of the subway. Not a bad idea in my estimation.Right now, i'm doubtful that even the SAS will get fully built, much less anything else. But I would like to see a re-purposing of some underused ROWs. If the SIR North Shore Line is rectivated in full, then you could use it as the cross harbor freight tunnel. I get what you're saying about double leveling such a tunnel to avoid interference with the FRA, but I would rather see some sort of arrangement where an effective PTC were implemented and freight and a new type of subway/commuter hybrid car were purchased to keep costs down. Where feasible, freight would be kept on its own tracks, but where that's not possible, trains would share the tracks. Using this system, you COULD implement: 1. The Triboro RX plan, including continuing across the narrows to SI and running on the north shore. This would connect the outerboroughs. 2. Connect the RX coming from SI to the lower level of crosstown at church ave, and run it through Rutgers to manhattan via the Culver/crosstown express tracks. 3. Repurpose the LIRR Far Rock branch between Laurelton and Jamaica as subway. 4. Build the "super express" along the outerboroughs, with limited stations east of Metropolitan. Still need to figure out how that might tie into a manhattan trunk though. 5. Link the Atlantic branch of the LIRR into this system, and connect it to the Montague tunnel. The outerboros would see significantly more coverage throughout, and it could be done far more cost effectively than brand new lines. |
|
|
| (1135965) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Jan 30 13:50:49 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by J trainloco on Mon Jan 30 13:26:47 2012. Ultra cool..I pushed for a "hybrid car" long ago..one that could operate using both the LIRR and subway routes..integrating the two systems. |
|
|
| (1135979) | |
Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND) |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Mon Jan 30 14:48:02 2012, in response to Re: Euclid Ave Platforms (Back to 1904 with Post-War IND), posted by J trainloco on Mon Jan 30 13:26:47 2012. I suck.For item 4, that should say "build the super express along the Lower Montauk..." |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
