|
|
| Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8 PHOTOS (1477698) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
|
| (1478143) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8 PHOTOS |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Wed Jun 13 12:22:06 2018, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8 PHOTOS, posted by Avid Reader on Wed Jun 13 11:08:22 2018. 5 drooling stars out of 5 drooling stars for these pictures.chud1. :)..... |
|
|
| (1478148) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8 |
|
|
Posted by TUNNELRAT on Wed Jun 13 12:57:14 2018, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Tue Jun 12 22:52:50 2018. that was one of the proposals,connect the ind into the Jamaica EL at cresent st[stupid] or run it under the EL in completion[more stupid] |
|
|
| (1478149) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8 |
|
|
Posted by TUNNELRAT on Wed Jun 13 12:58:04 2018, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8, posted by Elkeeper on Tue Jun 12 15:43:41 2018. I,d say probably not from what bi,ve read. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1478159) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by William A. Padron on Wed Jun 13 14:48:06 2018, in response to SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jun 13 07:04:20 2018. Forgot about it, Wallyhorse, and not in our lifetime ever, if anyone of us will actually live that long to see that! Besides, there are historic brownstones that sit on top of that, so the NIMBY's will have a field day in opposing it!-William A. Padron ["Clinton St."] |
|
|
| (1478163) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jun 13 16:04:58 2018, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8, posted by Edwards! on Tue Jun 12 22:23:11 2018. I was thinking the same thing. Had the Fulton el been completely rebuilt east of Nostrand, there would have been a number of possibilities. The Ind could have been connected to the Fulton el at Nostrand where the Fulton el had been rebuilt to dual contract standards or at the approximate location of the Bway/ENY (now Bway Jct) station of the IND. since the current Fulton St subway infrastructure curves slightly north under Truxton Pk a portal could have been built in the area connecting the IND to the Fulton St el at that point. Actually, there were a couple of other variations of the extension of the IND east of Rockaway Ave. One was to have the IND continue under Fulton St and under the Jamaica Line el structure to a point a bit east of Crescent St where it would have emerged onto a structure and connected to the Liberty Av el structure around the same place it does now. Another would have had the IND turn east along Liberty Ave and connect directly to the Fulton St el structure at Crescent St which would have required of course the upgrading of that portion of the el to dual contract standards. I suspect that the present routing was decided on since it pretty much duplicated the exact routing of the Fulton St el with a slightly smoother connection to Liberty Av as well as affording an additional route east into S/E Queens although that line was never built. |
|
|
| (1478164) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jun 13 16:06:26 2018, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8, posted by Elkeeper on Tue Jun 12 15:43:41 2018. See my post addressing the proposed alternative routes. |
|
|
| (1478165) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jun 13 16:08:23 2018, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for June 8, posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Tue Jun 12 09:17:20 2018. Well any new lines would logically require additional rolling stock and possibly new yards depending on the capacity of the existing yards. |
|
|
| (1478170) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jun 13 16:29:36 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by William A. Padron on Wed Jun 13 14:48:06 2018. If you are talking about Court St, that might be a problem although I’m sure with a TBM, it could be accomplished with a minimum of inconvenience to the residents. If the line had been extended west to connect with some Manhattan line at the time the subway was first constructed, the city would merely have condemned the buildings in the way and through routed Schermerhorn St the way it did with 6 Av in Manhattan and Pitkin with Old South Rd in Queens. Had the Utica/Stuyvesant subway been completed, it would be safe to assume that S 4 St which ended at Union Ave would have been through routed in the same way by demolishing all the buildings in the path of the new subway. One of the reasons that Hoyt/Schermerhorn was able to be constructed as it was is because it was done during the depression and there were either empty lots over the station location or any buildings that might have been in the way were able to be condemned and demolished for the construction due to it being during the depression. |
|
|
| (1478172) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jun 13 17:28:46 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jun 13 11:16:27 2018. Excellent post. |
|
|
| (1478191) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jun 13 21:20:34 2018, in response to SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jun 13 07:04:20 2018. EXACTLY how would you connect this SAS line to Court St, Wally? |
|
|
| (1478192) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by mcorivervsaf on Wed Jun 13 22:12:06 2018, in response to SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jun 13 07:04:20 2018. Great. Again with this? For the millionth time:Can you make millions of dollars magically appear out of nowhere to fund all this? Even if you did, what about opposition from business owners and residents? Life is too short, you shouldn’t be speculating on things that you have no control over. |
|
|
| (1478235) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 14 13:21:17 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by randyo on Wed Jun 13 16:29:36 2018. Unless, they planned to turn onto Clinton St from Schermerhorn. Whether that turn was to go right or left (to State St), is unknonw to me. |
|
|
| (1478240) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jun 14 14:22:23 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 14 13:21:17 2018. In that neighborhood, it would have to be a very sharp turn to avoid underpinning at least some buildings in the area. |
|
|
| (1478242) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jun 14 14:36:09 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jun 13 21:20:34 2018. Any connection to the Court St station would require a new underwater crossing from the south end of Manhattan to get to Bkln. As originally envisioned, the existing stub tracks at Hudson Terminal (WTC) would have been connected to a reclaimed portion of the BMT Bway Subway since those 2 sets of tks line up almost perfectly. The bellmouths S/O Whitehall would then be connected to a new underwater tube connecting to Court St. While I have not seen any documentation on it it may be possible that the connection from Court St to the SAS might also have been part of the original plans as well although it is known that the SAS connection was definitely part of the 1940 plans. |
|
|
| (1478250) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Thu Jun 14 15:21:09 2018, in response to SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jun 13 07:04:20 2018. Which would mean the end of the Transit Museum as we know it. |
|
|
| (1478265) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jun 14 18:35:23 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Mitch45 on Thu Jun 14 15:21:09 2018. Which would you rather have, the museum or the station used for its original purpose? |
|
|
| (1478271) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Jun 14 19:37:04 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Mitch45 on Thu Jun 14 15:21:09 2018. They could always build a new stub terminal for the Transit Museum elsewhere-- perhaps one with more tracks and more space on multiple levels.Why dream for a peanut when you can dream about a 10-course filet mignon dinner? |
|
|
| (1478275) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Thu Jun 14 20:32:12 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Jun 14 19:37:04 2018. Unused upper level at Roo0sevelt ave. - platforms could be extended.and of course, tearing down the wall, and repurposing 76th. st. |
|
|
| (1478279) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by The I Man on Thu Jun 14 20:41:38 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Mitch45 on Thu Jun 14 15:21:09 2018. A small price to pay. |
|
|
| (1478283) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 14 21:08:44 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Express Rider on Thu Jun 14 20:32:12 2018. I was thinking of a complete renovation of Ninth Ave, Brooklyn, lower level. |
|
|
| (1478286) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Thu Jun 14 21:16:09 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 14 21:08:44 2018. Only problem with a lot of location suggestions...is viability and easy access..Where it is,practically perfect. Anywhere else..ehhh... |
|
|
| (1478287) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 14 21:17:07 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by randyo on Thu Jun 14 14:36:09 2018. I'll throw this one in the mix for the hell of it! After the "G" leaves Hoyt/Schermerhorn, westbound (southbound), have it turn right onto State St, instead of heading to Bergen St. |
|
|
| (1478288) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 14 21:18:30 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Edwards! on Thu Jun 14 21:16:09 2018. Visitors can take the "D" to 9th Ave, right? |
|
|
| (1478304) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri Jun 15 06:51:56 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Edwards! on Thu Jun 14 21:16:09 2018. Agreed!!! |
|
|
| (1478309) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by jailhousedoc on Fri Jun 15 07:41:18 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Jun 14 19:37:04 2018. The unused portion of the Canal Street Station on the J line would be a good candidate - one of the tracks on that side ends in a stub-end with a large concrete bumper. |
|
|
| (1478313) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by LA Scott on Fri Jun 15 09:23:16 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Elkeeper on Thu Jun 14 13:21:17 2018. Turning onto Clinton, and then turning again onto an east/west street might require more houses to be demolished than just a straight continuation.Schermerhorn west of Smith is narrow (was not widened by the IND), and there is just enough room for the station. Judging by other turns, ~17 brownstones would need to be taken out for a south turn, or ~14 brownstones and an apartment building for north turn. This does not include any more demolitions for the west turn. Extending Schermerhorn to Henry would require ~15 demolitions. That might give enough grade for a TBM to go under the remaining houses. Of course, neither option will ever happen. Even if funding magically appeared, tearing down this many houses in one of the most politically connected landmark districts in the city is a project killer. |
|
|
| (1478347) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by displaced angeleno on Fri Jun 15 13:22:34 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by LA Scott on Fri Jun 15 09:23:16 2018. We're also the first landmark district in the city. Of course, for that very reason. |
|
|
| (1478387) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Jun 15 17:42:43 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by jailhousedoc on Fri Jun 15 07:41:18 2018. Use both canal st and Bowery. Have it within fare control but additional access controls to prevent the general public from wandering in. Take regular J trains between the two stops to see both halves. Not sure how big the Bowery mezzanine is to host the exhibits (I know the Canal st one is too tiny). |
|
|
| (1478390) | |
Montague Tunnel Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri Jun 15 18:32:02 2018, in response to SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Jun 13 07:04:20 2018. And wait till the next time Halley’s Comet comes around (i.e., 2062)? If we’re lucky?Why not consider connecting the Fulton St Local tracks at Hoyt-Schermerhorn to the way-underutilized Montague St Tunnel? Then extend the W via the tunnel and have it replace the C as the Fulton St Local. This eliminates the merge between the A and C at Schermerhorn. The C can then run express to Lefferts while the A serves the Rockaways exclusively. |
|
|
| (1478392) | |
Re: Montague Tunnel Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Fri Jun 15 18:59:37 2018, in response to Montague Tunnel Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri Jun 15 18:32:02 2018. Then it would have to run under Clinton St from Hoyt/Schermerhorn to the subway connection at Montague St. You are dealing with narrow streets and curves. |
|
|
| (1478393) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Fri Jun 15 19:05:43 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Jun 15 17:42:43 2018. Take out the 2 center tracks, between Canal St and the Bowery. Put in ramps to/from under the Bowery station. Connect that to Christie St. No need for a new lower level station at the Bowery. Hardly anyone uses that station, anyway. |
|
|
| (1478395) | |
Re: Montague Tunnel Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by jailhousedoc on Fri Jun 15 19:30:56 2018, in response to Montague Tunnel Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri Jun 15 18:32:02 2018. that area in Brooklyn is way too congested for that to take place, and I do not see it ever getting any attention. Still, we can hope for something.... |
|
|
| (1478417) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Jun 16 00:38:01 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Elkeeper on Fri Jun 15 19:05:43 2018. These days,you'd be surprised about how much people use that station.Not as deserted as it once was due to the neighborhood changing. More folks moving in..new buildings going up and so on. |
|
|
| (1478421) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Lord Vader on Sat Jun 16 01:00:39 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Jun 14 19:37:04 2018. I’d suggest the old Essex St Trolley Terminal if there’s enough space for storage and expansion.Vader |
|
|
| (1478467) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sat Jun 16 20:52:22 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Edwards! on Sat Jun 16 00:38:01 2018. I was thinking more about the SAS connection logistics. The east end Bowery platforms almost touch Christie St. |
|
|
| (1478530) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jun 17 15:19:15 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Elkeeper on Sat Jun 16 20:52:22 2018. Which is why I wonder that the TA didn’t build a transfer between the 2 lines at that point. |
|
|
| (1478564) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Sun Jun 17 22:56:39 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Elkeeper on Fri Jun 15 19:05:43 2018. Hopefully the MTA can eventually build a transfer passageway from Bowery to Grand Street. Doesn't the Grand Street platforms extend to Broome St? That's only a block south of Bowery station. |
|
|
| (1478587) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by qveensboro_plaza on Mon Jun 18 07:17:00 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Sun Jun 17 22:56:39 2018. Isn't there a small section of the LOMEX built at Broome Street the same time as the Chrystie Street line? It might be in the way of a transfer, unless it could be incorporated into the passageway.Also, J/Z riders already have access to uptown Sixth Ave service via the F transfer at Delancey, and to Manhattan Bridge service via Canal Street. Both transfers are just one stop away from Bowery, so the cost of building an additional transfer at Bowery may not be justified. |
|
|
| (1478639) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Mon Jun 18 14:30:01 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by randyo on Thu Jun 14 18:35:23 2018. Quite frankly? The museum. Its location in an actual 1930's era subway station is unique. The station itself one of the museum displays. Putting the old trains someplace else would take something away from the museum's allure.Now, of course, if they put the museum at 76th Street.... |
|
|
| (1478641) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 18 14:32:28 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by randyo on Thu Jun 14 18:35:23 2018. Its original purpose was to act as the Fulton stub terminal. The plans to extend it to the city came later and are impractical. Given that, the museum is more useful. |
|
|
| (1478649) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Jun 18 15:27:07 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 18 14:32:28 2018. No.Its not impractical. Just undoable from THAT LOCATION. ANY river crossing would have to begin across the East River,and directly tied to the local tracks from Hoyt st. Any TBM/EPTBM WOULD HAVE TO BE BACKED OUT TO MANHATTAN after completed work. |
|
|
| (1478664) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Mon Jun 18 16:48:13 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Edwards! on Mon Jun 18 15:27:07 2018. Or disassembles and raised through the street. |
|
|
| (1478693) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jun 18 19:15:41 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 18 14:32:28 2018. Its original purpose was NOT to serve as a stub terminal but was to be connected as I have described in several posts to the stub tracks at Hudson Terminal (WTC) via a new underwater tunnel connected to the bellmouths S/O Whitehall and the lcl tks of the BMT Bway subway between Whl and Cortlandt St. The stub tks at Hudson Term line up almost perfectly with the BMT tks under Church St. |
|
|
| (1478740) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Tue Jun 19 10:31:10 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by randyo on Mon Jun 18 19:15:41 2018. So would it have been a flat junction for the connection? |
|
|
| (1478762) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Jun 19 17:11:04 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Q4 on Tue Jun 19 10:31:10 2018. Not a junction at all. BMT local trains coming from midtown ot Queens would terminate at City Hall or operate via the bridge and all Bway BMT exp service would operate via the bridge. The Montague St tunnel would serve only Nassau St. |
|
|
| (1478768) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jun 19 17:41:43 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by randyo on Mon Jun 18 19:15:41 2018. That sounds ridiculous. Now, I'm not saying that it was never planned, but it wasn't on either the 1929 or 1939 Second System maps. It was obviously not the plan when the IND First system was drawn up in 1925. Moreover, it is clear, given the way the Crosstown Line is designed, that the IND initially had no intention of building any tunnels for Brooklyn/Queens locals. |
|
|
| (1478840) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Wed Jun 20 14:35:02 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by randyo on Tue Jun 19 17:11:04 2018. Got it, thanks. I figured that might be the case. Under that scenario the the Broadway line station at Cortlandt would have been closed (as it has been clsince 9/11 so maybe no one would have missed it). |
|
|
| (1478841) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by LA Scott on Wed Jun 20 14:43:00 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Q4 on Wed Jun 20 14:35:02 2018. The Cortlandt station on the Broadway line has been open for years, and recently got additional entrances and a connection with the WTC E station. |
|
|
| (1478845) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jun 20 14:56:22 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by LA Scott on Wed Jun 20 14:43:00 2018. True, but had the proposed connection between the IND and the Lcl tks of the BMT at that location been built Cortlandt St would have become redundant due to its close proximity to the Hudson Terminal station. |
|
|
| (1478846) | |
Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jun 20 15:04:24 2018, in response to Re: SAS Connecting to Fulton Line, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jun 19 17:41:43 2018. Actually, one of the plans for an additional IND tunnel between Manhattan and Bkln did involve a local service since the bellmouths for the proposed Worth St Subway branch off the lcl tks S/O Canal St and the existing tks through the Rutgers St tube come from the 6 Ave local tks. When I first joined the ERA in 1959, one of the officers of the organization told me about the proposal for that connection so there must be something about it somewhere. From some of the early drawing plans I have for the IND, it seems that many of the plans for IND routes especially in the outer boroughs were a bit fluid. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
