|
|
| Re: Myrtle Avenue EL (1488427) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 5 |
||
|
| (1488941) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Bklynsubwaybob on Sun Oct 7 17:35:21 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Sun Oct 7 17:22:11 2018. Thanks for that info and for stating that there's no additional stress put on the structure with either mode.BTW do you have any info about the potential for testing R12/14 on the Myrtle Ave. Line. Like I say I got this info from a Supt. and Foreman when I was in C&S back in 1970. |
|
|
| (1488949) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Oct 7 19:12:54 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Bklynsubwaybob on Sun Oct 7 17:35:21 2018. I didn’t actually say there was no additional stress from the dynamic braking. I merely said that I cant see it. |
|
|
| (1488966) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Oct 8 03:08:23 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Oct 6 17:14:05 2018. Only temporarily:By the 1980's, there would have been pressure to use actual BMT-sized cars on the line, with the R-39s if they were built likely transferred to the IRT to supplement the R-62/As that were then the newest cars on the line. The line would have had to have eventually needed to be rebuilt, and I suspect that might have happened in the early 1980's before the construction boom hit New York. This might or might not at the time have included building via a new tunnel a link between the Montague line and the Myrtle EL, though if not immediately, I suspect that would have eventually happened similar to what I would do in a rebuild today. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1488975) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Bklynsubwaybob on Mon Oct 8 08:28:29 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Sun Oct 7 19:12:54 2018. But would the dynamic and friction brakes in combination cause prohibitive stress on the structure? |
|
|
| (1488979) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Oct 8 08:58:42 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Oct 8 03:08:23 2018. R39L's would have had no AC and a very simple air flow system, something like an R12. That would not have been acceptable in the IRT tunnels in the 1980's. They'd have scrapped them early like they did to the R27/30's - all dressed up and nowhere to go.All I suggested originally was retaining the upper level Myrtle/Bway station, not the whole line. |
|
|
| (1488982) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Oct 8 09:15:56 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Bklynsubwaybob on Mon Oct 8 08:28:29 2018. Does dynamic braking mean extra hardware on the car itself ? |
|
|
| (1488984) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Mon Oct 8 09:36:08 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Joe V on Mon Oct 8 08:58:42 2018. I imagine they would have ran as someone else posted early, shuttles from the Upper Level Myrtle/Bway station to Bridge Street and connection to Jay Street with the R-39 being the fleet of cars used. Eventually sections of the line would have been strengthened but A Division type cars would have still been utilized and with the R-39 being replaced with R-188A's or something. |
|
|
| (1488988) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Mon Oct 8 10:23:50 2018, in response to Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Wallyhorse on Fri Oct 5 21:38:02 2018. The el was abandoned while the Mets were in the playoffs in 1969. |
|
|
| (1488992) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Bob Andersen on Mon Oct 8 10:43:37 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 6 16:44:20 2018. I would have thought that when the Broadway/Myrtle junction was completely rebuilt in the late 1910's that the upper level would have been able to support regular subway cars. Or was the upper level not affected by that? |
|
|
| (1488995) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Oct 8 11:31:24 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Bob Andersen on Mon Oct 8 10:43:37 2018. They must have had to do something to support the upper level when the Broadway el was rebuilt piece by piece, but that doesn't mean they upgraded its weight limits.Ironic they had to keep a piece of non-dual contract Myrtle el for a block south of Broadway for the Broadway el's structural stability. This and the 3rd Ave el was all about Dr Ronan, we're "modernizing", discarding specialized el equipment, here's a GM Fishbowl bus. The Franklin Shuttle is lucky to be around, though it used standard subway equipment. |
|
|
| (1488998) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Oct 8 11:51:41 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Bob Andersen on Mon Oct 8 10:43:37 2018. I would have thought that when the Broadway/Myrtle junction was completely rebuilt in the late 1910's that the upper level would have been able to support regular subway cars.There was no Broadway/Myrtle Junction before the rebuild. The two lines crossed at different levels. There was no need to strengthen the Myrtle support beams because it was on top. Only the supports for the Broadway El needed to be strengthened. |
|
|
| (1489013) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Oct 8 13:53:22 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Q4 on Mon Oct 8 09:36:08 2018. That makes sense to me.Randyo has posted (and I believe him) that the Myrtle structure could have held anything the NYCTA had at the time (which would have included Steels). The issue was the plate girders at stations. With that in mind, the un-airconditioned R39s could have either been GOHed with A/C, or been replaced with R62s/R142s/R188s. |
|
|
| (1489014) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Oct 8 13:55:24 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by MainR3664 on Mon Oct 8 13:53:22 2018. Why was the R39 design not just another R33/36 with threshold plates ?Weight had to be something of an issue |
|
|
| (1489016) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Oct 8 14:12:38 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Joe V on Mon Oct 8 13:55:24 2018. Weight was not so much of an issue with myrtle as it was with 3rd even though the Bx structure was capable of holding heavier cars like the R-12s. In any case, by the time theR-39s were being planned, the TA was thinking stainless steel for its entire fleet, not just the els. |
|
|
| (1489018) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Oct 8 14:22:02 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Bklynsubwaybob on Mon Oct 8 08:28:29 2018. Doubtful, since the lockout magnet prevents air from entering the brake cylinders till the train speed is low enough to make the dynamic brakes ineffective. The 2 systems are blended but not entirely simultaneous. |
|
|
| (1489019) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Oct 8 14:38:48 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Oct 8 11:51:41 2018. As has been mentioned before, unlike the unrebuilt portions of the Fulton St el Myrtle could hold just about anything the BMT had much like the Jamaica Lin structure between Alabama Av and Cypress Hills although that structure was eventually strengthened, I believe in the 1980s. The problem with the Myrtle structure was that since it was slightly lower than the Jamaica Line structure, the area at the ends of the stations had to have a different type of trusswork to clear the stairways to the street making adapting the structure for 10 ft wide cars prohibitively expensive. I suspect that was the main reason that even under the dual contracts, there were no plans to connect Myrtle to the subway but rather truncate it at Flatbush Ext with a new terminal and a transfer to the subway station at Myrtle Av (Gold St). If there had been sufficient funds to do so, I suspect that in order to make Myrtle able to fit 10 ft wide cars, all the stations between Bway/Myrt and Bridge St would have had to be rebuilt as outside platform stations replacing the island platforms completely. Of course, probably not all the stations would have been replaced with some eliminated entirely or even relocated Chicago style |
|
|
| (1489021) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 3 |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Oct 8 15:05:56 2018, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 3, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Oct 7 10:42:26 2018. I've worked in the Bushwick area, and I can think of times the MJ would have been useful to me.And I also can simply see that the trip from Broadway/Myrtle to Jay Street is simply brutal by bus. |
|
|
| (1489034) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by MorningsideHeightsM100 on Mon Oct 8 16:15:23 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Oct 7 16:14:53 2018. They're FLUSHING Toilets all over the stadium after a huge loss. |
|
|
| (1489038) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Bklynsubwaybob on Mon Oct 8 16:22:15 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Mon Oct 8 14:22:02 2018. Thank you. I mulled that over and realized just that. |
|
|
| (1489244) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Oct 9 22:08:47 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Joe V on Mon Oct 8 11:31:24 2018. Yes, but the 3rd Avenue EL (Bronx Portion) was in very bad shape and would have had to have been rebuilt anyway when there was not enough money for that.The Myrtle EL as said would have had to have been completely rebuilt anyway, and likely to where it was single tracks on two levels so it could handle wider cars. |
|
|
| (1489245) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Oct 9 22:10:55 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Mon Oct 8 14:38:48 2018. And as said, it likely would also have required doing so as single tracks on two levels given the narrowness of the streets in some areas. |
|
|
| (1489246) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Oct 9 22:13:54 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by MainR3664 on Mon Oct 8 13:53:22 2018. Exactly. Or as I said with those moved to the main IRT lines and the line rebuilt to handle 10-foot wide trains, possibly with two levels of single track to accommodate for narrow streets. |
|
|
| (1489247) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Oct 9 22:34:01 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Mon Oct 8 14:38:48 2018. would have had to be rebuilt as outside platform stations replacing the island platforms completely.Ironically, they got rid of the only outer platform station between Bway and Bridge St. |
|
|
| (1489251) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Tue Oct 9 23:03:52 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Mon Oct 8 14:38:48 2018. "Myrtle could hold just about anything the BMT had"If that was the case, why did the Q's recieve lighter weight trucks when transferred to the Myrtle? IIRC the replacement trucks were from retired 3d Ave equiptment & made the cars ride too high to fit into the tunnels, thus requiring the roofs shaved & ruining their looks |
|
|
| (1489305) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Oct 10 15:12:42 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Oct 9 22:08:47 2018. If Myrtle were to be rebuilt at all, it would probably be cheaper to keep it as a single level with the appropriate modifications to the trusswork at the station entrances. |
|
|
| (1489306) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Oct 10 15:15:05 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Oct 9 22:13:54 2018. Myrtle Av between Bway and downtown Bkln is wide enough not only to accommodate structure adaptation for 10 ft wide cars but for third tracking if that were ever deemed necessary. |
|
|
| (1489307) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Oct 10 15:15:28 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Oct 9 22:34:01 2018. Yes, Grand Ave. |
|
|
| (1489308) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Oct 10 15:18:56 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Tue Oct 9 23:03:52 2018. The maximum traction trucks were already on the cars from their 3rd Av el days and the TA decided not to go to the expense of changing them when they went to Myrtle, probably since even back then, the future of the el was in doubt. |
|
|
| (1489364) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Oct 11 07:20:09 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 10 15:18:56 2018. I think the TA/MTA was looking to get rid of that line almost from unification, or at least the end of WW2- they just had to wait for the "right" time.I also don't think they were serious about the R39- it was just a "what if" concept. Some city councilmen (though not actually from the area!) were explicitly pushing for demolition by 1966. |
|
|
| (1489365) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Oct 11 07:20:24 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 10 15:18:56 2018. I think the TA/MTA was looking to get rid of that line almost from unification, or at least the end of WW2- they just had to wait for the "right" time.I also don't think they were serious about the R39- it was just a "what if" concept. Some city councilmen (though not actually from the area!) were explicitly pushing for demolition by 1966. |
|
|
| (1489366) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Oct 11 07:25:10 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Oct 9 22:13:54 2018. Unnecessarily complex. All they had to do was order the R39s. And maintain, as opposed to redesign, the structure as needed. With these simple steps, it could have been a working facility to this day.Alas... |
|
|
| (1489369) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Thu Oct 11 07:56:06 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Oct 11 07:25:10 2018. I agree on the complexity, the R39s and maintenance although some rehabilitation on strengthening at some locations might have been required. |
|
|
| (1489370) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Thu Oct 11 07:56:43 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 10 15:12:42 2018. IAWTP. |
|
|
| (1489380) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Oct 11 08:50:32 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Q4 on Thu Oct 11 07:56:06 2018. Yeah, some strengthening and fixing would probably have been required (like the portion of the Jamaica Line over Fulton St). But a complete redesign into a Dual-Contract or a modern structure, with bi-levels and side platforms? No. |
|
|
| (1489383) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Oct 11 09:55:51 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Oct 11 08:50:32 2018. It could be done, but Ronan's MTA was not interested. Nobody foresaw Metrotech. |
|
|
| (1489385) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Oct 11 10:00:10 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Oct 11 08:50:32 2018. Oh okay:I had previously read that some of the streets were why you had the narrower cars/island platforms and so forth. Still, and especially if you were going to connect the Myrtle EL to another line (again, after Navy Street and most likely to the Montague portion that today would likely be a (W) from Metropolitan Avenue to Astoria), you still would need to lengthen the platforms to accommodate at least 480' if not 600' trains. As the platforms likely needed to be upgraded anyway, you'd be looking at lengthening the platforms and consolidating stations along the way to better reflect the longer trains. |
|
|
| (1489391) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Oct 11 11:25:54 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Joe V on Thu Oct 11 09:55:51 2018. Right.Not only did anyone fail to foresee Metrotech, but at the time there was likely not enough money, which also doomed the Culver EL five and a half years later. |
|
|
| (1489392) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Oct 11 11:28:51 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 10 15:12:42 2018. Based on what I now know, I agree (I was going by what I had read previously when I said what I did).The main thing, however, is would platforms have had to be lengthened to at least 480 feet if not 600 feet? Eventually, I suspect the Myrtle EL would have required that (especially once Metrotech came into play) and as I would have done it/would do today in a rebuild, have it connect to most likely the Montague line at what then was Lawrence Street/now Jay-Metrotech). |
|
|
| (1489393) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Oct 11 11:30:47 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Oct 11 07:20:24 2018. And why would that be, especially if NOT from the area? |
|
|
| (1489394) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Oct 11 11:32:16 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Oct 11 11:25:54 2018. Franklin Shuttle lucky to survive all of that. |
|
|
| (1489395) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Oct 11 11:36:58 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Mon Oct 8 14:38:48 2018. Now that I know a few more things on the topography of the area (proving what I read previously was wrong):What probably would have been needed was to eliminate the island platforms and go with side platforms at all stops, perhaps with a crossover if need be above the stations (that way, you could do it similar to the Market-Frankford line stations, especially on the portion East/railroad North of 2nd Street in Philly towards Frankford where the 69th Street-bound side has fare control and you have to pay there and cross over to get to the Frankford-bound side). Then as noted, after Navy Street as I would do now, the line joins the Montague Line and likely today would be the (W) to Astoria. Such a line could also actually carry a loop line, running to/from the Nassau Line to/from Montague, Willy B and back to Metropolitan as well, doing so in both directions. |
|
|
| (1489413) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Oct 11 16:29:00 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Oct 11 11:25:54 2018. Once the IND took over the Culver S/O Ditmas the shuttle portion declined in usefulness. |
|
|
| (1489414) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Oct 11 16:32:11 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Oct 11 11:28:51 2018. Actually, at some point, a parking garage and small park were built where Myrtle at one time went through to Court St. When it was t through street, Myrtle lined up almost perfectly with Montague St so if a connection were to be made it would probably have been made via a portal where the park was located. |
|
|
| (1489421) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Oct 11 17:28:09 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Thu Oct 11 16:32:11 2018. I saw that Myrtle-to-Montague connector discussed in the 1920's in the Brooklyn Eagle. Like Fulton St-Ashland Place, it went nowhere. |
|
|
| (1489423) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Oct 11 17:31:33 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Joe V on Thu Oct 11 11:32:16 2018. I remember a time when Frankie came close to being closed down, too! |
|
|
| (1489424) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Oct 11 17:35:36 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Oct 11 11:36:58 2018. Heavy patronage of of Nassau Street is a thing of the past. Plus, the springs that once fed the Collect Pond now drain down the walls and pillars of Chambers St! |
|
|
| (1489427) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Oct 11 17:58:57 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Oct 11 07:20:09 2018. There was no mention of removing the Myrtle Ave el after Unification, in 1940. Talk of removing the Lexington El went back as far as 1937. |
|
|
| (1489432) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Thu Oct 11 20:01:43 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 10 15:15:05 2018. The El structure was not that different in age from the J's Fulton Street section. I don't understand that that stretch could be made to use normal trains, but the Myrtle couldn't?They just didn't want to. |
|
|
| (1489433) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Thu Oct 11 20:06:10 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Joe V on Mon Oct 8 11:31:24 2018. they had to keep a piece of non-dual contract Myrtle el for a block south of Broadway for the Broadway el's structural stability.I think that was more because of the upper level interlocking tower that was there than the Broadway El itself. Not to mention that the Broadway's meezzanine and fare control was under the Myrtle el also. |
|
|
| (1489434) | |
Re: Myrtle Avenue EL |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Thu Oct 11 20:06:23 2018, in response to Re: Myrtle Avenue EL, posted by Joe V on Mon Oct 8 11:31:24 2018. they had to keep a piece of non-dual contract Myrtle el for a block south of Broadway for the Broadway el's structural stability.I think that was more because of the upper level interlocking tower that was there than the Broadway El itself. Not to mention that the Broadway's meezzanine and fare control was under the Myrtle el also. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 5 |
||
