|
|
| Re: Queens Blvd (1327547) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 5 |
||
|
| (1327779) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Dec 12 12:53:59 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 11 19:13:11 2014. Yes. But they required left turns.The first segment of the Southern State opened in 1927 with full access control. |
|
|
| (1327780) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Dec 12 12:59:21 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by northshore on Fri Dec 12 10:25:44 2014. Never in front. Maybe under. |
|
|
| (1327781) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Dec 12 13:00:10 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by northshore on Fri Dec 12 10:27:42 2014. Tell that to BrooklynBus. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1327816) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Fri Dec 12 16:43:42 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Dec 12 12:43:45 2014. Yes and no. It would not fit today, but having seen pictures of how empty Jackson Heights and Corona were back then, I bet it would have fit. |
|
|
| (1327844) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Dec 12 18:26:28 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by italianstallion on Fri Dec 12 16:43:42 2014. But its a good question, why dual contract els built over already wide streets, (McDonald/Gravesend, or Jerome aves. e.g.) were only allowed to be 3 tracks. |
|
|
| (1327846) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Dec 12 18:38:37 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Dec 12 18:26:28 2014. If those structures had been built 4 tracks wide, would there really be a need for express service. Thru express service of a sort was tried on Jerome, and the Culver did try express service fro a few years but the distribution of ridership on those lines didn’t seem to warrant express service even during rush hours and certainly not off peak. |
|
|
| (1327852) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Fri Dec 12 19:05:38 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Dec 12 06:27:38 2014. The evolution of the horse in the early 20th century was truly astounding. |
|
|
| (1327853) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Dec 12 19:06:43 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by randyo on Fri Dec 12 18:38:37 2014. Although if full express service existed, rental patterns might shift. |
|
|
| (1327856) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Dec 12 19:27:05 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Dec 12 11:43:19 2014. Making up history as it flows along...kinda like The Terminator's SKYNET.. |
|
|
| (1327863) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 12 20:26:16 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by italianstallion on Fri Dec 12 16:43:42 2014. And it was my understanding that Roosevelt east of Woodside was only built in conjunction with the el. Therefore they could have made it as wide as needed. |
|
|
| (1327864) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 12 20:29:51 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Dec 12 12:53:59 2014. Which was later than 1922 so not relevant. |
|
|
| (1327866) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by boliqua2 on Fri Dec 12 21:01:14 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 12 06:34:58 2014. Thank you!!! Exactly how I feel. |
|
|
| (1327870) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Fri Dec 12 21:16:14 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 12 08:51:19 2014. I SUPER AWTP. Especially on the center road, where there's no turning conflict, and all left turns are governed by dedicated signals.WHO ARE YOU PROTECTING ON THE CENTER ROAD WITH A SPEED LIMIT OF 25 MPH??? On the service roads, I'm fine with 25 MPH. They're narrow, and people are crossing the road everywhere to get to the left-side parking spaces. |
|
|
| (1327890) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Dec 13 00:18:08 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Dec 12 19:06:43 2014. Possibly, but actually it was several years before the Flushing Line got express service. It wasn’t until the 1939 World’s Fair. Of course it was kept after that but it was really more for bus passengers coming from points in Flushing and Bayside beyond the end of the line rather than from passengers along the line itself. |
|
|
| (1327893) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Dec 13 00:52:13 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 12 20:26:16 2014. I wasn’t aware of that but it makes sense since several rapid transit lines were built along streets that were created pretty much for the specific purpose of building either a subway or el through the area. |
|
|
| (1327897) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by northshore on Sat Dec 13 02:01:52 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 12 20:26:16 2014. Yes, Roosevelt was built through open land for the purpose of the Flushing el line.But the thing back then was that express service was only needed in the rush hour direction of commuting to or from Manhattan. |
|
|
| (1327907) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Sat Dec 13 08:09:43 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Dec 10 17:34:02 2014. well of course Grand Central Parkway was already being planned in 1922. Grand Central Parkway opened in July, 1933. |
|
|
| (1327960) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by K. Trout on Sat Dec 13 15:41:29 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by randyo on Fri Dec 12 12:44:24 2014. Outer borough els were largely built in undeveloped areas, right? I guess 3 tracks would have been sufficient for the expected amount of traffic at the time. |
|
|
| (1327998) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Sat Dec 13 20:07:25 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 12 20:29:51 2014. Which was later than 1922 so not relevant.My point was that it existed as an idea at the time. |
|
|
| (1328010) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Dec 13 21:23:57 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Dec 11 14:58:49 2014. Controlled access is usually defined as being able to get on and off at specific locations. You could get on and off the turnpikes at any point. The only thing is that if you travelled any substantial distance, a toll was required. |
|
|
| (1328012) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Dec 13 21:27:47 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by randyo on Sat Dec 13 00:52:13 2014. Actually it made little sense to build the street at the same tie as the el because if there were no streets it made much more sense to build the el between, two streets like the Brighton Line, on over alleys like in Chicago, than create blight with an el.If the street pre-existed, you really didn't have a choice. |
|
|
| (1328015) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Dec 13 21:50:34 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Dec 13 21:27:47 2014. It works great in Ridgewood with the m train el. Itgoes through the neighborhood barely noticable. Granted it was built over an old railway row....but it would be nice if many of the other els were like it. |
|
|
| (1328022) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Dec 13 22:26:51 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Sat Dec 13 20:07:25 2014. It makes it plausible that it was an idea but not certain. It may have been introduced at a later point in the planning. |
|
|
| (1328023) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Dec 13 22:34:56 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by northshore on Sat Dec 13 02:01:52 2014. Unless I am missing something, if 2 tracks worth of rush hour service heads in a given direction, the net throughput cannot exceed the "return" capacity of the single track. Worse yet, if the "return" is all locals, the time back to the far end is longer. |
|
|
| (1328024) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Dec 13 22:39:07 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by italianstallion on Fri Dec 12 16:43:42 2014. Yes.....there are photos of rge Roosevelt Ave el being built through wilderness. |
|
|
| (1328025) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Dec 13 22:41:11 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 12 20:26:16 2014. That is correct. I have seen photos of the Roosevelt el built through pure wilderness. |
|
|
| (1328027) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Dec 13 22:43:27 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Dec 13 21:50:34 2014. Itgoes through the neighborhood barely noticable.That may be because it barely runs. 10 tph max. |
|
|
| (1328028) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Dec 13 22:44:24 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by K. Trout on Sat Dec 13 15:41:29 2014. Even built up....many of the els don't need even the third track.....except of course flushing....and the Jamaica el....which ironically was one of the only dual contract els to not get a third track...one that would be well used today had it gotten it |
|
|
| (1328032) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Dec 13 22:53:54 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Dec 13 22:43:27 2014. No, not at all....it snakes through the neighborhood in back of buildings....you can still hear the trains....you just don't gave all the blight and ruined street. Els are a blight and ruin a street even when the trains are not on it. The m el is none of that. |
|
|
| (1328038) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sun Dec 14 00:24:32 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Dec 13 22:34:56 2014. It depends. If there is a yard at one end, the return throughput can be less. |
|
|
| (1328039) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sun Dec 14 00:25:15 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Dec 13 22:44:24 2014. It could still be added. |
|
|
| (1328040) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sun Dec 14 00:35:01 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by italianstallion on Sun Dec 14 00:25:15 2014. Yes...of course. But its ironic that its one of the few that didn't get it but really could use it whole so many (most) are idle |
|
|
| (1328042) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by JAFO on Sun Dec 14 00:54:30 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Gold_12th on Wed Dec 10 16:59:49 2014. simple fix:two carriage return [CR] presses between the picture codes ie: {Picture code][CR] [CR] {Picture code][CR] [CR] {Picture code][CR] [CR] or even some titles for the pix ie: Interesting info about the picture[CR] {Picture code][CR] [CR] Funny story about the picture[CR] {Picture code][CR] [CR] Best picture saved for last[CR] {Picture code][CR] [CR] |
|
|
| (1328044) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Dec 14 03:34:36 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Dec 13 22:44:24 2014. Honestly... there's nothing stopping the TA from building an third track. |
|
|
| (1328045) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sun Dec 14 08:41:10 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Edwards! on Sun Dec 14 03:34:36 2014. Of course not. But all the he other lines which don't even need or use it...have it already |
|
|
| (1328049) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Sun Dec 14 09:30:04 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Dec 13 22:34:56 2014. The Flushing Line has only two tracks from Queensborough Plaza to Times Square. The third track from Main Street to Queensborough Plaza allows faster service but does not allow more trains. |
|
|
| (1328094) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Dec 14 14:59:45 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by merrick1 on Sun Dec 14 09:30:04 2014. correct, weakest link... |
|
|
| (1328099) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sun Dec 14 15:34:30 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sun Dec 14 00:35:01 2014. In 1968, I was going to St Johns and living with my great-aunt on Marginal St East, a one block continuation of new Jersey Ave, parallel to the Interboro Pkwy (sorry, I'm old school with names!). The MTA erected a crane straddlng the unfinished incline to the overhead structure, just west of Alabama Ave station. It stayed up for a few months until it was taken down. Nobody ever found out any more about why it was never completed. We assumed that the $$$ went elsewhere. The Eastern Division was always the step-child of the BMT, Board of transportation, TA, and now, the MTA. |
|
|
| (1328110) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Dec 14 16:06:28 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Dec 13 22:53:54 2014. That was the main reason that most of Chicago’s els are built over back alleys. The original builders of the els would have had to pay property owners for loss of sunlight had the els been built over public streets. Building the els through back alleys imposed no such obligation on the el builders. |
|
|
| (1328116) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Dec 14 16:21:16 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by merrick1 on Sun Dec 14 09:30:04 2014. That’s the same situation with the BMT Brighton Line and the IND Fulton St Line as well. The 2 BMT tracks between Dekalb and PPK limit the number of trains that can be operated as do the 2 IND tracks between Canal and Hoyt St although in the case of the IND it was not originally intended to operate both local and express Fulton St service in that area. The AA or CC locals would terminate at Hudson Terminal and the HH if ever operated as intended would have operated between either ENY or Euclid and Court St. Of course, Court St was supposed to be connected either to Hudson Term by reclaiming the BMT between Cortlandt and Whitehall or to the SAS or possibly both depending on which version of the IND plans you happen to look at. |
|
|
| (1328117) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Dec 14 16:33:50 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Elkeeper on Sun Dec 14 15:34:30 2014. I would suspect that the reason that the Eastern was sort of a step child was that it had more elevated lines than the Southern and those could be more easily eliminated and replaced by subways than the 4 Av, Brighton or Sea Beach lines. The Southern had only 3 true elevated lines and 2 of those, the Culver and West End were branches off the 4 Av subway. The Eastern had only one true subway and that was the 14 St line and even that was intended to be elevated for a substantial portion. The rest of the Eastern Division consisted mostly of free standing elevated lines some of which were upgraded to dual contract standards so they could be operated as part of the BMT subway system. Once the IND came along, The death knell was sounded for the Fulton St el which not having been completely upgraded could not be connected to the subway system. The BMT kept part of the Fulton St el alive for a few years by ordering cars light enough to operate on the unrebuilt portion of the Fulton El but the handwriting was on the wall for the western portion of the el. In fact, had the portion of the iND second system through So 4 St been built that would have effectively duplicated part of the Bway Bkln El and with its various connections possibly eliminated the need for that also. |
|
|
| (1328127) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sun Dec 14 17:21:59 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Dec 13 22:44:24 2014. Never understood why the Astoria El got 3 tracks instead of 2. Years ago when they tried the W express from QBP, that did'nt work out, primarily a/c the 2 track terminus at Ditmars. Congestion there negated any time savings.I've heard that the original plan for Main St station was to be 2 tracks. Since 3 into 2 does not go in terms of flexibility & saving time, smarter heads prevailed in addition to local political arm twisting & the station was built with 3 & underground. But since the 3d track is there over 31st St., it would be very useful if the line in some way, someday is extended to LGA. |
|
|
| (1328129) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sun Dec 14 17:37:00 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sun Dec 14 17:21:59 2014. The Astoria el was built with 3 tracks to 25th Ave/Hoyt. Hoyt/25th Ave/Astoria Blvd was the only 3 track express station built on that line. The original plan had been for an express service for area streetcars which would have passengers taken to Manhattan, using the express track on the el. The IRT, which first operated trains on the Astoria/Flushing branches, ran 2nd Ave el trains to Ditmars Blvd only as locals. Even after the BMT started joint service in 1923, there was no express service on either branch until the 1939 World's fair- then only on the Flushing line. |
|
|
| (1328141) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by TUNNELRAT on Sun Dec 14 19:24:48 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Elkeeper on Sun Dec 14 15:34:30 2014. are you sure about that date? worked in dist.33 transit police from june of 1968 to march of 1969 and don`t recall said crane. |
|
|
| (1328151) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Dec 14 20:30:28 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by TUNNELRAT on Sun Dec 14 19:24:48 2014. LOL!!! Go get him! |
|
|
| (1328153) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sun Dec 14 20:48:14 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sun Dec 14 17:21:59 2014. Perhaps the line was planned to go further where it would have made more sense. |
|
|
| (1328155) | |
3-Track Els Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sun Dec 14 20:48:56 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Elkeeper on Sun Dec 14 17:37:00 2014. Is there any evidence that the 3 track els were built for the very purpose that most of them are used for today -- as mid-day and overnight lay-up tracks so that some trains do not have to be sent to yards after peak hours? |
|
|
| (1328156) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Dec 14 20:51:15 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by randyo on Sun Dec 14 16:33:50 2014. Certainly, as far as the Bway El is concerned,its indeed speculative the line would have been removed from Myrtle Avenue west.Most of the block on the north side of Bway from Jefferson to Willowby would have been removed to make way for the Utica Avenue subway,and the Portal to the Elevated line since the South 4th subway would be transitioning from Bushwick Avenue. |
|
|
| (1328164) | |
Re: 3-Track Els Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by r33/r36 mainline on Sun Dec 14 22:13:01 2014, in response to 3-Track Els Re: Queens Blvd, posted by italianstallion on Sun Dec 14 20:48:56 2014. There useful for when one of the outer tracks are OOS for a G.O... wish the L line had one on its outdoor portion, which forces a shuttle during the midday that runs on 24 minute headways whenever one of the tracks is OOS for repairs. |
|
|
| (1328165) | |
Re: Queens Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sun Dec 14 22:25:34 2014, in response to Re: Queens Blvd, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sun Dec 14 17:21:59 2014. We will never see an elevated extension to LGA from Ditmars/31st St, via Ditmars to LGA. Astoria is a very desirable neighborhood today. Nobody wants to have an el built and running where they live. Several other options have been given here before. My plan is to tie into the IND Northern Blvd express tracks before it meets with the local tracks at Broadway. From a point west of the this intersection, continue a tunnel under Northern Blvd, turn north on 69th St, and go under the BQE. Run under the small park between St Michael's Cemetery/BQE to Astoria Blvd North to LGA. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 5 |
||
