|
|
| 1947 SAS Proposal (1473138) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (1473138) | |
1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by X-Astorian on Thu Apr 19 17:10:47 2018 This seven-page BoT proposal for the 2nd Avenue trunk line goes into some good detail. Of particular interest (at least to me) are the last two pages which list new routes. There's apparently at least one typo - Concourse to Brighton Beach is shown as via 6th Avenue but a few lines later the return is via 8th Avenue. Not sure why they have two IRT lines (which will remain IRT lines) at the end.Ah, what might have been (and what should have been).         
|
|
|
| (1473142) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 19 17:31:14 2018, in response to 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by X-Astorian on Thu Apr 19 17:10:47 2018. 1947, eh? DOA. City already ate up the formerly-private subways seven years earlier. Damage was done. |
|
|
| (1473149) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Thu Apr 19 18:05:48 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 19 17:31:14 2018. Well some of it did get done like the 6th Ave. express tracks below 34th St., the Culver connection and unfortunately the dismantling of the Manhattan portion of the 3rd Ave El (although without the 2nd Ave subway being built first as intended).No where near enough of it though. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1473155) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Apr 19 18:41:56 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Q4 on Thu Apr 19 18:05:48 2018. Chrystie St was a product of this plan, though it involved only a connection to 6th Ave. |
|
|
| (1473161) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Apr 19 19:54:14 2018, in response to 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by X-Astorian on Thu Apr 19 17:10:47 2018. The IRT lines in question would have been modified to accommodate ten-foot-wide cars. |
|
|
| (1473169) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by andy on Thu Apr 19 20:55:26 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Apr 19 19:54:14 2018. That's because some of the Bronx IRT lines (Woodlawn, Pelham Bay, and White Plains north of Tremont Ave.) were Dual Contracts routes and have the same more generous curves as the IND and BMT lines. Also the Dyre Ave. line could handle B Division equipment, because it was originally built to mainline railroad dimensions. |
|
|
| (1473187) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri Apr 20 07:00:05 2018, in response to 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by X-Astorian on Thu Apr 19 17:10:47 2018. Thank you. Fascinating indeed. All of them were great ideas. Some of this really did happen, like the 6th Avenue Express tracks, the De Kalb modernization, connection of the IND to the Fulton Street Line, and of course, the demolitions. What I find particularly interesting:1) It was obvious that the Third Ave Line in Manhattan couldn't be demolished until it was replaced. It was common sense. 8 years later, they there common sense out the window. 2) Again, it was quite obvious that the Bronx portion of the TAE needed to stay. The escalators at 149th were apparently added as part of this plan. 25 years later, f*** that, the TAE goes!! (that fact that it was needed isn't relevant) In fact, in the 1970s, they even put out a promotional video boasting of the elimination. 3) This report suggests that the Jamaica-Canarsie connection, used by the JJ around the time of Chrystie, was not original BRT or Dual Contract construction. I assumed it was. OR...did they just start using it for revenue service in the post WW2 era? |
|
|
| (1473191) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by zac on Fri Apr 20 07:56:24 2018, in response to 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by X-Astorian on Thu Apr 19 17:10:47 2018. I love the last line, "No other changes due to this project". The project basically changes everything.Other than the Jamaica-14th St connection, there isn't anything here that wasn't in some other proposal that I see. |
|
|
| (1473192) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by zac on Fri Apr 20 08:05:38 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by MainR3664 on Fri Apr 20 07:00:05 2018. The connection proposed for the Jamaica line was the other way, from Jamaica to 14th St. It was already in use from Canarsie to Bway/Bklyn.But reading through it they were proposing a lot of routes that required a lot of switching. There was a lot of that after Chrystie St anyway, but at some point they made most routes straight routed to minimize crossing. They would need to keep all the double letter trains with all those routes too. But other than the 6 track 2nd Ave subway most of what is there got built. Of course the 2nd Ave subway was the heart of the proposal. |
|
|
| (1473195) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri Apr 20 08:30:40 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by zac on Fri Apr 20 08:05:38 2018. Ok, thanks- I get it now about the proposed Jamaica/Canarsie connection.Like you said, the SAs was the heart of the proposal :( |
|
|
| (1473201) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by X-Astorian on Fri Apr 20 10:22:21 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by MainR3664 on Fri Apr 20 07:00:05 2018. You're welcome. |
|
|
| (1473213) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Fri Apr 20 12:55:18 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by MainR3664 on Fri Apr 20 07:00:05 2018. Also, the 11th St. cut was part of this proposal. |
|
|
| (1473227) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Fri Apr 20 15:15:05 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by zac on Fri Apr 20 07:56:24 2018. I never saw any prior references for a 2nd Ave- West End line. Did I miss something here for connecting Court St? And the South 4th St complex is DOA here. |
|
|
| (1473268) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by zac on Fri Apr 20 22:18:59 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Elkeeper on Fri Apr 20 15:15:05 2018. I think Court St was meant to be the terminal for Fulton locals. But that is a problem for anyone that gets on at a local stop. Just ask anyone that uses the stops along the F in Park Slope or Carroll Gardens.It does look like the IND second system is totally dead. |
|
|
| (1473356) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Sun Apr 22 02:34:35 2018, in response to 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by X-Astorian on Thu Apr 19 17:10:47 2018. Thank you for posting this.What is the source of this report, and where was it found? It would be interesting to find minutes etc. of those planning meetings that led to this document being written. |
|
|
| (1473369) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by FYBklyn1959 on Sun Apr 22 09:48:39 2018, in response to 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by X-Astorian on Thu Apr 19 17:10:47 2018. So if the 6 (Pelham) would be rerouted to 2nd Av, what was going to run local on Lexington? |
|
|
| (1473383) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Apr 22 11:42:13 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by FYBklyn1959 on Sun Apr 22 09:48:39 2018. If you read the proposal, either Jerome or WPR service. |
|
|
| (1473405) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Sun Apr 22 14:34:19 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by italianstallion on Fri Apr 20 12:55:18 2018. Yeah, I saw that. That little connection sure did improve th functionality of the Queens Blvd Line. In my "man cave", I have a copy of the 1963 NYCTA map, which not only points out that it was a weekday only connection (which in fact, was the case until the 1980s- '87, I believe), but seems to go out of its way to point that out- with the use of the word "only".I guess the whole BMT-IND interoperability thing was considered a really big deal back then. Now, I doubt anyone under 50 (which I will be for a few more weeks..) who's not a die hard railfan would even know understand the issue. |
|
|
| (1473421) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sun Apr 22 18:29:19 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by MainR3664 on Sun Apr 22 14:34:19 2018. Yeah, I remember when the Forest Hill trains from the Broadway line used to quit at about 8 pm each night, and not run at all on weekends. |
|
|
| (1473434) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by FYBklyn1959 on Sun Apr 22 19:58:46 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Apr 22 11:42:13 2018. Guess I missed that. Some passengers in the Bronx were not going to be too happy. I will speculate that since the 5 was part-time in so far as going to Manhattan and Brooklyn, it would remain the express, with the 4 being the local. |
|
|
| (1473449) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Apr 22 21:48:54 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by FYBklyn1959 on Sun Apr 22 19:58:46 2018. That would probably have been the case since at that time when the West farms spur closed, the Wh Pl Rd service operated via the west side. I didn’t read it that closely, but I assume that s part of the original SAS, Dyre trains were also supposed to operate via 2 Av. |
|
|
| (1473513) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Mon Apr 23 15:11:01 2018, in response to 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by X-Astorian on Thu Apr 19 17:10:47 2018. Did I miss something here with the Pelham Line going to the SAS? Were the #4, #5, and #6 trains supposed to bottleneck into the current 3 tracks, between 125th St and 149th St? Plus, the westside #2 at 149th St! |
|
|
| (1473516) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Mon Apr 23 15:14:57 2018, in response to 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by X-Astorian on Thu Apr 19 17:10:47 2018. What could have been, without Robert Moses controlling construction and City Hall. |
|
|
| (1473518) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Apr 23 15:22:09 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Elkeeper on Mon Apr 23 15:11:01 2018. At the time,the DAD was suppose to be a six tracked subway line...which is why so many services were going to be routed through it from Bronx Brooklyn and Queens.The Lex would have actually been streamlined,with a rebuilt 149th st connection to West Farms. From what I understand, the Lexington Ave Locals would have terminated at 149th st center track on the Jerome subway in one plan..138th st on the Pelham branch on another. |
|
|
| (1473519) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Apr 23 15:22:39 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Elkeeper on Mon Apr 23 15:11:01 2018. At the time,the SAS was suppose to be a six tracked subway line...which is why so many services were going to be routed through it from Bronx Brooklyn and Queens.The Lex would have actually been streamlined,with a rebuilt 149th st connection to West Farms. From what I understand, the Lexington Ave Locals would have terminated at 149th st center track on the Jerome subway in one plan..138th st on the Pelham branch on another. |
|
|
| (1473521) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Mon Apr 23 15:25:33 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Mitch45 on Mon Apr 23 15:14:57 2018. Forget the proposed subway routes for a minute. Just imagine that awful Brooklyn-Battery Bridge, had he gotten his way! |
|
|
| (1473522) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Mon Apr 23 15:43:30 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Edwards! on Mon Apr 23 15:22:39 2018. I had always hoped that they would have ran the SAS or a re-routed #6 up Third Ave, in the Bronx, as a subway. Never like the original proposal to run it up Melrose and Webster Aves. Looks like the BOT was hellbent on saving the Bronx portion of the 3rd Ave el, as well! |
|
|
| (1473525) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Apr 23 15:46:20 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Mitch45 on Mon Apr 23 15:14:57 2018. Not much would have been different, except that the LIE and possibly the Van Wyck would have had median transit. |
|
|
| (1473526) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Mon Apr 23 16:18:08 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Apr 23 15:46:20 2018. Or, perhaps, median transit on the Grand Central Parkway to Laguardia, had it been built. |
|
|
| (1473528) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Mon Apr 23 17:18:45 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Elkeeper on Mon Apr 23 15:25:33 2018. I love that part of the Caro book when he discusses how FDR stopped the bridge project and the celebration that took place afterward. Caro states that if the park supporters had really considered what had happened, they would not have thrown a party but instead held a wake. As Caro says (and I am paraphrasing):"It wasn't that they had convinced the President to halt the project - it was that it had taken the President to stop it." |
|
|
| (1473533) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 23 18:06:54 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Mitch45 on Mon Apr 23 15:14:57 2018. Even without Moses, this plan was far too expensive to build. Moses was not responsible for an aging and worn out system post-war. In fact, any large scale expansion was DOA after WWII because the system had grown to such a size that more and more capital was needed to maintain what was already built. |
|
|
| (1473534) | |
Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 23 18:24:28 2018, in response to 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by X-Astorian on Thu Apr 19 17:10:47 2018.  There are some distinct differences between the map and the text seen here, so it may have been modified at some point. The main differences: - no connection between SAS and WPR line - no connection between Jamaica line and 14th St line I'm not exactly sure how Lexington Ave would be configured had the Pelham line gone over to the SAS, there would be a significant capacity problem. One potential answer would be to connect the 3rd Ave el to the Lexington Ave line south of 149th St, but they seemed bent on tearing the whole thing down. |
|
|
| (1473549) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Mon Apr 23 23:00:49 2018, in response to Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 23 18:24:28 2018. I see how prominently the Third Ave line is featured in this plan. |
|
|
| (1473550) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Apr 23 23:16:37 2018, in response to Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 23 18:24:28 2018. Are they showing the subway taking over LIRR service to Great Neck?Funny how the L train's Canarsie service is still intact on that map. |
|
|
| (1473551) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Apr 24 02:26:04 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 23 18:06:54 2018. too expensive for NYC by itself, apittance compared to what was spent building the interstates. |
|
|
| (1473554) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Tue Apr 24 07:15:02 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Catfish 44 on Mon Apr 23 23:00:49 2018. Keeping it was common sense. It was the new MTA that got rid of it- and was proud of doing so! (I've seen the publicity video where they brag of it..) |
|
|
| (1473560) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Tue Apr 24 09:30:28 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Apr 23 23:16:37 2018. Possibly a wider shared ROW. |
|
|
| (1473564) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Tue Apr 24 10:20:48 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Avid Reader on Tue Apr 24 09:30:28 2018. Google "Images of Right of Way Douglaston (LIRR branch)" and see if you can guesstamate if the ROW is wide enough. |
|
|
| (1473579) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Apr 24 16:33:24 2018, in response to Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 23 18:24:28 2018. Amazing how many of the lines were projected to run 34 TPH. |
|
|
| (1473583) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Tue Apr 24 17:17:32 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by italianstallion on Tue Apr 24 16:33:24 2018. Someone must have figured that that was the maximum the signal system could handle. It doesn't even work out to be an integer number of seconds between trains, but it is approximately a minute and three quarters (a minute and 45.88 seconds, to be specific). |
|
|
| (1473598) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Apr 24 18:23:26 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by italianstallion on Tue Apr 24 16:33:24 2018. Yes, that IS the most important datum. We need to force MTA to get back to that service level. The current service pattern is manifestly insufficient. |
|
|
| (1473601) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Apr 24 18:40:16 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by italianstallion on Tue Apr 24 16:33:24 2018. Seems to be the maximum capacity a single track was allowed back then. Today it's 30. I think this map exaggerates the numbers of trains per hour each new line would carry, instead giving what each line could handle. |
|
|
| (1473604) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue Apr 24 18:55:10 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Apr 24 18:23:26 2018. Speeding it up a hair would help. |
|
|
| (1473608) | |
Re: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Apr 24 19:08:06 2018, in response to Re: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 23 18:06:54 2018. The money was available so without Moses, it could have been used for rapid transit projects. |
|
|
| (1473611) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Apr 24 19:23:35 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Apr 24 18:40:16 2018. Back then M/M were allowed to key by red automatic signals without RCC permission so trains could in theory run closer together. |
|
|
| (1473612) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Apr 24 19:31:21 2018, in response to Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 23 18:24:28 2018. I had always been under the impression that the SAS would have been connected to the Dyre Line by utilizing the entire NYW&B ROW from Westchester Av all the way to the city line probably branching off from the Pelham Line N/O Hunts Pt. Note also that that map was revised in 1950 after the decision to connect the subway to the LIRR ROW in Ozone Pk via what is now Liberty Jct instead of continuing the Pitkin Av subway to the LIRR through (dare I say it) 76 St. |
|
|
| (1473617) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue Apr 24 21:08:26 2018, in response to Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 23 18:24:28 2018. The Bronx 3rd Ave el could have been connected possibly via a portal from the ROW between Willis and Alexander Aves, to the 138th St tunnels. That is, if the Pelham Line had been connected to the SAS. |
|
|
| (1473618) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Tue Apr 24 21:17:16 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by randyo on Tue Apr 24 19:31:21 2018. Well, the 1970s SAS plan definitely intended to use the NYWB ROW and take over the Dyre Avenue Line. |
|
|
| (1473686) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Apr 25 14:37:31 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by MainR3664 on Tue Apr 24 07:15:02 2018. Besides lengthening the station platforms for 10 car steel trains, would the structures on the Bronx 3rd Ave el have to be rebuilt for the added weight? |
|
|
| (1473723) | |
Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Apr 25 16:42:46 2018, in response to Re: Map: 1947 SAS Proposal, posted by MainR3664 on Tue Apr 24 21:17:16 2018. Also, there was a slight change in the Bronx plans for the SAS which involved leaving the Pelham Line with the IRT and connecting the SAS to the Wh Pl Rd Line N/O E180 St since like the Pelham Line it was built to dual contract specs and could accommodate 10 Ft wide cars by shaving back and lengthening the platforms as was done on the Astoria Line. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
