KK Line
ande
Can somebody fill me in on the KK line? What were its beginning and
end points? When did it stop running and why?
(Questions I forgot to ask the tour guide at the Museum.)
Thanks.
ande
a...@mellon.org
brooklyn, ny
Rev. Trashcan Man
In article <31F990...@worldnet.att.net>,
Stephen Bauman <SBA...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>It was a very slow train. The theory was that it would provide an
>alternate to overcrowed F service to Jamaica. (Jamaica Ave an Hilliside
>are only a few blocks apart). However, a study done in the early 1960's
>said this service would draw passengers only if it ran express from
>Jamaica to Manhattan. The study recommended extending the 3rd track on
>the Jamaica Ave El all the way to 168th St.
This would never be done, considering that the Jamaica El was slated for
demolition pending construction of the Archer Avenue line. Of course, the
El was demolished in '78 west of Sutphin (I remember it somewhere in the
recesses of my childhood) and between Sutphin and 130th Street in '91
(although service ended in April '85). The archer Avenue line didn't open
until '88.
I have to admit, I never really understood what kind of improvement was
provided by the construction of the Archer Avenue line. The E no longer
goes as far as 179th St, the J no longer goes as far as 168th Street. All
the line does is bring transit a 5 minute walk south of its current
connection.
The only improvement is that Jamaica Avenue looks very different from when
I lived in Jamaica in my childhood. Jamaica Avenue is brighter, and I
imagine it attracts more business this way, especially small business. But
I still remember the days Macy's, Gertz, and finally Mays, closed their
doors in Jamaica.
>Now what would have happened had the TA and MTA had built that third
>track on the Jamaica El? The rush hour running time from Jamaica to
>midtwon would have been comparable to the E or F. Had they drawn traffic
>between Sutphin and 179th Sts then there would have been less need for
>connecting the 63rd St tunnel to the Queens Blvd line.
See above. You are right- volume would have significantly increased- I
remember the el even had space (and rivet holes) to build a center track
all the way to Cypress Hills and then from Myrtle Avenue on. With a fast
way to downtown instead of this skip-stop bullshit, it would certainly
alleviate pressure off of Queens Blvd.
Constantino Tobio, Jr.
"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under Communism, it's just the
opposite."
-- John Kenneth Galbraith
Peter Dougherty
ct...@aloha.cc.columbia.edu (Rev. Trashcan Man) toned in the RTC and
said :
>See above. You are right- volume would have significantly increased- I
>remember the el even had space (and rivet holes) to build a center track
>all the way to Cypress Hills and then from Myrtle Avenue on. With a fast
>way to downtown instead of this skip-stop bullshit, it would certainly
>alleviate pressure off of Queens Blvd.
What I don't understand is why, with a center express rack already in
place but never used between Metroploitan Av and B'way/E.N.Y. - - why
don't they run peak-hour express service?
Cheers, | New York Subway track maps available at
Peter Dougherty | http://subway.k2nesoft.com/maps
p...@fox.nstn.ca | -------
Amateur Radio: VA3PJ | For other great NYC subway information
in Toronto, Ontario. | check out David Pirmann's terrific site:
CANADA | http://subway.k2nesoft.com/
Joseph Korman
Michael549 wrote:
> So far there does not seem to be any plans to recreate a portion of the K
> /KK route.
The KK was a slow skip stop with J from 168th to Eastern Parkway and
then local to Marcy Ave. As I remember the service, most people would
change the express J trains at EP and then wait at mid stair at
Essex/Deleancy for either F or KK for 6th Ave service.
--
Joseph D. Korman - joe...@earthlink.net
WWW site http://home.earthlink.net/~joekor/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The light at the end of the tunnel ... may be a train going the other
way!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael549
How come a middle track was not installed along the J line from Broadway
Junction to 168th Street? How come the Archer Avenue line was built?
There is currently the mindset among many transit planners that elevated
train
lines are noisy, slow, and blight the neighborhoods in which they exist.
The
early planners of the IND lines believed that SUBWAY systems were better,
faster and reduced the NIMBY response. Many of the earliest IND lines
replaced
the elevated lines near them (Columbus Ave/9 Ave, Sixth Avenue, Fulton
Street).
In the early sixities there were planning documents produced that sought
the
removal of several elevated lines, and their replacement by subway lines -
witness
the Second Avenue subway.
The Archer Avenue line was built to offer faster access to Jamaica
station,
and wider subway access to southeastern Queens. It was part of a series
of transit lines as outlined in an MTA 1968 Master Plan.
How come the KK was discontinued?
It was a very slow service using very old subway cars, and operated only
during
the rush hours. The 57th Station/Sixth Avenue station was an initial first
step
in the creation of the 63rd Street tunnel. As construction progressed on
the
tunnel, the function of that station would change. The K (KK) was seen as
just
a rush hour local service, that allowed the B to better service the upper
West
side and Brooklyn, by relieving it of servicing the 57th Street station.
(When the
K did not run, the B train ran to 57th Street).
Now, the B,F,Q routes service the 63rd Street line. The Q line is
expected to
return to the BMT-Broadway line when construction on the Manhattan Bridge
is
complete. If the Second Avenue subway is built, it may provide to the
Upper
Eastside. The B and F service the line in the absence of other
alternatives. At
one point it was planned that the F line, or a Queens Super-Express would
travel down the 63rd Street line and Sixth Avenue.
So far there does not seem to be any plans to recreate a portion of the K
/KK
route.
Michael-549
Stephen Bauman
Rev. Trashcan Man wrote:
>
> In article <31F990...@worldnet.att.net>,
> Stephen Bauman <SBA...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >It was a very slow train. The theory was that it would provide an
> >alternate to overcrowed F service to Jamaica. (Jamaica Ave an Hilliside
> >are only a few blocks apart). However, a study done in the early 1960's
> >said this service would draw passengers only if it ran express from
> >Jamaica to Manhattan. The study recommended extending the 3rd track on
> >the Jamaica Ave El all the way to 168th St.
>
> This would never be done, considering that the Jamaica El was slated for
> demolition pending construction of the Archer Avenue line. Of course, the
> El was demolished in '78 west of Sutphin (I remember it somewhere in the
> recesses of my childhood) and between Sutphin and 130th Street in '91
> (although service ended in April '85). The archer Avenue line didn't open
> until '88.
Ave plans. However, Chrystie Street was already under construction.
Steve
Richie Sevrinsky
On 28 Jul 1996 04:03:25 -0400, micha...@aol.com (Michael549) wrote:
>Now, the B,F,Q routes service the 63rd Street line. The Q line is
>expected to
>return to the BMT-Broadway line when construction on the Manhattan Bridge
>is
>complete.
"When"? Try if.
BTW, is there any good reason the N or R don't run express in Manhattan? It
seems kind of silly to have redundant service on 70% of the lines.
> If the Second Avenue subway is built, it may provide to the
>Upper
>Eastside.
"If"? Ha!!
(Sorry for the scepticism, but after a while, you learn to expect very
little -- and get impressed that the trains are running at all...)
- Richie
/------------[ sev...@columbia.edu / rs...@columbia.edu ]-------------\
| Richard S. Sevrinsky | "Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"|
| (212)305-2955 | "Well, I think so, Brain, but I can't memorize|
| | a whole opera in Yiddish!" - Animaniacs |
\---------[ http://www.cpmc.columbia.edu/homepages/sevrins/ ]----------/
Joseph Brennan
Peter Dougherty <p...@globalserve.net> wrote:
>What I don't understand is why, with a center express rack already in
>place but never used between Metroploitan Av and B'way/E.N.Y. - - why
>don't they run peak-hour express service?
You mean on the Jamaica "J" line? There is a section of center track
around 111th St, but the rest of the "new" elevated line from Cypress
Hills to Jamaica never had center track in. There is only a provision
in the cross girders for center track supports, and center trackways at
the concrete track floor sections in stations.
More importantly, the section from Alabama Ave station to the curve at
Cypress Hills is an "old" original elevated from 1885-1893 with no such
provision. It would need the same massive reconstruction done from
East New York to the Williamsburgh Bridge, which involved replacement
of much of the iron and steel, notably the "bents" (the unit of a
cross-girder and the two pillars supporting it) and center platform
stations. Big job. This section has been somewhat strengthened and
partly rebuilt over the years, but not enough to support third track
except where it has always existed between Crescent St and Cypress
Hills curves.
By the way, the Broadway rebuilding was done under traffic, creating
safety conditions that would shock people today. There is a photo in
one of the Public Service Commission reports, side view of the el,
showing a bent completely out, with a gap of open space between the
ends of the stringers (the lengthwise girders under the rails), which
are held up solely by a wooden pillar near the end of each!!
Joe Brennan Columbia University in the City of New York
bre...@columbia.edu ("affiliation shown for identification only")
http://www.cc.columbia.edu/~brennan/index-rails.html
Stephen Bauman
Joseph Brennan wrote:
>
> You mean on the Jamaica "J" line? There is a section of center track
> around 111th St, but the rest of the "new" elevated line from Cypress
> Hills to Jamaica never had center track in. There is only a provision
> in the cross girders for center track supports, and center trackways at
> the concrete track floor sections in stations.
>
> More importantly, the section from Alabama Ave station to the curve at
> Cypress Hills is an "old" original elevated from 1885-1893 with no such
> provision. It would need the same massive reconstruction done from
> East New York to the Williamsburgh Bridge, which involved replacement
> of much of the iron and steel, notably the "bents" (the unit of a
> cross-girder and the two pillars supporting it) and center platform
> stations. Big job. This section has been somewhat strengthened and
> partly rebuilt over the years, but not enough to support third track
> except where it has always existed between Crescent St and Cypress
> Hills curves.
>
> By the way, the Broadway rebuilding was done under traffic, creating
> safety conditions that would shock people today. There is a photo in
> one of the Public Service Commission reports, side view of the el,
> showing a bent completely out, with a gap of open space between the
> ends of the stringers (the lengthwise girders under the rails), which
> are held up solely by a wooden pillar near the end of each!!
>
The 1965 report suggested continuing the El down Jamaica Ave to
Broadway Jct. and abandoning the original construction on Fulton St.
Steve
Jeremy M. Posner
In article <forstnerD...@netcom.com>, fors...@netcom.com (Robert M.
Forstner) wrote:
> Richie Sevrinsky (sev...@columbia.edu) wrote:
> > On 28 Jul 1996 04:03:25 -0400, micha...@aol.com (Michael549) wrote:
>
> > >Now, the B,F,Q routes service the 63rd Street line. The Q line is
> > >expected to
> > >return to the BMT-Broadway line when construction on the Manhattan Bridge
> > >is
> > >complete.
>
> > "When"? Try if.
>
> > BTW, is there any good reason the N or R don't run express in Manhattan? It
> > seems kind of silly to have redundant service on 70% of the lines.
>
> Well, for one thing, you can only run an express between Canal Street and
> 57th Street. And with the Manhattan Bridge out of service, you'd have
> to do switching at two locations. Since the Manhattan Br. is out, downtown
> expresses would have to merge just north of Canal St., instead of just
> heading out to Brooklyn after Prince Street, like they used to. Given
> the erratic (and that seems to be an understatement) behavior of the N and
> R (or "The Never and the Rarely", as they're known in Brooklyn), controlling
> the split/merge at Canal would be, ummm, interesting. And since the N/R
> are still limited by 2-track tubes at either end of Manhattan, running
> expresses doesn't increase capacity, but may in fact reduce it by introducing
> the additional two track movements.
>
> Second, because the Manhattan Bridge is out, the Q is running on 6th Avenue.
> That leaves only two lines on Broadway, and forcing riders headed for local
> stations on Broadway onto only one of these lines would lead to some pretty
> packed trains. When the Q finally (if ever) returns to Broadway, express
> service would be easier to provide.
>
> Incidentally, _occasionally_ there is an express train on Broadway (there
> is usually one s/b at 34th St/Herald Sq. at about 8:30AM, to 14th St.
> only, though). But this seems to happen only on an as necessary basis
> (or if the train is bound for layup at Canal St. / City Hall).
Since it is generally agreed that there are service problems on
the N/R lines, is there some reason that a third route couldn't be run on
that line, perhaps running from 21st-LIC through the 63rd street tunnel
then down to Canal on the express tracks? (Maybe they could use the "V"
signs) While it wouldn't fix the problems in Queens or Brooklyn, it might
help relieve the inadaquate service during rush hour.
Of course it might solve some of the problems if the trains
actually moved. I was a bit annoyed this weekend when I was on an R train
which stopped _within sight_ of the 5th avenue station only to have an
announcement about moving shortly come over the PA. 20 minutes later the
train moved the one train length to get into the station, where it sat for
another 5 minutes. All told, with several other delays it took close to 50
minutes to get from Lex to 57th street with most of that time spent
sitting between stations, so there was no way to get out and walk, which
would have been faster. The least the TA could do is disallow use of the
word "shortly" for delays of more than 15 minutes...
-JMP
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Jeremy M. Posner | "Life is what happens to you while you're |
| jpo...@panix.com | busy making other plans." -John Lennon |
| (212) 996-2183 | http://www.panix.com/~jposner/ |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert M. Forstner
> "When"? Try if.
--
Robert Forstner -- fors...@netcom.com for...@cooper.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNIX _is_ user friendly. It's just VERY picky about its friends.
There is no dark side of the moon, really. As a matter of fact, it's all dark.
--Pink Floyd
Samsiboney
I d like to run the Z up 6th ave then thru the f tracks to quenns then
terminate at
Parsons on the elevel :>
Stephen Bauman
One shortcoming of the Archer Avenue Extension is that there is no track
connection between the J/Z and E tracks.
This connection would have great use for maintenance, even though it
would have limited revenue use. This connection would have come in very
handy, when the Williamsburgh Bridge was closed to train traffic several
years ago. The closing left the Fresh Pond, East New York and Canarsie
yards with no connection to Coney Island.
Steve
PSchleifer
In article <3202D1...@worldnet.att.net>, Stephen Bauman
<SBA...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>One shortcoming of the Archer Avenue Extension is that there is no track
>connection between the J/Z and E tracks.
>
>This connection would have great use for maintenance, even though it
>would have limited revenue use. This connection would have come in very
>handy, when the Williamsburgh Bridge was closed to train traffic several
>years ago. The closing left the Fresh Pond, East New York and Canarsie
>yards with no connection to Coney Island.
>
The Williamsburgh Bridge closing was 4 months before the Archer Ave
Extension was open.
---------------------
Peter Schleifer
work: nny...@ubss.com (UBS Securities-standard disclaimer applies)
home: pschl...@aol.com
Harvey Fishman
In <3202D1...@worldnet.att.net> Stephen Bauman <SBA...@worldnet.att.net> says
> This connection would have great use for maintenance, even though it
> would have limited revenue use. This connection would have come in very
> handy, when the Williamsburgh Bridge was closed to train traffic several
> years ago. The closing left the Fresh Pond, East New York and Canarsie
> yards with no connection to Coney Island.
How about the connection via the Bay Ridge division? Granted that this
would have required the equipment to be hauled by a diesel engine, but it
could have been done if necessary. I do not think that this has a width
limitation as a connection via the rail-shop wye and the IRT trackage
would (which would have also required a locomotive as the wye lacks third
rail.)
Harvey
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harvey Fishman | The best answers are those that expand one's mind
fis...@panix.com | and lead to a hundred new questions.
718-258-7276 |
Peter Rosa
In <4u38co$b...@panix3.panix.com> fis...@panix.com (Harvey Fishman)
writes:
>In <3202D1...@worldnet.att.net> Stephen Bauman
<SBA...@worldnet.att.net> says
>
>> This connection would have great use for maintenance, even though it
>> would have limited revenue use. This connection would have come in
very
>> handy, when the Williamsburgh Bridge was closed to train traffic
several
>> years ago. The closing left the Fresh Pond, East New York and
Canarsie
>> yards with no connection to Coney Island.
>
>How about the connection via the Bay Ridge division? Granted that
this
>would have required the equipment to be hauled by a diesel engine, but
it
>could have been done if necessary. I do not think that this has a
width
>limitation as a connection via the rail-shop wye and the IRT trackage
>would (which would have also required a locomotive as the wye lacks
third
>rail.)
>
Where is this connection located, that involves the rail-shop wye and
IRT trackage? I didn't think there were any IRT lines near the Coney
Island yards.
Manoj Nair
Makes too much sense? Either that or the track linkage is no longer there
...
Manoj
Sometime, somewhere, Michael Berson <mber...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
: ande <a...@mellon.org> wrote:
:
: >Can somebody fill me in on the KK line? What were its beginning and
: >end points? When did it stop running and why?
:
: >(Questions I forgot to ask the tour guide at the Museum.)
:
: The KK (later renamed the K) ran from 168th Street Jamaica to
: 57th Street-6th Avenue. Some trains originated at Broadway Junction.
: It made all stops along 6th Avenue, crossed the Williamsburgh Bridge,
: made all local stops along Broadway-Brooklyn and ran skip-stop from
: Broadway Junction to 168th Street. One of the reasons the KK was
: eliminated was that it was slow.
: Most Jamaica bound passengers changed from the F to the QJ (later
: renamed the J) at Delancey-Essex Street. This was because the QJ ran
: express along Broadway-Brooklyn.
: Manhattan Bound passengers would prefer to ride the express QJ along
: Broadway-Brooklyn and change for the F at Delancey-Essex. The KK was
: slow as it ran as a local in Brooklyn.
:
: I always wondered why the TA never used the Z train to replace the
: service offered on the KK. Do BOTH the J and Z REALLY need to
: terminate at Broad Street?? Why not run the J to Broad Street and
: route the Z from the Williamsburgh Bridge to 6th Avenue. The Z
: currently runs express in Brooklyn which would make this line a
: convenient and fast way to Midtown. Currently, a transfer MUST be made
: between the J,M,Z and the F at Delancey-Essex to get to Midtown.
: I have been through there and the platforms are extremely crowded.
: A re-routed Z train up 6th Avenue, would alleviate that situation and
: offer a one-train ride to Midtown and express run in Brooklyn would
: probably attract quite a few passengers.
:
: Any thoughts??
:
: MB
:
Harvey Fishman
In <4u3f7p$2...@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com> pro...@ix.netcom.com(Peter Rosa) says
> Where is this connection located, that involves the rail-shop wye and
> IRT trackage? I didn't think there were any IRT lines near the Coney
> Island yards.
The rail-shop is located at Linden Boulevard and Pennsylvania Avenue. The
wye connects to the Canarsie line just south of the Sutter Avenue station
and another leg goes to the Livonia Avenue IRT line near the Junius Street
station. The third leg goes to the rail-yard itself.
There are no IRT lines near the Coney Island shops; the use of the wye is
purely to exit from the BMT lines onto something else other than through
the Nassau Street loop connection to the Montague Street tunnel. Once you
were on the IRT trackage, you would still need another connection to the
BMT, such as that at Queensboro Plaza. Roundabout, but there ARE physical
connections in place. Of course you will wind up shaving platforms
running the B division equipment on the A division tracks, but...
jab...@hoflink.com
On 5 Aug 1996, Peter Rosa wrote:
> In <4u38co$b...@panix3.panix.com> fis...@panix.com (Harvey Fishman)
> writes:
> >
> >In <3202D1...@worldnet.att.net> Stephen Bauman
> <SBA...@worldnet.att.net> says
> >
> >> This connection would have great use for maintenance, even though it
>
> >> would have limited revenue use. This connection would have come in
> very
> >> handy, when the Williamsburgh Bridge was closed to train traffic
> several
> >> years ago. The closing left the Fresh Pond, East New York and
> Canarsie
> >> yards with no connection to Coney Island.
> >
> >How about the connection via the Bay Ridge division? Granted that
> this
> >would have required the equipment to be hauled by a diesel engine, but
> it
> >could have been done if necessary. I do not think that this has a
> width
> >limitation as a connection via the rail-shop wye and the IRT trackage
> >would (which would have also required a locomotive as the wye lacks
> third
> >rail.)
> >
>
> Where is this connection located, that involves the rail-shop wye and
> IRT trackage? I didn't think there were any IRT lines near the Coney
> Island yards.
>
There is a maintanence yard built in the vicinity of Linden Blvd
and Rockaway Ave (north of the elevated section of the LIRR Bay Ridge
line. Originally, there was a crossover from the righthand LIRR freight
track to the SB "L" line north of the New Lots Ave. station. An overpass
was built with connections to the EB IRT east of Junius Street and the SB
"L" line south of the Livonia Ave. station. These lead to one track that
crosses over the LIRR freight tracks and goes directly into the yard. I
am told there is no third rail on these tracks. A crossover from the NB
"L" tracks to the SB "L" tracks was added north of the Livonia Ave.
station.
jab...@hoflink.com
On 5 Aug 1996, Manoj Nair wrote:
> Makes too much sense? Either that or the track linkage is no longer there
> ...
>
> Manoj
>
> Sometime, somewhere, Michael Berson <mber...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> : ande <a...@mellon.org> wrote:
> :
> : >Can somebody fill me in on the KK line? What were its beginning and
> : >end points? When did it stop running and why?
> :
> : >(Questions I forgot to ask the tour guide at the Museum.)
> :
> : The KK (later renamed the K) ran from 168th Street Jamaica to
> : 57th Street-6th Avenue. Some trains originated at Broadway Junction.
> : It made all stops along 6th Avenue, crossed the Williamsburgh Bridge,
> : made all local stops along Broadway-Brooklyn and ran skip-stop from
> : Broadway Junction to 168th Street. One of the reasons the KK was
> : eliminated was that it was slow.
Actually (although the maps stated Broadway-East NY) the "K"
trains terminated at the old abandoned center platforms at Atlantic Ave.
Atlantic Ave. on the "L" line has 3 island platforms. The outer NB tracks
are removed and the platform has a railing. The inner side of the
outside platform is where
the NB "L" train stops. The center platforms were used for the "K" trains
(formally the old Fulton St elevated line) replaced in the 50's by the
underground A/C lines. The outer third platform is used for the SB "L"
line and before they discontinued the "K" line, it was moved to the outer
platform (next to the "L") line for the handful of passengers that did not
get off a Bway Junction and connected to the "L" at Atlantic. About two
"K" trains a day proceeded all the way to Rockaway Parkway. They were
stored in the Rockaway Parkway yards. I used to ride one in the morning
rush hour (undocumented train - you have to read the signs on the train).
Harvey Fishman
In <Pine.BSI.3.93.960809...@hoflink.com> <jab...@hoflink.com> says
> There is a maintanence yard built in the vicinity of Linden Blvd
> and Rockaway Ave (north of the elevated section of the LIRR Bay Ridge
> line. Originally, there was a crossover from the righthand LIRR freight
> track to the SB "L" line north of the New Lots Ave. station. An overpass
> was built with connections to the EB IRT east of Junius Street and the SB
> "L" line south of the Livonia Ave. station. These lead to one track that
> crosses over the LIRR freight tracks and goes directly into the yard. I
> am told there is no third rail on these tracks. A crossover from the NB
> "L" tracks to the SB "L" tracks was added north of the Livonia Ave.
> station.
The connection between the south-bound Canarsie track and the Bay Ridge
division of the LIRR has been restored. The turnouts were removed for
about a year, but were reinstalled several years ago. There is still a
manual ground-throw on the turnout on the Canarsie trackage though rather
than a switch-machine.
Peter Rosa
In <4uigm2$9...@panix3.panix.com> fis...@panix.com (Harvey Fishman)
writes:
>The connection between the south-bound Canarsie track and the Bay
Ridge
>division of the LIRR has been restored. The turnouts were removed for
>about a year, but were reinstalled several years ago. There is still
a
>manual ground-throw on the turnout on the Canarsie trackage though
rather
>than a switch-machine.
>
system and the regular rail network. In a different thread a couple of
months ago, there was a discussion of how new/rebuilt equipment can be
delivered to the subway. Apparently, the normal procedure was to float
the cars across NY Harbor by barge, to a rail connection on the
Brooklyn waterfront that connects with subway tracks. It would seem to
me that this restored connection with the LIRR would be much easier ...
PSchleifer
In article <Pine.BSI.3.93.960809...@hoflink.com>,
<jab...@hoflink.com> writes:
> About two
>"K" trains a day proceeded all the way to Rockaway Parkway. They were
>stored in the Rockaway Parkway yards. I used to ride one in the morning
>rush hour (undocumented train - you have to read the signs on the train).
A map I have from the 50's indicates limited service to Rockaway Parkway
via the Broadway el. It seems to me that a rush hour service running
from Rockaway Parkway, then express Eastern Parkway - Essex St,
then via 6th Ave might, unlike the old KK, actually be useful.
Michael Berson
pschl...@aol.com (PSchleifer) wrote:
>In article <Pine.BSI.3.93.960809...@hoflink.com>,
><jab...@hoflink.com> writes:
>> About two
>>"K" trains a day proceeded all the way to Rockaway Parkway. They were
>>stored in the Rockaway Parkway yards. I used to ride one in the morning
>>rush hour (undocumented train - you have to read the signs on the train).
>A map I have from the 50's indicates limited service to Rockaway Parkway
>via the Broadway el. It seems to me that a rush hour service running
>from Rockaway Parkway, then express Eastern Parkway - Essex St,
>then via 6th Ave might, unlike the old KK, actually be useful.
I agree. The service you mention would give access to 6th Avenue via
express service in Brooklyn. It would also give Rockaway Parkway
riders a long-needed alternative to only the L train.
Robert Coe
On 10 Aug 1996 20:59:52 GMT, pro...@ix.netcom.com(Peter Rosa) wrote:
: So this must mean that there's a direct connection between the subway
: system and the regular rail network. In a different thread a couple
: of months ago, there was a discussion of how new/rebuilt equipment can
: be delivered to the subway. Apparently, the normal procedure was to
: float the cars across NY Harbor by barge, to a rail connection on the
: Brooklyn waterfront that connects with subway tracks. It would seem to
: me that this restored connection with the LIRR would be much easier ...
There must be all sorts of compatibility problems (couplers, power feed,
brake lines, etc.) that would make it difficult to tow subway cars over
significant distances on the LIRR.
--
___ _ - Bob
/__) _ / / ) _ _
(_/__) (_)_(_) (___(_)_(/_____________________________________ b...@1776.COM
Robert K. Coe ** 14 Churchill St, Sudbury, MA 01776-2120 USA ** 508-443-3265
Joseph D. Korman
Robert Coe wrote:
> There must be all sorts of compatibility problems (couplers, power feed,
> brake lines, etc.) that would make it difficult to tow subway cars over
> significant distances on the LIRR.
I'm not sure how they worked the brakes etc, but remember seeing slides
or movies of the R-29 to 36 series cars on Horseshoe Curve while being
delivered to NY from St.Louis. If there's enough of a move reqiured, it
should not be impractical to set up (or build) a locmotive with brakes
compatable with the subway cars.
--
-------------------------------------------------
| Joseph D. Korman - joe...@earthlink.net |
| WWW site http://home.earthlink.net/~joekor/ |
|-------------------------------------------------|
|Follow the YELLOW Brick Road to the Land of OZ |
| to learn about writing HTML pages |
| http://www.buffnet.net/~paulk/oz.htm |
| The Page Masters Ultimate Web Page |
|from the Virtual University: http://horizons.org/|
|-------------------------------------------------|
| The light at the end of the tunnel ... |
| may be a train going the other way! |
| Bad Trek is better than No Trek! |
| I have become a (computer) chip potato. |
-------------------------------------------------
Michael Berson
pschl...@aol.com (PSchleifer) wrote:
>In article <Pine.BSI.3.93.960809...@hoflink.com>,
><jab...@hoflink.com> writes:
>> About two
>>"K" trains a day proceeded all the way to Rockaway Parkway. They were
>>stored in the Rockaway Parkway yards. I used to ride one in the morning
>>rush hour (undocumented train - you have to read the signs on the train).
>A map I have from the 50's indicates limited service to Rockaway Parkway
>via the Broadway el. It seems to me that a rush hour service running
>from Rockaway Parkway, then express Eastern Parkway - Essex St,
>then via 6th Ave might, unlike the old KK, actually be useful.
I agree. The KK was doomed from the start becuase it was so slow. The
re-incarnated service you desribe would not only provide an express
route in Brooklyn to 6th Avenue, but it would also provide a long
needed alternative to riders from Rockaway Parkway other than the L.
Michael Berson
Ed (NY)
> >A map I have from the 50's indicates limited service to Rockaway Parkway
> >via the Broadway el. It seems to me that a rush hour service running
> >from Rockaway Parkway, then express Eastern Parkway - Essex St,
> >then via 6th Ave might, unlike the old KK, actually be useful.
>
> I agree. The KK was doomed from the start becuase it was so slow. The
> re-incarnated service you desribe would not only provide an express
> route in Brooklyn to 6th Avenue, but it would also provide a long
> needed alternative to riders from Rockaway Parkway other than the L.
>
I think there would be a problem with this: the original service plan for
the Essex Street-Broadway/Lafayette connection had both the
Broadway/Brooklyn (KK) AND Myrtle Avenue (M or MM) operating up 6th Avenue.
This was modified when it became apparent that the remaining service (QJ)
would be inadequate for the lower Manhattan ridership; in fact, the opening
of this segment saw the M extended from Chambers Street to Broad Street
rather than up 6th Avenue.
The viability of this new service would depend on available slots over the
Williamsburgh Bridge. I don't know what the capacity is (certainly less
than 30 TPH) or how many trains are currently scheduled, but it would seem
that any reasonable number of new trains would result in a diminished
service to lower Manhattan. Would it make sense to run the new service
every 12 minutes if that's all the additional capacity that existed?
Schedule experts...???