|
|
| Re: 9th Avenue LL Question (1170611) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
|
| (1171850) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 12 00:30:46 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 00:29:34 2012. Pics like that make me wonder what a complex like Queensborough Plaza station would look like underground . . . |
|
|
| (1171851) | |
Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 00:37:49 2012, in response to Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Aug 10 14:48:17 2012. You are mistaken. See the photo I just posted. Also, in the 1924 overhead view, notice the two tracks swinging from the 5th Avenue L to the far south of the yard complex. Were the tracks still used in 1924? I don't know, but as you can see, the ramps did have tracks. |
|
|
| (1171852) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 00:41:26 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Aug 10 21:15:29 2012. No, subway cars could use both types. Some L cars had compromise shoes as well. They had white paint on the front buffers.The Brighton Line had L type third rail into my memory, about 1958. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1171854) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 00:45:11 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by 3-9 on Sat Aug 11 02:45:14 2012. Yes, the entire intersection over Franklin/Fulton was original KC L structure. |
|
|
| (1171861) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Sun Aug 12 05:35:32 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 00:29:34 2012. a excellent picture.chud1 |
|
|
| (1171871) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by LRG5784 on Sun Aug 12 09:51:44 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 12 00:30:46 2012. Tell me about it. Not even the 145th Street Junction on the IND comes close. |
|
|
| (1171872) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by tunnelrat on Sun Aug 12 10:31:48 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 12 00:30:46 2012. print out a photo of it & cover it with dirt. |
|
|
| (1171874) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 12 11:04:59 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by tunnelrat on Sun Aug 12 10:31:48 2012. Not asphalt? |
|
|
| (1171891) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Aug 12 14:23:56 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by 3-9 on Sat Aug 11 12:02:02 2012. Yes, but:I like the idea of having the lower level available for use in the event an emergency happens or we have a blizzard that would make it much easier to use the enclosed lower level to terminate. Also, I'd be looking ahead to try and and rebuild the old Culver Shuttle line and allow for 4th Avenue line trains to access that like it used to be done (allowing for a fourth Subway line on fourth avenue that can use the new connect to get to the Culver El and run with the (F) to Coney Island and/or allow the (F) to access 4th avenue when needed). |
|
|
| (1171899) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Aug 12 15:49:15 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Aug 12 14:23:56 2012. Culver Shuttle is gone for good. Its ROW is now populated with houses.ROAR |
|
|
| (1171900) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 12 16:09:01 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Aug 12 15:49:15 2012. Houses are not forever, you know. |
|
|
| (1171901) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Aug 12 16:20:59 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 12 16:09:01 2012. These are nice new houses, and there is no need to restore that line, as much as I would like to see it restored.But I have spent some time looking at Google Earth and if you want the opinion of the LION, the work equipment that you see in the 39th Street yard will be moved west to the water front, and the 39th Street yard will become the home of the (RR) train, perhaps just in time for the opening of the Second Avenue Subway and the moving of the (RR) train back to a full time Astoria - Ft. Hamilton routing. ROAR |
|
|
| (1171906) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Aug 12 17:39:37 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Broadway Lion on Sun Aug 12 16:20:59 2012. The problem is that sending R line layups to 36 St Yd would cause just as much of a disruption on the mainline as the former practice of sending them to CIYd. If possible you need access to a yard that does not require having to block the mainline with reverse moves and the current routing og the R to CTL provides just that. |
|
|
| (1171907) | |
Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Aug 12 17:45:33 2012, in response to Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 00:37:49 2012. Since that was apparently the case, I would suspect that towards the end of 5 Av El operation, those ramps were taken out of service and 5 Av el trains routed down the yard leads and that would be the service pattern that the men I worked with would remember. |
|
|
| (1171909) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Aug 12 17:47:25 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by 3-9 on Sat Aug 11 02:45:14 2012. What I am describing was exactly what was left of the Franklin Av station of the Fulton St el. |
|
|
| (1171910) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Aug 12 17:50:22 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Aug 11 04:35:46 2012. If a blizzard were to be bad enough to require the use of the lower level for turning trains, it would also likely be bad enough to block the open portions of the 38 St cut at 4 Av and between the south portal of the cut and 9 Av station as well, so the lower level would not be accessible either. |
|
|
| (1171915) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:09:27 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 00:29:34 2012. Hmmmm, interesting.Still, the two pics I show, one definately shows no track, another strongly hints there were no tracks. It's possible these ramps had tracks and were used before 1915, but not after. |
|
|
| (1171916) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:10:21 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 00:41:26 2012. So did the Broadway el, IIRC. After 1958, there were no el cars left (xcept the Q types). |
|
|
| (1171917) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Aug 12 18:12:16 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by randyo on Sun Aug 12 17:47:25 2012. That's what I thought at the time, thanks. A pity there isn't more pics of the northern end of the station before it was demolished, there were some interesting remnants from the el days. Almost all the pictures I've seen are on the southern end, or mainly focused on the trains (not that they weren't interesting). |
|
|
| (1171918) | |
Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:12:53 2012, in response to Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by randyo on Sun Aug 12 17:45:33 2012. Then how does one explain this picture of the area in 1915? Yard leads have track, the second set of ramps clearly do not.
|
|
|
| (1171920) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Sun Aug 12 18:14:26 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Aug 11 04:35:46 2012. Start with a thorough cleaning, then installation of standard flourescent fixtures. That will get you better than halfway there. Much of the tile is somewhat intact and needs patching. There may be ceiling leaks as well (stalactites) that would need fixing. That much would bring it to somewhat-presentable. Resurfacing the platforms would be a nice add-on to the project.wayne |
|
|
| (1171921) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:15:27 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 00:45:11 2012. For a while there were short segments of each platform still intact. Sometime before I got out there, the entire area was leveled and a single, flat wooden platform was built over the entire remaining el structure. The old staircases were still intact in 1986. In fact, they were in such poor shape that the first time I used them to transfer between BMT and IND was the LAST time I ever used them. |
|
|
| (1171922) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:16:42 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Aug 11 04:35:46 2012. There's really no need to use the lower level, outside layups. The southbound platform has been partially blocked by some structure. |
|
|
| (1171924) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:17:57 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Aug 11 03:54:49 2012. Forget about rebuilding the line to Ditmas. It's been built upon. |
|
|
| (1171926) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:20:25 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by 3-9 on Sat Aug 11 12:02:02 2012. Yup. And the track configuration west of the station allowed for the M trains to sit and wait for the middle track to clear without blocking thru B trains. Used to piss people off seeing a B train that was behind the M go past the M while it waited for another train to leave 9th Ave headed north. Bay Parkway was not as well configured to turn trains. |
|
|
| (1171927) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Aug 12 18:27:07 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Aug 12 14:23:56 2012. But it there really enough demand on the Culver El for an extra connection from 4th Ave? The current service doesn't even have enough demand for local/express service, let alone another line. Maybe if the rebuilt shuttle did something more interesting than just connecting with the F, I could see it.Otherwise, the issue of the ROW isn't any worse than with building any other el. If it can't go over the old South Brooklyn ROW, just have it go over the street, and deal with the usual NIMBYs. |
|
|
| (1171930) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Aug 12 18:31:31 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:09:27 2012. Since that picture looks like it was taken during contruction, maybe temporary tracks were laid for construction purposes? Then ripped out later when it looked they had a set service pattern already. |
|
|
| (1171937) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Aug 12 18:39:16 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:15:27 2012. It was like that in the '70's as well. I used the Franklin Ave shuttle when I was a kid, and they covered over everything with wooden planks, including the unused second track of the Brighton/shuttle. It was still like that in the early '80's (and the tower left their window open!), but by the '90's they had removed most of the planking over the Fulton el and over the disused track (and put darkened bulletproof material over the tower window). They only had planking for a single walkway over Fulton St, everything else was open structure. |
|
|
| (1171938) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Sun Aug 12 18:41:09 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:17:57 2012. He did say, "not quite on the original ROW," presumably meaning over a nearby street after it is cleared of NIMFY's. |
|
|
| (1171945) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:58:37 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Andrew Saucci on Sun Aug 12 18:41:09 2012. 37th St is clear and about 50 feet north of the original ROW. |
|
|
| (1171946) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 19:00:28 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by 3-9 on Sun Aug 12 18:39:16 2012. I honestly never used it after that first time in 1986. Next time I did was after the rebuild (and not a single time since). |
|
|
| (1171947) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 19:01:55 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by 3-9 on Sun Aug 12 18:31:31 2012. Possible. But this track of what looks like clean, new construction shows the second set of ramps lacking any track:
|
|
|
| (1171951) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Sun Aug 12 19:13:16 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Wallyhorse on Sun Aug 12 14:23:56 2012. Rehab it for use as the terminal for a resurrected Nassau-Montague thru service.If a Culver connection is ever rebuilt, it was have to run in 37th Street. To use the surviving steel on the s/b side, some funky curving at Dahill. The n/b would have to ramp-up to an upper level starting around Avenue F to gain adequate clearance to swing over the buildings and join the connector west of Dahill. No way would a grade crossing happen. And there's insufficient room to put both tracks on an upper level and merge them back before 18th Av. |
|
|
| (1171955) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Sun Aug 12 19:19:24 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by 3-9 on Sat Aug 11 12:02:02 2012. When I lived in B'hurst back in the late 80s, they frequently turned every other s/b B in rush hours at 9th Av because of the fustercluck of the entire 4th Av ROW being skeletonized all the way to Pacific. Those trains terminated *only* on the lower level, never on the topside tracks. If they were heading back north, passengers could board there though they often went OOS, reversed and went into service at 36th. |
|
|
| (1171968) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 19:54:43 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 19:01:55 2012. You don't have enough resolution in that picture to say definitively that there are no tracks on the 5th Avenue ramps. |
|
|
| (1171969) | |
Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 19:56:36 2012, in response to Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:12:53 2012. As I said, that picture doesn't have sufficient resolution to determine exactly what is or isn't on those ramps, |
|
|
| (1171973) | |
Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 20:22:24 2012, in response to Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by randyo on Sun Aug 12 17:45:33 2012. I agree. I think 1931 at the latest was the end for the 5th Avenue ramps. The Culver-Nassau ran full-time from then on. They might have made a trade-off of having Culver trains routed through the yard space against simpler switching at 8th Avenue.This enlargement detail is grainy, but it clearly shows the ramp tracks shifting to the south side of the yard space, which is consistent with the tracks shown angling southeast from the 36th Street station. The arrow points to what I think is the 36th Street tower.  |
|
|
| (1171976) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 20:42:48 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by 3-9 on Sun Aug 12 18:12:16 2012. There are then and now views of Franklin-Fulton on Forgotten New York.You can clearly see the so-called "spider" cast-iron construction of the Fulton L. |
|
|
| (1171986) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 21:30:17 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 19:54:43 2012. Maybe. But they REALLY look barren to me. |
|
|
| (1172014) | |
Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Mon Aug 13 01:15:24 2012, in response to Re: Confirmation: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 19:56:36 2012. I tried blowing up the picture. If tracks are there, they must have been buried from disuse - the color of the roadbed is too consistent. |
|
|
| (1172030) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Aug 13 08:09:10 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by randyo on Sun Aug 12 17:39:37 2012. How does sending (R)s to 39 block the mane lion? They come in on 9th Avenue Lower Level, they can be deloused or whatever and then moved to the yard. You got three tracks to do this with, you can even have relay crews (valet service) to take the train to the yard, or the crew has time to walk to the other end and move it themselves.ROAR |
|
|
| (1172098) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Aug 13 14:24:35 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Aug 13 08:09:10 2012. Trains laying up from 95 St have to run light to 36 St Xover to the N/B exp tk and change ends on the mainline in order to get to 36 St yd. Nt every layup can be scheduled to drop out at 36 St and go directly into 9 Ave. |
|
|
| (1172099) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Aug 13 14:27:18 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by SLRT on Sun Aug 12 00:29:34 2012. This picture would seem to settle the question that the ramps had tracks on them at some point. It doesn't claify how extensively the ramps were used or when they were taken out of service...It's possible they never saw revenue service, despite having tracks on them. |
|
|
| (1172100) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Aug 13 14:28:49 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Aug 12 18:09:27 2012. That's entirely possible. It's possible that near the end of construction, management changed plans and put the ramps out of use & removed the tracks.. |
|
|
| (1172102) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Aug 13 14:32:17 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by randyo on Fri Aug 10 17:31:48 2012. The Myrtle Avenue El stub between Broadway and Lewis Avenue had tracks for many years- saw 'em myself.Also, the upper level, Jay St.-bound trackway had train-length signs (is this the correct terminology), and remnats of signal equipment of the part between the Broadway-Myrtle Station and the junction at least as recently as November 2011!! I haven't been out there since to see if this is still the case... |
|
|
| (1172103) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Aug 13 14:36:38 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by randyo on Mon Aug 13 14:24:35 2012. Sure it can, why not? |
|
|
| (1172105) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Aug 13 14:38:20 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by MainR3664 on Mon Aug 13 14:32:17 2012. I knew about those but I don't think the rails remained on that portion of the structure as long as they did on Fulton. |
|
|
| (1172106) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Aug 13 14:39:47 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by randyo on Mon Aug 13 14:38:20 2012. I believe they lasted into the early 1990s...I first looked at that area in the Summer of 1989...just before the 20th anniversary of the closure. |
|
|
| (1172144) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Aug 13 15:59:19 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Aug 13 14:36:38 2012. It would not be operationally efficient to attempt to discharge passengers from a loaded train in the PM rush just to get trains moe conveniently to a yard that shouldn't be used for that purpose anyhow. Don't forget that I spent almost 32 years of progressively responsible experience in rapid transit operations, most of it on the BMT and prepared timetables and work programs for most of the Southern Div including the R Line so I have a rather thorough knowledge of what can and can't or should and shouldn't be done. |
|
|
| (1172149) | |
Re: 9th Avenue LL Question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Aug 13 16:01:04 2012, in response to Re: 9th Avenue LL Question, posted by MainR3664 on Mon Aug 13 14:39:47 2012. Then that might be comparable to Franklin. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
