|
|
| Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. (1547940) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 6 of 6 |
||
|
| (1549668) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Tue Jun 2 21:29:02 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Jun 2 21:23:53 2020. Trucks were always an overhaul shop item so I never got involved too deeply. There is a bit of info thats scattered around several article. Loco trucks reportedly have 3 disc brakes per axle plus friction brakes. |
|
|
| (1549712) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 3 09:52:18 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Tue Jun 2 18:51:40 2020. Or at least take the argument live on the Canarsie Line to stay on-topic. |
|
|
| (1549717) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Jun 3 10:56:29 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Jun 2 21:23:53 2020. Superliner II's, all 3 flavors of California cars, Horizons, Viewliners all have basically the same heavy GSI truck.MTA M-3's of the mid-1980's have the Pioneer truck, or else look just like them. Maybe the NJT & MTA Comet-IV and V's do also. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1549754) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jun 3 14:43:48 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Tue Jun 2 18:51:40 2020. O/T Chat for sure! Why should the rest of us be subjected to two lonely old men, who think they are going to win an argument with their keyboards! PUT THEM IN SUBCHAT JAIL FOR A MONTH, LIKE FACEBOOK! |
|
|
| (1549759) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Wed Jun 3 15:08:39 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jun 3 14:43:48 2020. I dont want to belabor the point but I. Hardly lonely. I asked the question I did in te spirit of rail fanning. In the past we've had civil exchanges on this side in the past. For my part. It isn't about to be repeated. |
|
|
| (1549765) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jun 3 15:16:56 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Train Dude on Wed Jun 3 15:08:39 2020. We all have differences of opinion, or can be mistaken with our "facts". This is meant not only for you, but for everyone here- please be civil. I am sick and tired of being a captive audience for your personal vendettas. GET A LIFE!!! |
|
|
| (1549804) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Jun 3 18:11:29 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Joe V on Wed Jun 3 10:56:29 2020. When the Silverliner Vs had truck issues,they were referred to as Buckeye products. To a casual observer they seem to be the same as the GSs. Seeking more and better knowledge. |
|
|
| (1549820) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Jun 3 18:52:51 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Jun 3 18:11:29 2020. Yet the Denver RTD cars were not suspect. |
|
|
| (1549827) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Jun 3 19:18:11 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Joe V on Wed Jun 3 18:52:51 2020. and I have no knowledge why not. Is it the case that the cars for RTD had slightly different trucks. IINMthere some specialdetail of the truck assemblies for Septa which was alleged to have caused the problem. |
|
|
| (1549829) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Jun 3 19:20:57 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Jun 3 19:18:11 2020. Maybe forged at a different time or place. Denver cars also have lighter 60-cycle transformers. They don't have to deal with Pennsy/Reading catenary. |
|
|
| (1549859) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Jun 3 22:00:28 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jun 3 15:16:56 2020. Please give us a break with the overwhelming FALSE outrage.Like I said, I don't want to fight with you guys,so let's let the drama die. Oh..I also would like to remind YOU that I have plenty of friends and family, plus "other interest". Lonely is something I can only wish for. |
|
|
| (1549861) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Jun 3 22:03:55 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Tue Jun 2 18:51:40 2020. Why?I'd rather let it die HERE. If NOBODY chimes in,in most cases...it Will. So Let's be CIVIL. |
|
|
| (1549863) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Jun 3 22:12:41 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jun 3 14:43:48 2020. No such thing as "winning a championship fight with a keyboard",sunshine.What I do want,however, is to continue the topic headers. Question for the board. Why didn't Hylan's 14th st line connection to the Jamaica Elevated get built,as it stood out being propelled by Need? What caused the Fulton st subway deviation from natural Jamaica Line connection? |
|
|
| (1549869) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Thu Jun 4 00:13:54 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Edwards! on Wed Jun 3 22:12:41 2020. On David Rogoff's IND track map, he indicated there are turnout provisions in the IND Fulton St. line for a Jamaica subway. This probably would have replaced the outer portion of the Jamaica line beyond B'way E.NY? (with the inner Jamaica line being replaced by the Stuyvesant Utica subway of the 2nd system plans.)I don't have any more information about the Jamaica subway route. If info. on this line appeared in any of his NY Div. articles, I don't remember coming across any references to this route. If anyone can add info. on this route it would be great. One more thought - the 1929 second system plan shows the Stuyvesant trunk veering southeast and becoming the Utica Ave. subway. So, if the inner section of the Jamaica line were replaced it looks like there would have been a gap with no transit, between the point where the Stuyvesant subway turned SE and B'Way- ENY. To leave a gap like that (even in the BOT's initial planning of 2nd system routes) doesn't make sense - it would seem at some point, if second system plans had proceeded forward, that revisions could, or would have been made to continue the Stuyvesant trunk route east towards a future Jamaica subway route, while keeping its SE Utica Ave. line plans intact. |
|
|
| (1549882) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jun 4 01:23:35 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Express Rider on Thu Jun 4 00:13:54 2020. If the Utica/Stuyvesant subway had replaced the inner portion of the Bway Bkln el, passengers needing the Bway Jct area could change for the Fulton st subway and the proposed dual transfer station. One of the aspects of the line through s 4 St was that while the Stuyvesant subway was to turn south, a branch was to continue out Bushwick Av which is a block north of Bway so that corridor would have been served anyhow. |
|
|
| (1549883) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jun 4 01:35:40 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Edwards! on Wed Jun 3 22:12:41 2020. I can’t see Hylan having any plans for any service modifications to the 14 St Line since he wanted the BMT out of business so he certainly wouldn’t want to make things any easier for the company. I made reference in another post in this thread to a Bushwick Av line continuing east away from the Stuyvesant/Utica subway. That would probably have provided the service along the Jamaica line must likely continuing under Jamaica Av where it could be connected to the reclaimed Jamaica el at Cypress Hills. That allowed the Fulton st Subway plans to be changed to provide the connection to the outer portion of the BMT’s Fulton St El on Liberty Ave.I’ve seen 2 proposals for the connection to the Fulton El. The oldest one shows the subway continuing under Fulton St and turning south to make the connection from north of Liberty Ave. Another one shows the subway almost as it does now, but turning east at Liberty Av instead of Pitkin and making a straight connection to the reclaimed Fulton St el although exactly where this would be done was never made clear since the short section of the Fulton St el on Liberty Av between Crescent St and Grant was original structure and unable to support steel cars. |
|
|
| (1549920) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 4 14:17:51 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Express Rider on Thu Jun 4 00:13:54 2020. One of the original IND plans for service east of B'way-East NY involved having the express tracks bypass the local ones (like Church Av-7Av) . They would have continued under Jamaica Ave, Ridgewood Ave, and Conduit (now Force Tube) Ave. Then, it would rejoin the local service under Liberty Ave at Euclid Ave. I have never seen how this Liberty Ave subway would have been connected to the recaptured BMT Liberty Ave elevated section. |
|
|
| (1549966) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jun 4 18:25:20 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 4 14:17:51 2020. I can’t see any advantage to the Jamaica/Ridgewood/Force Tube “bypass” since it is actually a longer more roundabout route than a route either under Fulton St, Pitkin or Liberty Aves. |
|
|
| (1549987) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 4 20:29:18 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by randyo on Thu Jun 4 18:25:20 2020. I can't either, but there were a few others. Another was to access Liberty Ave via a private right-of-way from the corner of Jamaica/Pennsylvania, diagonally to the intersection of New Jersey/Liberty Aves, to continue east on Liberty. |
|
|
| (1550007) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Fri Jun 5 06:01:51 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 4 14:17:51 2020. I hadn't seen that plan. Are there any articles in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle about it? |
|
|
| (1550098) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Fri Jun 5 17:17:02 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by randyo on Thu Jun 4 01:23:35 2020. Thanks. I will look at the map again. |
|
|
| (1550290) | |
Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question. |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sat Jun 6 23:08:15 2020, in response to Re: BMT Canarsie Line history question., posted by Union Tpke on Fri Jun 5 06:01:51 2020. Finally, I found it! Brooklyn Eagle site: 18 Dec 1929, page 14. Look under "Route No. 6". |
|
|
|
Page 6 of 6 |
||
