|
|
| Jamaica Av EL Track Question (305949) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (305949) | |
Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by RiverLINE3501 on Sun Sep 3 19:08:58 2006 Was there ever a third track on the Jamaica Ave El?I 've seen the spot for the third track, was it installed when the line was built, then removed later? Or was the provision there, but never installed? |
|
|
| (305952) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by VictorM on Sun Sep 3 19:19:12 2006, in response to Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by RiverLINE3501 on Sun Sep 3 19:08:58 2006. There never was a third track installed, except for a short stretch at 111 St (for relaying Lexington Av el trains, and later for layups), and on the now demolished portion between 160 and 168 Streets. |
|
|
| (306021) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Sep 3 21:14:04 2006, in response to Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by RiverLINE3501 on Sun Sep 3 19:08:58 2006. As Victor said, there never was a third track on the Jamaica El except in 111th St as he mentioned, which was used to turn trains from the old Lexington El, and to store trains, and at 160th St which was used to store trains.The rest never got it. This is similar to the Livonia El, which also had a provision for an express track, yet never got it (aside from the yard lead at Junius St). Ironically, out of all the dual contract els that got their express track installed completely, and sit unused, the Jamaica El probably needed it the most (exception the Flushing line, which is the only one that needed it more), and ironically didn't get it. I guarantee that had the Jamaica express track been installed when it was supposed to, it would be a well used track to this day. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (306038) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Sep 3 21:30:49 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Sep 3 21:14:04 2006. And chances are a few stations would have been built as express stops with island platforms.IIRC there wasn't enough money available at the time to install a third track. They must have figured it could be installed later when needed or when funds became available. You're right about the other part - all those Dual Contracts elevated structures with unused middle tracks and here's a line that could use one and never had it. |
|
|
| (306090) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Sun Sep 3 22:31:38 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Sep 3 21:14:04 2006. I guarantee that had the Jamaica express track been installed when it was supposed to, it would be a well used track to this day.It would certainly help now that the Jamaica intermodal complex exists. |
|
|
| (306151) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Sun Sep 3 22:59:31 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Sep 3 21:30:49 2006. They should take the steelwork and track panels from the West End El's middle track and put them in there. |
|
|
| (306239) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 00:21:34 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by J trainloco on Sun Sep 3 22:31:38 2006. We should be happy the the Jamaica EL still stands...If the TA had there way during the 70's or 80's..the el would be GONE. |
|
|
| (306255) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Mon Sep 4 01:13:11 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Sun Sep 3 22:59:31 2006. Aside from the fact that the West End might someday need an express (it is the only Southern Division branch other than Brighton to have two rus hour services) it serves a useful purpose now.You might be surprised to find that the cost of dismantling and removing the center track steelwork and moving it to Jamaica might eat up most of the savings. Also, that's almost 90-yo steel and it would also have to be determined whether removing it would compromise the structure. |
|
|
| (306296) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Mon Sep 4 07:29:38 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by VictorM on Sun Sep 3 19:19:12 2006. You can see remnants of the wooden ties on the steelwork of the middle trackway.I thought the skip/stop service worked pretty well on that line. Is it still in use? |
|
|
| (306301) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Sep 4 08:09:00 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Mitch45 on Mon Sep 4 07:29:38 2006. That's funny, because there was never a middle track other than where there is now.You may be thinking of the ties you can see the remnats of on the M line between Central Ave and Wyckoff, through Knickerbocker Ave? There was an express track there which was removed, but never on Jamaica Ave (except at 111th St, where it still is, and 160th St, where of course the el is completely gone). |
|
|
| (306317) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 4 08:55:32 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 00:21:34 2006. Besides provision for 3rd track, Woodhaven Blvd station had provisions in the structure to convert to an express station with 2 island platforms like Myrtle. There is extra girder work in the structure. |
|
|
| (306366) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 11:30:58 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 4 08:55:32 2006. Iwouldn't mind seeing this happen..Part of the AIRTRAIN proposal has realinement for the Jamaica line as one of it screening studies. |
|
|
| (306381) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 12:01:23 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Sep 3 21:14:04 2006. The Jamaica El needs an express service and the TA knows it.The problem is..every time they propose some sort of improvement to it the neighborhood NIMBYS cry FOUL! They WANT BETTER SERVICE...but whine about it when the attempt is made! What does the TA do? Nothing. |
|
|
| (306437) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 13:33:35 2006, in response to Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by RiverLINE3501 on Sun Sep 3 19:08:58 2006. No. My grandfather, who worked for the LIRR and whom I inherit my railfan "genes" from used to tell my mother that the third track was planned for but not built because demand for the el was so heavy and they wanted to open it ASAP. Remember, when we entered into WWI in April of 1917, the demand for mass transit skyrocketed, with millions of women entering the workforce. I suppose the track was never installed because of financial problems the BRT had after the war, and the cost of installing the Fulton St. flyover was too great. |
|
|
| (306440) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 13:35:41 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by VictorM on Sun Sep 3 19:19:12 2006. The 111th St. middle track was initially needed to turn all trains here, since the section from there to 168th opened later. |
|
|
| (306448) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 13:44:36 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Sep 3 21:14:04 2006. I agree. But you can blame the configuration of the Fulton St. portion for preventing it's installation. The street is simply too narrow to have a traditional el with 3 tracks and side platforms, especially around Cleveland and Van Siclen. That's probably why this portion of the el didn't get the rebuild we saw along Broadway or upper Myrtle. The el should have been moved from Fulton to Jamaica Ave when the rest of the Jamaica Ave el was under construction, so a straight run into Eastern Parkway could be maintained. With three tracks and an express stops at Suthphin Blvd and Woodhaven Blvd, transportation time from Jamaica to Chambers St. could be cut by 12-15 minutes. |
|
|
| (306449) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 13:49:20 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 13:44:36 2006. Nope..Was a cost cutting measure taken by the BRT.. The rebuild was suppose to happen sometime later AFTER 1917..but since the BRT was insolvent...they couldn't build. They also couldnt build the Laffayete avenue el/subway from DeKalb to the Broadway El[planned as part of the DUAL CONTRACT LINES]or the Crosstown el. Most of this was directly due to HYLANS hatred for them... |
|
|
| (306452) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 4 13:55:48 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 13:44:36 2006. True.The MTA could improve service somewhat today by creating stretches of 3 tracks wherever possible and merging into two tracks where it is not possible to have three. It would increase track capacity overall and might, at least, allow for a faster version of the "skip stop," maybe shaving a few more minutes off the rush hour J/Z service. If they combined that with additional station renovations and new trains maybe more people would be enticed to ride this BMT line into Lower Manhattan. |
|
|
| (306458) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 14:08:34 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 13:49:20 2006. There was NEVER any plan to move the Fulton St. el over to Jamaica. Permission to build the now existing Jamaica Ave. line was received in 1911, before BRT financial woes took shape. The "flyover" track was apparently never seriously considered. |
|
|
| (306460) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 14:10:43 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 4 13:55:48 2006. What is needed is a TOTAL REBUILD.Reduce the Els footprint...to a T TYPE STRUCTURE..Run the line down Jamaica Avenue. Or build a diverting line from ENY..as an express service DIRECTLY TO CYPRESS HILLS,Joining the present EL. Sever the original at Cresent st...extend it to Rockaway Blvd and the Rockaway Branch. This way the line would tap two nabs...separate Jamaica services from the local Fulton route...plus add an additonal route toward the JFK AIRPORT if needed. |
|
|
| (306474) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 4 14:31:15 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 14:10:43 2006. But a total rebuild is highly unlikely to happen. But targeted improvements are more likely to happen if enough people ask for them.Even shaving 2 minutes off the rush hour trip while increasing line capacity would be significant. |
|
|
| (306478) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 14:39:34 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 4 14:31:15 2006. I know..Keeping it "real" for a moment.. The best way to deal with the problem at THIS TIME would be an adjustment to the signal system... REVISE the rush hour peak times..with LONGER J/Z skip stop service.. Peak express service from ENY to ESSEX ST. Midday Z service from Cresent to Broad. |
|
|
| (306483) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 14:50:20 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 4 14:31:15 2006. Unfortunatley, the configuration of this line precludes any time saving moves. It has a choker of an S curve at Crescent and a grade crossing at Myrtle (which can really bottleneck eastbound service in the afternoon). Jamaica residents will still continue to choose the E over the J/Z to common Manhattan destinations. |
|
|
| (306528) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 4 16:59:23 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 14:50:20 2006. They ran a far denser service 40 years ago down Broadway. There is no excuse for congestion at Myrtle today except for bad scheduling or dispatching. Then they had to merge the Myrtle subway trains with the Myrtle El trains and that worked. It would not today.The J/Z service when first started was each at 12 minute intervals for about 70 minutes. There were 7 Z's. Now they are 10 minute intervals for 60 minutes but with only 6 Z's. I don't think the present regime at Jay Street likes skip-stop given that they have never done it on the L, and dismantled it on the 1. |
|
|
| (306534) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Sep 4 17:14:46 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 4 16:59:23 2006. The reason they don't do it on the L line is because when it was proposed a few years back, strong community opposition killed the idea. It was NIMBY's that ended the chance of L skip stop, not the MTA. |
|
|
| (306537) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Sep 4 17:18:14 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 12:01:23 2006. Correct, there has been very strongt opposition in Woodhaven.It would be such a needed service, but really, we can't blame the communities along the el. Since there are no express stops, they'd get all the negatives associated with a third track (more noise, less light on Jamaica Ave, etc), yet not reep any of the benefits, as they wouldn't even be able to access the express service as it swings by their homes. That being said though, I really feel the greater good should be done here, as the express service would benefit a lot more people than it "harms". |
|
|
| (306544) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Sep 4 17:26:04 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 13:44:36 2006. Judging by the Alabama "launchpad", that must have been a provision to make a "double decked" express track along Fulton, I guess as part of the rebuilding of Broadway Junction-Eastern Parkway.I don't understand what in the world they were thinking though when they built the Jamaica El. Why in the world would they have built it with all local stations from Cypress Hills to 160th St? I find that incredibly foolish. They should have just built Woodhaven as a provision for an express station. it may have spent it's entire life being operated like Wyckoff Ave station, but at least if the express track ever came through, it wouldn't have meant rebuilding the entire station? If they were planning to put in an express track anyway, and Woodhaven was thought to be a logical choice for an express station (someone mentioned there is a provision built into that station to tear it down and make a two island platform station out of it), why did they even bother spending the money on building it as a local station, just to someday tear it down? It doesn't make sense. As for the Fulton section of the Jamaica line, I believe it serves a lot more people easier where it is now in the middle of a neighborhood, as opposed to have had it on Jamaica Ave next to a cemetery on one side of the street. The logical choice would have been to build the express track up throug the Cypress Hills station, over the Manhattan local track, run as a single track el without stations along Jamaica Ave, and rejoin the local tracks at Broadway Junction-Estern Parkway. that today would also be the logical choice if an express track was to come through.... |
|
|
| (306547) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 17:37:55 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 4 16:59:23 2006. Operating rules have changed. The new signal system also makes for a slower ride. One infuriating aspect of Myrtle happens when a J/Z express arrives and meets an M local. The M usually gets priority. Sometimes, a J or Z running to Manhattan prevents the M from leaving immediatley because it blocks the northbound track. What does Myrtle do? Hold the M, wait for the Manhattan bound train to leave, THEN close down and move out the M, then the J/Z. In the time it takes for the Manhattan-bound J to clear the interlocking, the Jamaica-bound train could close down and pull out. But no, the M's gotta leave first, so all must be delayed! |
|
|
| (306548) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 17:39:08 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Sep 4 17:14:46 2006. There's also no real reason to do so, since so many stations west of Myrtle have such a dense patronage. All trains would HAVE to stop. |
|
|
| (306558) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 4 17:56:43 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 17:37:55 2006. As I said, bad dispatching. |
|
|
| (306567) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Sep 4 18:11:34 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 17:39:08 2006. Correct, and that's getting more and more pronounced with the gentrification of Bushwick and WIlliamsburg, and the continued strength of Greenpoint, and even Ridgewood. The stations west of Myrtle are seeing a large serge in ridership. It would be poor planning to actually skip them in my opinion. |
|
|
| (306633) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Mon Sep 4 20:06:23 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 4 14:10:43 2006. What is needed is a TOTAL REBUILD... Reduce the Els footprint...to a T TYPE STRUCTURE..Run the line down Jamaica Avenue.Ask West Philadelphia residents just how well that's working out for them. If you're going to completely rebuild the elevated then you might as well underpin the el and do a cut and cover subway. For all the disturbance to both customers and lineside businesses as well as cost overruns SEPTA could have had a Subway to replace the elevated from 40th to Millbourne along Market. Philadelphia is just realizing the mistake of rebuilding the el now, and there's no need for NYC to repeat that mistake. Hell, build a 4 track subway under Broadway from Marcy to Bway Jct and then build another 3 or 4 track subway north on Jamaica Ave from there. Track connections would be needed at Bway Jct and Myrtle Ave, and at the former a connection to the Fulton Ave subway could be included. On the western end of the line, so long as this is to be a complete pipedream, the Houston St tube could be built to accomodate a Fulton St Subway route which bypasses downtown Brooklyn, and which allows all four tracks of the Broadway Subway to work at capacity without the bottleneck the Williamsburg bridge would inevitably create. |
|
|
| (306711) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Mon Sep 4 22:55:49 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Sep 4 17:26:04 2006. It's odd how Alabama and Van Siclen have such unusual canopies which appear to be able to support an upper-level track, while Cleveland/Norwood/Crescent do not. I wonder how that happened? |
|
|
| (306718) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Mon Sep 4 23:02:25 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 17:37:55 2006. Actually the most annoying part is when a Queens-bound J/Z gets stuck at that signal west of Myrtle while an M has the lineup to leave Myrtle. You then have to sit there while that M finishes loading/unloading and closes up and leaves. I dunno what quirk of the interlocking results in this, but it needs to be fixed. |
|
|
| (306719) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Mon Sep 4 23:05:45 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by RonInBayside on Mon Sep 4 13:55:48 2006. Those goddamn buildings are now on the middle track's ROW between almost every stop, so your idea wouldn't fly. The best you could do at this point is build a slightly-raised middle track that rises over the structures where neccessary. |
|
|
| (306758) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Sep 5 00:30:52 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Mon Sep 4 23:05:45 2006. Wouldn't it be cheaper to just move the structures, than spending all that money to rais the express track up high? |
|
|
| (306759) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Sep 5 00:32:46 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Mon Sep 4 22:55:49 2006. I don't know why Alabama has that sort of Canopy, however, Van Siclen does because it originally was a side platform station, that was rebuilt into the island platform station it is today. Cleveland, Norwood, and Crescent still have their original 1880's canopies. |
|
|
| (306793) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Tue Sep 5 02:40:03 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Sep 5 00:30:52 2006. Possibly. But Ron's idea wouldn't make any sense, since not only would you have to build a crapload of switches, but there would be no time savings whatsoever. |
|
|
| (306798) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Sep 5 03:16:43 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by WillD on Mon Sep 4 20:06:23 2006. If you check your subway proposal history, you will see that the So. 4 St/Stuyvesant Ave subway and its branches were intended to take care of most of what you are talking about but they were never built, just odd sections here and there such as the upper levels at Broadway on the G and Utica av on the A. The upper level at Roosevelt Av on the Qns Blvd Line was also intended to serve some of those neighborhoods but from differenet directions. |
|
|
| (306800) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Market-Frankford on Tue Sep 5 03:42:42 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sun Sep 3 21:14:04 2006. Forget express service, run trains more often than every freakin 10 minutes durring rush hour. |
|
|
| (306860) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Sep 5 10:48:52 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Sep 4 17:37:55 2006. I agree with you. |
|
|
| (306872) | |
Today's Subway Fantasy |
|
|
Posted by rashidas on Tue Sep 5 12:05:42 2006, in response to Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by RiverLINE3501 on Sun Sep 3 19:08:58 2006. Here is today's subway fantasy: most of the elevated portions of NYC's subway are 70 years old or older and will have to be replaced or completely rebuilt eventually. Instead of replacing them with 100 year old technology why not replace them with AirTrain style trains using magnetic levitation style propulsion similar to a new line opened recently in Tokyo.Assuming the money were available (ha!) each el could be replaced by modern elevated concrete structures station by station starting from its terminus until eventually the entire line is replaced. This would minimize service disruption. Is this fantasy worth dreaming about? |
|
|
| (306876) | |
Re: Today's Subway Fantasy |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Tue Sep 5 12:21:43 2006, in response to Today's Subway Fantasy, posted by rashidas on Tue Sep 5 12:05:42 2006. 'why not replace them with AirTrain style trains using magnetic levitation style propulsion similar to a new line opened recently in Tokyo'magnetic levitation? monorails would be so much better! |
|
|
| (306896) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Sep 5 13:33:23 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by WillD on Mon Sep 4 20:06:23 2006. Ahh..the Return Of the South 4th st Subway! |
|
|
| (306901) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Sep 5 14:00:40 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Mon Sep 4 23:02:25 2006. That appeared with the new signal system in 1994. I assume it's an additional safety feature which prevents a speeding train from overshooting the plaform and crossing over the track an M train uses to head north. This usually happens only when the M train is late and it cannot be held to meet the J that was behind it. |
|
|
| (306902) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Sep 5 14:03:43 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Mon Sep 4 22:55:49 2006. I don't believe Alabama or Van Siclen's canopies are original. IIRC, they date to the 1979ish rebuilds. These stations do have mezzanines under the platforms, unlike the other three. |
|
|
| (306907) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Sep 5 14:13:48 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Sep 5 00:32:46 2006. Alabama had NO canopy prior to the 1979/80 rebuilds. This station must've sucked when it rained. And I thought Norwood was bad. This early 70's shot appears to show a tiny roof hanging over the stairs at the extreme southern end: 
|
|
|
| (306909) | |
Re: Today's Subway Fantasy |
|
|
Posted by 600vdc on Tue Sep 5 14:15:52 2006, in response to Today's Subway Fantasy, posted by rashidas on Tue Sep 5 12:05:42 2006. Ok....So what do you do once the lines connect with their underground portions? I would guess either change trains, or continue the maglev throughout the line. Here's an idea... How about rebuilding the underground portions to be a sort of "dual use" system in which both maglev and traditional trains run along the same right of way? That way the transition from traditional rail to maglev could be done over many years, as funds and needs dictate. Eventually - maybe 50 or 100 years from now the whole system would be maglev. Of course, by that time, a still newer technology would have probably prevailed. |
|
|
| (306920) | |
Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Sep 5 14:54:32 2006, in response to Re: Jamaica Av EL Track Question, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Sep 5 14:13:48 2006. Ah that explains it. Thanks. |
|
|
| (307217) | |
Re: Today's Subway Fantasy |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Tue Sep 5 21:24:01 2006, in response to Today's Subway Fantasy, posted by rashidas on Tue Sep 5 12:05:42 2006. Hmmm... suppose the Myrtle could be rerouted back to Park Row... |
|
|
