|
|
| Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay (1139360) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
|
| (1139373) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by The Silence on Mon Feb 13 22:29:04 2012, in response to Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Feb 13 21:28:15 2012. Who here would like to take Ms. Crawford on a tour of the ESA or SAS project?Acutal new rail lines being built in this economy. We're talking about an old line that would simply be refurbished back to service. Into what kind of serivce doesn't eaxctly matter right now, we can hammer out those details later. |
|
|
| (1139389) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 13 23:40:41 2012, in response to Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Feb 13 21:28:15 2012. Deuling douches pandering for votes with public money.All of you.....shut up. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1139393) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Mon Feb 13 23:45:41 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 13 23:40:41 2012. Some rail fan you are. |
|
|
| (1139394) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by N6 Limited on Mon Feb 13 23:51:39 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by The Silence on Mon Feb 13 22:29:04 2012. Referbished yes. Railroad service? No. They should connect it to the Queens Blvd Line. Who's going to use it with LIRR's expensive fares? |
|
|
| (1139402) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by andy on Tue Feb 14 00:21:12 2012, in response to Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Feb 13 21:28:15 2012. Makes more sense to attach this route to the IND Queens Blvd. line just east (north operationally) of 63rd Drive. Turnouts are already built into the tunnel walls in both directions. Some M or R trains could be sent all the way to Rockaway. Only current IND stations that get less service are 67th Avenue and 71st Avenue. |
|
|
| (1139416) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 01:13:55 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by N6 Limited on Mon Feb 13 23:51:39 2012. Right! |
|
|
| (1139420) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 01:20:26 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by andy on Tue Feb 14 00:21:12 2012. |
|
|
| (1139423) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 14 01:30:23 2012, in response to Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Feb 13 21:28:15 2012. Crawford is not thinking about rail,she thinking about the profit this trail is going to bring to the property owner along it and herself.buses will just increase the traffic on the city streets..but since she drives,she couldnt care less about transit. this is your classic example of NIMBY THINKING selfishly placing their own ahead of the greater good. |
|
|
| (1139426) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Tue Feb 14 01:39:02 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 14 01:30:23 2012. Fuck Crawford and her Bull shit Queensway. Stupid whore. LOL!!! |
|
|
| (1139432) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 14 02:02:18 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Tue Feb 14 01:39:02 2012. I kinda agree..do something useful with the line,instead of pandering to the bullshit..one way or another..they are looking for money from either the government..or the state...or from the investor..practically ANYONE with a deal sweet enough to shut them up.It's all a game. |
|
|
| (1139438) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by The Silence on Tue Feb 14 02:23:19 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by N6 Limited on Mon Feb 13 23:51:39 2012. Into what kind of serivce doesn't eaxctly matter right now, we can hammer out those details later.Right now, our concern should be killing Queensway, not if this line will be seeing R160s or M7s or LRVs or whatever. We can worry about what's going to run once we can be sure SOMETHING is going to be running in the first place. One friggen step at a time. |
|
|
| (1139439) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by The Silence on Tue Feb 14 02:30:23 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 01:13:55 2012. There are simpler solutions that don't invole compeltly screwing up the Broadway BMT. |
|
|
| (1139440) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 14 02:30:29 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by The Silence on Tue Feb 14 02:23:19 2012. correct..The focus MUST be ABOUT KILLING this foolish fantasy. |
|
|
| (1139441) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 14 02:32:03 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 01:13:55 2012. forget about it.leave the bway line alone.. it works fine..but needs its Astoria to lower Manhattan train back. |
|
|
| (1139455) | |
Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 04:11:45 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by The Silence on Tue Feb 14 02:30:23 2012. The problem is, Genting likely would want any new QB-Rockaway line to include stops in the Financial District. Since it would be impractical to switch the (E) and (R) as express/local and have the (E) go to Rockaway Park, reviving the (W) would be the next best option. Otherwise, I would have the (M) do it.Also, failed to note in the last post that the (G) would also return to operating to 71st-Continental with the (M), with both the (G) and (M) during rush hours extended to 179th Street while during rush hours, the (F) is express on its entire route. |
|
|
| (1139456) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 04:13:26 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 14 02:30:29 2012. Absolutely, and this Convention Center may very well be what does it! |
|
|
| (1139485) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Tue Feb 14 09:36:55 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by The Silence on Tue Feb 14 02:23:19 2012. Well, you can't very well build something if you don't know what you're building. The subway and LIRR may use physically similar track and third rail, but the signalling is very different, and the voltage on the third rail is now different as well. Not to mention who would pay for the construction and the workers doing it. For the city to make a decision for rail in the rail-vs.-trail question, I think they would first want there to be one definite plan, not "we'll decide that later". |
|
|
| (1139487) | |
Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Tue Feb 14 09:59:09 2012, in response to Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 04:11:45 2012. You are putting words into Genting's mouth.You don't know what he wants. Those are your ideas. Genting wants warm bodies without time constraints. That would be tourists and business people with time on their hands. People in the Financial District have WORK to do during the work day. You confuse the product of the FINANCIAL DISTRICT with it being available for unfettered use at a casino. Your premise is WRONG. Access from MIDTOWN and the rest of the Metropolitan Area is what is needed. |
|
|
| (1139510) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Feb 14 12:17:04 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 04:13:26 2012. Right. This Aqueduct Convention Center should be the final nails in the coffin for QueensWay. |
|
|
| (1139516) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Tue Feb 14 12:28:39 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Feb 14 12:17:04 2012. Jacob Javits Convention Center was blessed with the # 7 Train.Good for the Gander, Good for the Goose! and a lot cheaper, too! |
|
|
| (1139526) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Feb 14 13:11:04 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 01:13:55 2012. Here's what I would do.First off, make sure that any pressure from the NIMBYs to build a rail trail would be reduced to as close to zero as possible, while drumming up support for a rail line. As the Convention Center gets built, the refurbishing of the Rockaway Beach branch, including a connection from the 63rd Drive IND station, would begin. The connection from the IND line will initially include a connection from the local tracks, but would also include a provision for service from the express tracks, which would involve D3 and D4 tracks descend to a lower level north of Woodhaven Boulevard, F3 and F4 slide out and under the local tracks, then D3 and D4 would rise through 63rd Drive station. F3 and F4 would slide out further and rise toward the level of the local tracks, then merge with F1 and F2 between the IND and the LIRR. Short term work would be connecting the Rockaway line to the local tracks of the Queens Boulevard line, including stations at Union Turnpike, Jamaica Avenue, Atlantic Avenue, and 101st Avenue. Medium term work would involve building the super express extension of the 63rd Street line, and connect it to both the Queens Boulevard line and the Rockaway line. Tracks T3 and T4 (initially a single track, but with a provision for two) will continue under Sunnyside Yard, then Queens Boulevard. This would eventually feed into the aforementioned F3 and F4 tracks, and provide a connection to D3 and D4. The portion of the route consisting of new construction would be designed for operation at speeds of up to 80 miles per hour, though trains would be limited to 65 in actual service. The Rockaway Line would also be engineered for operation at higher speeds. |
|
|
| (1139528) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Tue Feb 14 13:29:14 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Feb 14 13:11:04 2012. I'm familiar with D1, D2, D3, and D4. On the Queens Blvd. Line.But where are these F3 and F4 tracks you write about? Are the tracks on the current Rockaway Branch, south of Liberty Avenue designated F1, F2, F3 and F4? Its been a while since I was there and don't recall the desi's. Woodhaven could be converted to an Expree station. The two current express tracks could then flyunder and head south to White Pot. More costly, but more flexible. |
|
|
| (1139533) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Tue Feb 14 14:06:25 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 13 23:40:41 2012. Why should we shut up? Andrea Crawford and her fellow NIMBYs are the only ones who need to shut up. They could care less if Queens continues to suffer from the effects of a transit-riding population that continues to increase yet is stuck with largely the same transit infrastructure it had 30 years ago. Sorry, but it's time to stand up to these NIMBYs and their selfish interests. |
|
|
| (1139534) | |
Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 14:27:09 2012, in response to Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch, posted by Avid Reader on Tue Feb 14 09:59:09 2012. The part about the financial district comes from the what was said about the (A). I also said I'm assuming in this case that if Genting (a company based in Malaysia, NOT a person) were to be convinced to pay for this connection, they would want it from a line that serves the financial district so after the workday, people who want to go to the Casino can do so without having to go through Brooklyn on the (A) and on a (W) in this case that likely would be far less crowded given the train would start at Whitehall Street.Also, the financial district itself is much more heavily residential these days than it was even 10 years ago, plus there are a number of hotels down there now that didn't exist 15-20 years ago. That also plays into how I would be looking to do this. If the financial district is not an issue, then I would have the (M) go full-time to Rockaway Park (either way, the (G) would return to the QB line to 71st-Continental all times and 179th Rush hours with the (F) a full express during rush hours). |
|
|
| (1139536) | |
Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 14 14:29:56 2012, in response to Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch, posted by Avid Reader on Tue Feb 14 09:59:09 2012. That would be correct since for anyone form the financial district wanting the casino or the convention center, the A or even an extended local C would be faster than any service going through midtown by somewhere in the area of 20 min. For midtown passengers, there would be a point at which there is either minimal or no difference at all and If you see my post on this topic, I based the difference from lower Manhattan based on an interpolation of existing subway running times combined with LIRR running times to Howard Bch from the early 1950s just prior to the NYCTA takeover. The unfortunate problem with accessing the Rockaways via Qns Blvd is that both the Roosevelt Av spur and the 63 Dr spur are accessible only from the Qns Blvd local tracks whereas both Fulton St locals and expresses can access the Rockaways. |
|
|
| (1139543) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Tue Feb 14 14:47:59 2012, in response to Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Feb 13 21:28:15 2012. Ms. Crawford sounds like she would have been a Robert Moses fan back in the day - put more buses on the streets and the hell with increased traffic, failure of service in inclement weather and higher costs relating to fuel prices. |
|
|
| (1139544) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 14 14:48:59 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Avid Reader on Tue Feb 14 13:29:14 2012. The Rockaway tracks are the ones with the "F" designation. The problem now arises due to the fact that trains coming from the existing IND Rockaway connection are SOUTHBOUND and are numbered as such whereas tracks coming from Qns Blvd would be NORTHBOUND tracks and would have to reflect the logic of the IND track numbering system. The new connection from Qns Blvd would probably have to have a new letter designation with a separate chaining system until somewhere around Liberty Jct when the track designations would change. That is not really that difficult since a similar change takes place at the Broad St end Of Chambers St on the Nassau St Line. under the original BMT standard, trains passing through Brooklyn enroute to Manhattan were NORTHBOUND regardless of their point of origin thus Jamaica and Myrtle/Chambers trains were always northbound towards Chambers and Broad and Southbound towards jamaica and Met. When the Nassau St extension was added to the original Centre St subway in the 1930s, the tracks between Chambers and the Nassau Cut were Southern Div tracks and were SOUTHBOUND from that point. J2 connected to R1 at the end of Chambers St. When the Jamaica and later the Myrtle were through routed into the Southern Div, their designations were made southbound towards Stillwell and northbound towards Jamaica or Met to eliminate confusion. K trains running in the same physical direction, however were still northbound towards 57/6. With the rerouting of the M to Qns Blvd, that service has been restored to being Northbound away from Met and southbound towards Met, however I don't believe the J line designation has been changed back yet although based on the track numbering system in place it should be. That way there will be no confusion as there is now with northbound M service alternating with southbound J service with both operating in the same physical direction on the same tracks. Connecting Qns Blvd to Rockaway will present a similar problem since northbound trains coming from Qns Blvd would be operating alternately with southbound trains coming off Fulton St tending to cause confusion. |
|
|
| (1139545) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 14 14:50:27 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Tue Feb 14 14:06:25 2012. IAWTP! |
|
|
| (1139546) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 14 14:53:42 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by andy on Tue Feb 14 00:21:12 2012. Actually, the loss of service to 71 Av would be minimal since most passengers for that station are probably on the E or F anyhow meaning that 67 Av would be the only station that might suffer such a loss and I would suspect that by 67 Av most of the local passengers would probably have detrained at previous stations anyhow. |
|
|
| (1139547) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Tue Feb 14 14:56:04 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Feb 14 14:47:59 2012. I'm sure she would be. She and her group really don't care are about expanding transit options in that area. They just want their own interests to be accommodated and to hell with everyone else. Why should everyone else stand for it? |
|
|
| (1139548) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 14 14:57:06 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Feb 14 14:47:59 2012. The NIMBYs need to realize that unlike the cross Bx Expwy which actually destroyed residences along its path, reactivation of the rail line on which nothing has been built will not displace any families from their homes and will actually increase property values for those nearby the ROW by providing them with more convenient public transit as happened with HBLR in NJ. |
|
|
| (1139574) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 14 16:52:17 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Feb 14 13:11:04 2012. Further on down, restore the 102nd Street mezzanine on the J line to make the "Brooklyn Manor" station (call it something else) more useful.They would have to figure on a way to shut the governors on and off on subway equipment. |
|
|
| (1139576) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by FarRock on Tue Feb 14 16:59:02 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 01:13:55 2012. Theres only enough room in Rock PARK for the (A). The (W) would have to use a different yard |
|
|
| (1139577) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 14 17:03:19 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by FarRock on Tue Feb 14 16:59:02 2012. Layup tracks north of Broad Channel ? |
|
|
| (1139579) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Feb 14 17:10:16 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by randyo on Tue Feb 14 14:48:59 2012. It's okay, since the Rockaway line's tracks already have their own zero point, near Borden Avenue and 2nd Street in Long Island City. The tracks from the Rockaway line to Queens Boulevard would simply be tied to that same zero point going up the line, then once they cross the LIRR, they'll be reverse tied to the point where they meet the Queens Blvd line.For instance, the north end of the southbound platform at the Aqueduct-North Conduit station is located at station 480+20, or 48,020 feet (approximately 9.1 miles) from the zero point in Long Island City. It crosses Liberty Avenue 4,560 feet north from that, or station 434+60. It crosses the LIRR Lower Montauk line just north of Union Turnpike, at about 331+00±, leaving the path the line is tied to, and continuing north. It crosses the LIRR main line 21,700 feet from Aqueduct, or 263+20. If it then followed 65th Road to get to the Queens Boulevard line, it would get there approximately 23,180 feet from Aqueduct, or station 248+40. So the new chaining would be picked up either right as the Rockaway line splits from the Queens Boulevard line (reverse tied from L.M.), or as the line crosses the Lower Montauk. Approximate position of certain stations along this route: 101st Avenue: 425+75 to 418+74 Atlantic Avenue: 402+00 ± Jamaica Avenue: 380+48 ± Union Turnpike: 332+58 ± |
|
|
| (1139587) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 14 17:42:59 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by FarRock on Tue Feb 14 16:59:02 2012. As would probably have to be laid up at Pitkin Yd if another service were to go to Rock Pk. |
|
|
| (1139591) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by N6 Limited on Tue Feb 14 18:41:17 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by N6 Limited on Mon Feb 13 23:51:39 2012. Not only would the fares for LIRR service be too expensive, the service would probably be hourly |
|
|
| (1139592) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by ENY Blitz 5107 on Tue Feb 14 18:41:34 2012, in response to Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Feb 13 21:28:15 2012. Greetings Everyone...First off,lets be totally realistic about this.The Restoration of the Rockaway Line Is going to be expensive,of that there is no doubt.We can all shoot for the "Pie in the sky" and say "YES!" lets build a "New" subway line to connect with the Rocakaway Branch,buts lets be truthful,IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN.Nope,sorry,i just cant see it.Its taken almost 60 years for the Second Avenue Subway to be built,and now we are going to build a "New" connection to the Queens Blvd.IND with "New" yards and "New" lines.Sorry Guys,its just a fantasy for you all.Now,we are dealing with the MTA,a Public Agency that is very slow in building anything.The LIRR is a part of the MTA,and i am sure they too will chime in one way or another,and Track Space in the tunnels to Penn Station is sure to be an issue.Can the line be restored? Yes,it can and the time to do so is now,as most of the Infastructure is still there.Once that infastucture is removed or destroyed it will make it that much harder to rebuild or replace it.ALSO,the LIRR will have the equipment to service the line,as most of the 1984 built M-3s are still in service,with the M-9s on the Drawing board.Of course,in rebuilding the line i am quite sure that the NIMBY's will weigh in with all of their complants,like "We cant have those BIG,Noisy trains running thru our backyards",Etc,Etc. In my opinion,to have the line restored it must be part of the LIRR once again.Running time from Penn Station,New York to Ozone Park in the 1950s was just a little over 20-25 minutes.Now,THAT is a fast ride! To connect this line with the Subway is just asking for more of the same ol',same ol'as trains to the Rockaways must compete with other train traffic on Queens Blvd. or whatever scenario is evisioned.Restore the LIRR Rockaway Line-but make it part of the LIRR... |
|
|
| (1139606) | |
Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Tue Feb 14 19:58:36 2012, in response to Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Feb 14 14:27:09 2012. What length would these 179Th St "G" trains be during the Rush Hours, and off peak hours.In Los Vegas , "NO CLOCKS" What about the wee hours of the AM? I'm not sure the Financial District would care for employees with a Casino Jones! To tempting! |
|
|
| (1139610) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 14 20:16:02 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 13 23:40:41 2012. NO..Why dont you shut up. |
|
|
| (1139625) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 14 20:41:11 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by ENY Blitz 5107 on Tue Feb 14 18:41:34 2012. I think the intent is to make the casino and convention center accessible to the ordinary passenger at a reasonable fare rather than a high priced commuter operation. Also, as was pointed out, the LIRR would probably be a "scheduled" service with big headways possibly as much as an hour as opposed to a rapid transit type of service with frequent service of no more than 10 min during "normal" hours and no more than 20 min on midnight's or even less if service warrants. |
|
|
| (1139648) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Tue Feb 14 22:20:53 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by ENY Blitz 5107 on Tue Feb 14 18:41:34 2012. Nearly five decades of "Not in My Back Yard" are what stopped this section of the Rockaway Line from getting recycled into a part of the subway unlike the rest of the line south of Liberty Avenue. Through the years, nature began to reclaim the line as no one from the city bothered to maintain it. That's why it won't be cheap to rebuild the line. But it would still be cheaper than building a new route from scratch.There are several reasons why LIRR should not get the Rockaway Line back: 1. They let it go in the first place 50 years ago. They didn't try to get it back for five decades. Why would they want it back now, especially with all the train traffic into and out of Penn Station? 2. Fares would be significantly higher than the subway. 3. There is the perception that the LIRR prefers to focus solely on commuters in Nassau and Suffolk Counties and that they see Queens riders as "Transit's problem." 4. FRA issues. Railroad and Transit trains south of Liberty Avenue have to be kept completely on separate tracks or the entire NYC subway becomes a mainline railroad with trains subject to quarterly FRA inspections and other FRA regulations. |
|
|
| (1139727) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Feb 15 03:37:00 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Avid Reader on Tue Feb 14 12:28:39 2012. Ironically, if Javits gets torn down because of the new center at Aqueduct (which I would actually be looking to build across the other side of the tracks from Aqueduct and connect to the existing Racetrack and Casino as it would likely be cheaper to acquire whatever land was necessary and build on that rather than build on the current Aqueduct property and either winterize Belmont Park or build a new facility somewhere to replace Aqueduct), the (7) extension becomes even more important long-term with the likely development of that property into new buildings and the like. That might even be enough to get the 10th Avenue-41st Street station on the (7) actually built. |
|
|
| (1139728) | |
Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Feb 15 03:41:47 2012, in response to Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch, posted by Avid Reader on Tue Feb 14 19:58:36 2012. The (G) would probably be full length at all times, especially at rush hours going to 179th Street. |
|
|
| (1139729) | |
Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Feb 15 03:43:51 2012, in response to Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch, posted by randyo on Tue Feb 14 14:29:56 2012. And that is true about it being an unfortunate issue. Of course, when the line was first built, no one could have envisioned the possibility of a Casino and Convention Center being on the line (and while Aqueduct certainly was there in those days, it was not used NEARLY as much as it would be today (half the year for live racing and year-round for simulcasting)). |
|
|
| (1139760) | |
Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Wed Feb 15 09:11:29 2012, in response to Re: New Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Branch, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Feb 15 03:41:47 2012. Can't find anything wrong with that. |
|
|
| (1140152) | |
Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Fri Feb 17 08:22:58 2012, in response to Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Gold_12TH on Mon Feb 13 21:28:15 2012. Lew Simon, a Rockaway civic leader, said commuters from his neighborhood can be stuck for hours on the A train.“If you get the express A train maybe you can get to Chambers St. in an hour and 15 minutes,” he said. “Without the express train you are ... going through hell.” Lying won't help your community much. Hours? Huh? |
|
|
| (1140160) | |
Re: Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Line |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Feb 17 10:03:24 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Feb 14 17:10:16 2012. Interesting stuff indeed.It would seem odd at first to have what are considered southbound and northbound trains on the same branch in the same direction, but then again, we already have that on the Broadway-Brooklyn line with the (J) and (M). |
|
|
| (1140161) | |
Re: Queens Boulevard-Rockaway Line |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Feb 17 10:06:27 2012, in response to Re: Lawmakers: southern Queens commuters need a new railway more than the QueensWay, posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 14 02:02:18 2012. And I think in the end, Cuomo would convince Genting to pay to have that stretch re-built to subway since there would be no way Genting would get what it seems to really want right now, the (A) essentially becoming a revived JFK Express from Manhattan.And if this does happen, I still say this would be best done as a new (W) train from Whitehall Street-Rockaway Park, though perhaps in rush hours there could be some put-ins at Canal Street. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
