|
|
| Re: 24 years ago today (1191533) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 4 |
||
|
| (1191882) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 06:42:17 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Edwards! on Wed Dec 12 15:14:53 2012. Yeah, to satisfy NIMBYs and to glorify themselves, they obstructed the job, then complained how long it was taking and how bad it was.... |
|
|
| (1191883) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 06:44:13 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by chud1 on Wed Dec 12 16:51:06 2012. I also remember Mr. D. Manes. As i was a kid and no longer lived in Queens, I really don't rember him attacking the construction job here. But I do remember him getting arrested- and while on bail, making 2 suicide attmepts- the second of which was successful. |
|
|
| (1191884) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 06:47:13 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Edwards! on Wed Dec 12 20:56:23 2012. That's what politicans do. Say whatever the crowd in front of them wants. If speaking to a crowd that wants more service, they condemn MTA for not providing it. If speaking to a crowd of NIMBYs later the same day, they try to stall the project for better service. Kind of like what's gone on with LIRR's third track.They say they want more service, just not the way MTA want do it. Pressed for specifics, they offer nothing workable. And go on to re-election for multiple terms. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1191889) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Dec 13 08:49:32 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by 3-9 on Wed Dec 12 23:48:33 2012. Operationally it would have been an improvement since fumigating and turning at Continental backed-up the n/b local to at least 63rd Drive during rush. Now, had they sent both the G and N to JC, that would not have accomplished much of anything. Union Turnpike would have been a lot more like Roosevelt with most folks swarming from the local to the express. That would have increased dwell time.Splitting-up the E & F with the N to 179th would have balanced things better, though there still would have been the problem of people who just can't cope with riding a local. I often could beat an F train leaving Continental at the same time to QP, or even 34th on the local in morning rush. At the very least, I could enjoy a seat versus being crammed against people. Reality is not something the typical subway passenger wants to deal with. |
|
|
| (1191902) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by vfrt on Thu Dec 13 10:18:43 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Edwards! on Wed Dec 12 21:26:06 2012. ==..to a load bearing girder near 1st avenue that was set too low to allow trains to pass under..==How the hell did that happen??? |
|
|
| (1191903) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 10:24:10 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Dec 13 08:49:32 2012. That fumigation process screwed over fewer people than having the R run local on Hillside Ave. That was unpopular from day #1, and was reduced to rush hours only less than 2 years later. |
|
|
| (1191905) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 10:27:51 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by renee gil on Wed Dec 12 23:12:35 2012. Yep. The Jamaica bound platform was only used for trains entering or going out of service on this track. I recall trains literally bumper to bumper on this track. |
|
|
| (1191906) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 10:29:19 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by VictorM on Wed Dec 12 22:00:56 2012. The center track was hard-railed into the Manhattan bound track. It was a real PITA because it limited movement between 111th and 121st to a single train in both directions. |
|
|
| (1191907) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 10:31:01 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by 3-9 on Wed Dec 12 23:37:11 2012. D'Amato was linked to one of the firms that did the concrete work for 63rd St. A lot of it was subpar. D'Amato was fortunate to avoid being indicted in that mess. |
|
|
| (1191909) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Thu Dec 13 11:02:30 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 10:24:10 2012. Having the local track backed up 3 stations certainly screws throughput worse than migrating flocks of passengers from locals to expresses at a few stations along the line. Had the original plan of sending both locals to JC been implemented, it would have been an epic fustercluck because no one on the JC branch would have stayed on the train they were on come Van Wyck Blvd or Union Tpk. Splitting them between JC and 179th would have better distributed transfers...regardless of whether Hillside people liked having a local that didn't go to 53rd. |
|
|
| (1191911) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Neil Feldman on Thu Dec 13 11:57:14 2012, in response to 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 11 13:33:54 2012. Interesting to note that R46's were in fact used on the E until all the R32's came back from rebuild, then once used on the G and R came to the E. Also you see the photo on the brochure of the R68's, and at that time, the R68A's were still being in the midst of delivery from Kawasaki, and some R10's were living their last lives. Also this was just past the time when all IRT SMEE's were GOH'd, but there was still a handful of SMEE's on IND/BMT lines non-GOH'd until May 12, 1989 when the last Graffiti covered R27/30 set was removed from service on the C. What a time period then! |
|
|
| (1191912) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Thu Dec 13 11:57:46 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Edwards! on Thu Dec 13 01:22:28 2012. What was the crosstown extension? |
|
|
| (1191914) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Thu Dec 13 12:20:16 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Elkeeper on Thu Dec 13 00:31:21 2012. The store owners didn't want the El and wanted it torn down. They didn't want to wait for the new service to be ready, felt the El was bad for business and property values. Got politicians on their side and voila, no more El to 168th St. but cut back to Metropolitan Ave. and then 121st (although a portion remained to QB as electric power was hooked up to a Substation.I remember having a baseball game at Franklin K. Lane HS. We tried to use our bus passes on the Q49L (I believe that was what the shuttle bus was numbered that took you to and from old stops between 168th St and Metropolitan. The driver told us the passes were not good as this was a subway, not a bus. |
|
|
| (1191915) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 13:22:19 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Q4 on Thu Dec 13 12:20:16 2012. From what I understand, those business owners wound up being ill served by what they advocated for... |
|
|
| (1191916) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Thu Dec 13 13:27:16 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 13:22:19 2012. Absolutely correct. No more walk in business from people stopping in after getting off the train. The decay of the area didn't help either. |
|
|
| (1191917) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 13:31:35 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 12 15:01:25 2012. Yeah, they do. But some of those things can still be remembered fondly...like this one. |
|
|
| (1191928) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 14:31:42 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by New Flyer #857 on Wed Dec 12 17:37:33 2012. Nah, it was a the middle of a major heat wave. This was the last summer our family lived without AC. |
|
|
| (1191929) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 14:32:36 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Ian Lennon on Wed Dec 12 15:26:40 2012. I've done that too. At least those tracks were de-energized. To this day I am not sure if the third rail was dead or not. |
|
|
| (1191930) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 14:34:19 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 13:31:35 2012. The worst part was not having any way to exit at Queens Blvd. We had to walk back to Metro. I had a hard time explaining why I was so filthy to my mother when I got home. |
|
|
| (1191931) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 14:36:07 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Elkeeper on Thu Dec 13 00:31:21 2012. They couldn't wait. They should have at least kept the el open all the way to 168th until 1985. The intermediate terminal at Queens Blvd was stupid. |
|
|
| (1191932) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 14:39:11 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 13:22:19 2012. When the el went my family still kept shopping in Jamaica, until around 1982ish when we just started going either to Queens Mall or Green Acres. By then Jamaica was a wasteland. The ONLY time we went out there was to get my yearly eye exam and to buy glasses at Cohen's on 164th St.I don't want to hear any racial excuses for the area going under. The area went black in the 60's and was still vibrant until the 1977 blackout looting. White people were still shopping there in large numbers. |
|
|
| (1191933) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Mark S. Feinman on Thu Dec 13 14:41:33 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by vfrt on Thu Dec 13 10:18:43 2012. See this link for what I wrote about in The New York Transit Authority in the 1980s--Mark |
|
|
| (1191934) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 14:44:21 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Neil Feldman on Thu Dec 13 11:57:14 2012. Yes, I had never seen anything on the E or F but an R46 until late 1990, when both lines became mostly R32. When the R46's came back, the R32's stayed on the E, and the G/R went 100% R46. In the immediate weeks following the new services there were not enough R68A's in service so the new orange Q used pre-GOH R42's. My last ride on one was on December 23rd, between 34th and Sheepshead Bay.
|
|
|
| (1191937) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Thu Dec 13 15:24:04 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by 3-9 on Wed Dec 12 23:48:33 2012. i think the current setup is sufficient. everyone that lives at 179, 169, etc gets on the F. if they want express in queens they stay on the train, if they want 6th ave but local they get off at 71 for the M, local and/or broadway they catch the R. 8th ave they get the E at union turnpike.i think this is probably the easiest setup you can get for queens blvd. theres not that high of ridership past 71st that would demand 2 trains. the only reason i could see extending the R to 179 is that 179 has more capacity for turning trains as opposed to 71. |
|
|
| (1191939) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Thu Dec 13 15:31:51 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Mark S. Feinman on Thu Dec 13 14:41:33 2012. great article.chud1 |
|
|
| (1191940) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Dec 13 15:34:38 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 14:39:11 2012. Another urban renewal triumph! |
|
|
| (1191941) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Thu Dec 13 15:36:20 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by chud1 on Thu Dec 13 15:31:51 2012. I wonder why he didn't make a article about the NYC Subway in the 90's?Maybe the NYC Subway in the 1980's were far more interesting....which is technically true. |
|
|
| (1191952) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Thu Dec 13 16:52:06 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by renee gil on Thu Dec 13 15:36:20 2012. i agree renee gil. i foget what it was like in da 90's in da NYC Subway.chud1 |
|
|
| (1191990) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 20:42:08 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 12 15:11:36 2012. Now THAT'S interesting.. I wonder why they kept them powered, even though that El segmanet was completely severed from anything else... |
|
|
| (1191991) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Thu Dec 13 20:45:29 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 20:42:08 2012. even though that El segmanet was completely severed from anything else...(Yep, for 5 years (1985-90). |
|
|
| (1191992) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 20:46:35 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by renee gil on Wed Dec 12 15:20:21 2012. Unless one was exceptionally athletic, using the partially severed stairways would've been very hard.I went out there in late December '88...I had assumed that the El would be in service over the Van Wyck Expressway- I didn't epxect to find that they'd tunneled under the highway. Still seems to me that it woulda been less costly to cross the highway over Jamaica Ave than to have tunneled the way they did. But c'est la vie. |
|
|
| (1191996) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 20:52:24 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Dec 12 14:49:25 2012. Maybe '83 was the promise when the last 3 El sattions closed in 1977...then delayed to '85...then to '88, which actually materialized. |
|
|
| (1191997) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 20:54:05 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 14:32:36 2012. One would think so. But if the signals were still energized... |
|
|
| (1192002) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Thu Dec 13 21:22:31 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 20:46:35 2012. Unless one was exceptionally athletic, using the partially severed stairways would've been very hard.Obviously, that stairway wasn't even like the one in that pic. The stairway only looks like that because it was being demolished at the time. |
|
|
| (1192007) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Thu Dec 13 21:41:16 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 13 20:46:35 2012. Unless one was exceptionally athletic, using the partially severed stairways would've been very hard.Obviously, that stairway at the Metropolitan Avenue station (the one in the picture I posted) wasn't like that. The stairway was only partially severed like that because it was being demolished at the time (in late 1990). |
|
|
| (1192028) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Dec 13 23:37:02 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by renee gil on Thu Dec 13 15:24:04 2012. The impression I got (as an outsider) is that it's not so much the people living in the area as the buses which terminate nearby. I also get the impression a second train to 179th wouldn't be a bad thing, even if it's just for rush hours, if only there was enough express track capacity (e.g., having the R being a Queens Express). |
|
|
| (1192086) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Mark S. Feinman on Fri Dec 14 14:18:03 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by renee gil on Thu Dec 13 15:36:20 2012. .... because writing an article like that takes up a great deal of my time, something that's been a premium of late. But be patient because I do plan to write it one day.--Mark |
|
|
| (1192090) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Dec 14 14:50:37 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Mark S. Feinman on Fri Dec 14 14:18:03 2012. We appreciate your work, just to let you know. |
|
|
| (1192094) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Dec 14 15:25:25 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Dec 14 14:50:37 2012. Yup. |
|
|
| (1192103) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by tunnelrat on Fri Dec 14 15:43:50 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Edwards! on Wed Dec 12 21:26:06 2012. the pumps were shut off on purpose to flood the tunnels.the t.a.tried to abandon the project untill the feds stepped in and said go ahead an abandon it,give us back OUR money WITH intrest.then the t.a. said "hold everything,lets take another look& see if we can solve this" the rest is history. |
|
|
| (1192139) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Mark S. Feinman on Fri Dec 14 17:22:57 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by renee gil on Fri Dec 14 15:25:25 2012. Thank you both.--mark |
|
|
| (1192141) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Dec 14 17:23:38 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Mark S. Feinman on Fri Dec 14 17:22:57 2012. You're welcome. |
|
|
| (1192293) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Sat Dec 15 16:55:13 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 11 19:44:05 2012. The Culver name wasn't restored to the F line until 1987.Two or three years later, IIRC. Signs at Coney Island had the Culver part still painted over in 1988. |
|
|
| (1192295) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Sat Dec 15 16:57:46 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 13 14:44:21 2012. That roll sign with the narrow font is how I remember the Q trains around the time I moved to NYC, with or sans graffiti. |
|
|
| (1192299) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Dec 15 17:24:41 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Wado MP73 on Sat Dec 15 16:55:13 2012. 1987 was the first time we saw car signage that referred to "Culver", at least in the R30-R38 B division cars. Prior to this they only mentioned their trunk lines (Ave Of Americas Local, Broadway Exp, etc). This was when we began seeing more info (Queens Blvd/6th Ave/Culver, Inwood/8th Ave/Fulton St, etc.)After 1954 the BoT still used Culver to refer to the shuttle. It only ever completely disappeared for about 10-12 years, when the shuttle was discontinued. I recall the old signage at Stillwell that had the Culver name covered over with "IND 6th Ave" in the mezzanine. It's ironic that most now assign the name to the entire line, including the IND part. |
|
|
| (1192303) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Dec 15 17:39:51 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Dec 15 17:24:41 2012. I recall seeing signs at stations along McDonald Av referring to the "IND Concourse-Culver." |
|
|
| (1192352) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Sat Dec 15 21:27:36 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Dec 15 17:24:41 2012. 1987, the R30-38 had the older roll signs with "Ave of the Americas Express (or Local)" and had no room for anything more. It wasn't until the R32-38 started to come back from GOH that we saw the newer ones. Besides, the F only had R46 at the time. |
|
|
| (1192355) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Sat Dec 15 21:42:23 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by randyo on Sat Dec 15 17:39:51 2012. I also remember this along McDonald Av/Culver stations: (1980) Credit to the Webmaster himself, Larry Fendrick aka NotchIt. |
|
|
| (1192356) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Sat Dec 15 21:46:07 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Dec 11 19:44:05 2012. The Culver name wasn't restored to the F line until 1987.....which was around the same time express service on the Culver (F) line ended, right? |
|
|
| (1192400) | |
Re: 24 years ago today |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Sun Dec 16 08:42:47 2012, in response to Re: 24 years ago today, posted by Wado MP73 on Sat Dec 15 16:55:13 2012. The brochure for the Chrystie St. changes in 1967 used the term "Culver" for the F line, as can be seen here. But the pre-Chrystie maps (like this one) used the term only for the Culver Shuttle, and called the McDonald Ave line the "6th Ave." line. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 4 |
||
