User talk:SPUI/NYC Subway archive

NY Subway Map
Very nice maps you're putting in the public domain. Thanks!

I'd like to offer a couple of corrections to your new NYC subway map. Since you're showing the lines by original owner, the Liberty Avenue portion of the IND Fulton Street Line in Brooklyn was originally BMT (until 1956). Also, the Rockaway Line could be viewed in several ways. It was the Long Island Rail Road until 1955-1956 (different portions). When the subway took it over, it was operated as part of the IND, but was a separate division ("Rockaway Division"). Is 1956 "recent"? By me it's recent in the sense of being post-Unification. So maybe you would want to make it black or otherwise note this.

The Astoria and Flushing Lines are a little confusing. I know what you're trying to do, but I'm not sure others would realize you're showing joint operaton. Keep up the GREAT work! Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 19:47, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Second System map? Kewl! Looking forward to it! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 21:29, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah, that's just beautiful. Are you using Illustrator or Photoshop? I especially like that you're keeping the map geographically correct. Of course, I have a couple of nitpicks: the ramp from Euclid to the Liberty Ave. el should be in red also. And you might want to indicate that the IRT-BMT operation on Flatbush Avenue does not share trackage, even though it's in a common structure.


 * That's it! Are you planning to note line names (e.g., you mention "Culver south of Ditmas" but you don't show where Culver is)? Or any key stations? Or maybe you want to save that for a different map, if you're feeling ambitious. :) -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 21:50, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I think the most straightforward way of dealing with downtown is an inset. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 22:23, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Eighth Avenue Subway
Yes, the northern part is the Washington Heights Line. This is one of those things where you can't depend on Google (too recent) or public maps (simplied for public information).

Actually, it isn't mentioned in the article (I don't think) but the IND particularly was organized around the concept of mainline/branch line, which was reflected in their signage. On the trains, the destination signs reflect both the BRANCH and station, and the route sign shows the letter and mainline. This was kepy pretty much intact (with the exception of Coney Island as an IND destination) until Chrystie Street. Example signage:

WASH HTS.-205 ST.    FULTON-LEFFERTS A | EIGHTH AVE. EXP.

So this meant an A-8th Ave Exp was going from 205th Street station on the Washington Heights LINE (205th is in Inwood, not Washington Heights) to Lefferts Blvd. on the Fulton Street LINE (Lefferts Blvd is not on Fulton Street, it's on Liberty Avenue). -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 19:44, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

(from Cecropia's talk): ''I have the same question about the Houston Street Line - is it possibly part of the Sixth Avenue Line? The one seems a bit sketchier though.''
 * Yes, there was even special signage for it to distinguish trains using it from those 6th Avenue trains continuing down toward Chambers Street. There were signs: D | 6th Ave Exp and D | 6th Ave. - Houston Exp. Same for F Line.

By the way, it looks like the official name is Concourse Line
 * It's been called both but I won't nitpick on it, since the R1/9 signs said "Concourse - 205 St" -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 20:21, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Your Subway Map
Wow! That is a great effort!

I hate to quibble with any of it, but I will anyway ;-) because I get the feeling you want it to be the best it can be. :)

In the Bronx:
 * The Woodlawn Line is now designated as Jerome Line (JER)

In Manhattan:
 * The MTA disambiguates the Broadway Line as BMT Broadway (BWY - BMT) and the IRT Broadway-7th is BW7. Just FYI
 * You might want to label the Chrystie Street Connection (we have an article).

In Queens:
 * Label the 60th Street Tunnel Connection.

In Brooklyn:
 * Can't find anything--just making the note that I found more references to Smith St. Line stations as Culver: Bergen St. and Smith-9th. That just about covers it -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 00:21, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * P.S. I'm making a bet with myself as to whether you're going to start labelling key junctions so people can follow the routes on your map. ;-) -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 00:26, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Canarsie LIne - LIRR connection
In what context are you saying that a connection was retained with the old route "now the LIRR Bay Ridge Line." The LIRR was rebuilt by the Brooklyn Grade Crossing Elimination Commission c.1918 and there was no such connection retained. The recently severed connection near the Linden shops is of more recent vintage, c.1970, when the LIRR built a branch near the Canarsie Line to serve new industrial buildings. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 09:27, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * copied from Cecropia Talk: Sorry about that - I had made a logical leap that was apparently false. Can you change that part to what actually happened? By the way, what do you mean by "a branch near the Canarsie Line to serve new industrial buildings"? The LIRR Bay Ridge Branch is from the time of the original Canarsie Line; a railroad ran from Bay Ridge to the Canarsie Line at New Lots, and needed somewhere to go once the line was elevated. The bottom of has the information on that. Do you know why the connection was built c. 1970? --SPUI 09:38, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, the LIRR Bay Ridge Branch was the New York & Manhattan Beach Rwy, which provided routes from both Bay Ridge and the East River to Manhattan Beach on Coney Island. In the area where it parallels the Canarsie Line, the two lines shared a common r-o-w but separate tracks, on the surface. What Bob Andersen is talking about is that the LIRR wanted a four track line through the area, plus two tracks for the Canarsie--not enough room on the r-o-w for all those tracks. So the Canarsie Line went up (elevated) and the LIRR went down (open cut) with the Canarsie overhanging part of the LIRR on the same r-o-w. The "new" LIRR branch I was referring to is not really a branch, but a long spur from the Bay Ridge Line to industrial buidings built next to E105 Canarsie station. Why the track connection between LIRR and Canarsie was made near Linden I have no idea. Why it was severed I have no idea either, though it might have something to do with FRA crankiness about connections between rapid transit and standard RR. If you don't have it, it's kind of pricey, but Peter Dougherty's "Tracks of the New York Subway" is fabulous. Every track, every switch on the system, nice and big, kept up-to-date. See . -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 17:07, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah, I just remembered, there is an article on the BGCEC at . Click on the "4" on the map which shows the area where the Canarsie ran next to the LIRR. It doesn't show tracks, but alignments. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 17:11, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Liberty Avenue el / Liberty Avenue Line
Hi, SPUI. I think our back-and-forths are maybe more historically interesting than the articles themselves.

The Liberty Avenue el was built as a Dual Contracts facility, continuing the original Kings County elevated Fulton Street el from its ending at City Line to Lefferts Ave. (Blvd.) in Queens as a heavy three-track structure over Liberty Avenue.

The original KC el running east from the Canarsie Line wasn't over Fulton Street, so the BMT sometimes referred to the outer portion (after the extension of course) as the Liberty Avenue Line. However, no trains were ever signed this way and, in fact, when the service from 8th Avenue to Lefferts Ave. was started in 1936, it was called "14th St.-Fulton St." despite the fact that no part of the run was actually over Fulton Street (the street). -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 18:55, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Lexington Avenue Line
"12 Historic Maps of Brooklyn" (the first set) from H&M Publications has an 1888 map with the station names. That reminds me--I have to correct "Eastern Parkway". The name back then was "Manhattan Beach Crossing" (later Manhattan Junction). It wasn't Eastern Parkway until much later because Eastern Parkway (technically "Eastern Parkway Extension") wasn't there. Also, I think we should have a separate entry bye-and-bye for the Lexington/Broadway L station at Cypress Hills. It's not the same or in the same location as the current station.

I know that maps showing the Park Avenue L (the BRT and BMT always called them "L"s--could I talk you into titling the articles that way?) are online. Try the maps collection at [The Library of Congress], a real gold mine. Search on Brooklyn. I'm not sure if any maps there show the station names, but I have seen those. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 08:52, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * We ended up in an edit conflict. I added the stations from memory but then checked the map. There WAS a station at York & Washington BUT NO station at Vanderbilt. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 09:17, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Pre-Chrystie BMT Letters
Is this what you were looking for? http://nycsubway.org/perl/caption.pl?/maps/historical/1966_c.gif -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 00:12, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I like the infoboxes on the R article, but I find the "prior uses" narrative difficult to follow, not surprising since it took the TA time to figure out what it was doing. I'm going to see if I can't make it more sensible. If you don't like it, just revert or try to figure out something else.

BTW, someone has a pretty decent rundown on letter history on the web. If I can recall who/where/what, I'll post it here. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 03:55, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, here's one from my bookmarks: http://members.aol.com/bdmnqr2/linehistory.html I've never looked over this one exhaustively, but you can do some "data mining" to see if you can get more gold nuggets than iron pyrite. Where there are explicit dates, it seems pretty good. I don't go along with the anachronism of talking about the Q (for example) in 1920, but he does note in some cases when letters were first used on individual cases. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 04:28, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Re: J and K. First you need to understand that letters were introduced on the BMT before they really had use for them. The letters were intended for Chrystie Street integration, but were introduced beginning in 1960 with the R27 equipment. So each letter represented one-for-one a BMT service number, as I showed by adding BMT numbers to the chart. Still, the letters were strictly equipment-driven. If you had an R27 or R32 or R38, you had letters. If you had a D-type or R-16, you had numbers. There were only R-16s on the BMT Eastern Division, so you only had numbers, J-K-L-M weren't used until after Chrystie. On the Brighton Line you had the "1" express and the "QB" and "QT" local, except when the Saturday express (which used R27s) still ran, you had the "Q" express on Saturday only. Get the concept?

OK, now the J and K. The J was the 15 service, the Jamaica Line from Broad Street to 168th Street. The 'K was the 14 service, the Broadway-Brooklyn Local, which before 1928 was called the Canarsie Line, running the traditional route from Canal St. on the Centre Street Line (as it was then called) via Bway-Bklyn to Canarsie, and before that, to Broadway Ferry. After 1928, the 14 became a secondary service, providing a local service on the Bway-Bklyn Line to the 15 express and had as many as five eastern origins/destinations: 168th Street in the a.m. as a skip-stop (like the Z, but local on Bway-Bklyn); 111th St on Jamaica Avenue (replacing some of the lost intervals from the Lex); Crescent Street; Atlantic Avenue on the Canarsie Line, and Canarsie. Oh, yes, sometimes there was a short-line to Eastern Parkway.

Actually, the 14 / K was more of a distinct service from the 15 / J than the Z is now from the J. -- 06:42, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"Defunct" services
I think there is a problem in referring to "defunct services" in the infobox. It is not the services that are necessarily refunct (except for the JFK express) it is the designations. We have 8 H K & T as defunct, but there were three "8"s, two "H"s, three "K"s, representing different services. The "8" that was the Astoria Line is covered, but the "8" that was the Third Avenue el in the Bronx is very defunct. The second "H" still runs, but is signed "S", the first and seond K's are history, but the third is simply the "C" now, and before that was the "AA". The "T" recently ran in its original incarnation, was was styled the "W".

The transitory nature (no pun intended) of letter and number designations does not lend itself well to infobox summary. Now if we could have some way of summarizing the really defunct (JFK Express, Lexington Avenue el, etc. etc.) that would be great. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 05:55, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * You wrote: Maybe 'unused designations', though that would imply that never-used letters should be in there too. Maybe they should, and all redirect to a page that explains why those were never used.
 * I agree with that idea. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:07, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Those Pesky IRT Brooklyn Lines
I think "Clark Street Line" is OK for Clark Street, but I think we should use "IRT Brooklyn Line" for Borough Hall, Hoyt, Nevins and Atlantic. This was the original Contract 2 subway, while the stations beyond Atlantic are the Eastern Parkway Line, a Dual Contracts Contract 3 subway.

BTW, noticing your change on the nomenclature page to "Brighton Beach Line" have you decided to call it that instead of "Brighton Line" which (1) is colloquial--the line was known as the Brighton Beach Line since it opened in 1878, and (2) there is a matter of disambiguation--I'm waiting for someone from "across the pond" to complain that the Brighton Line is the line from London to Brighton--which predates the Brighton Beach Line and is even in literature (Wilde's The Importance of Being Ernest") to be specific. -- Cecropia | explains it all'' ® 08:47, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

BMT Map
Another great map! As usual, a few quibbles:


 * 1) The BMT used to distinguish between above-ground and below-ground on its maps, and I think we should do the same. The difference is that the two open-cut lines (Brighton & Franklin from south of Park Place to Avenue H and Sea Beach from 59th St. to 86th St.) should be with the subway lines, not the el lines. Or, we could show the open-cut lines in a different color.
 * 2) The map is undated, but shows the service at about 1939 (the Fulton Ferry and Broadway Ferry lines are there, but without service). In connection with that, I don't think we should show the later connections, but if we do, we should indicate that they weren't contemporary, and give a year of opening.
 * 3) The black line curving east north of 57th Street in Manhattan should curve west. This was meant to go to 8th Avenue and that's how it was built. It's only with the 63rd Street Line that it now curves east (1970s).
 * 4) 12 service continued out the Jamaica Line as far as 111th Street
 * 5) There is no explanation of the dashed lines, but they mean different things. The Park Avenue and Hudson Avenue els were long gone by 1939, but the Broadway and Fulton Ferry lines were still there and usable, but without passenger service. The 39th Street Ferry branch came off the Culver Cut, not the 3rd Avenue Line, as implied by the map, and it still exists, but without passenger service. If you show that, you should also show the Sea Beach to 65th St. dock, which had passenger service later than 39th St., and was still there after Unification. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 07:32, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

BMT Map Follow-up

 * My point on Item #3 is that the stub above 57th Street existed in BMT days, but it curved left.
 * Re: #12 service, it is mentioned on the link you sent me. It isn't a matter of the Lex being extended, but of being cut back. It was the original service to 168 St, then traded with the Broadway L when the latter got enough steel cars to run the service. So different trains of the Lex ended at Eastern Parkway or Crescent or 111th. When the Lex was discontinued, #14 trains covered runs to Crescent and 111, in addition to going to Canarsie.
 * The branch to 39th Street Ferry still exists as the SBK railway, and still comes from the same location. It branches off the West End Line just before the West End curves into the Fourth Avenue Line, then continues on the surface to the shore at 39th Street.
 * OK, the dashed lines as of 1924:
 * the dashed line to Canarsie Shore was a trolley route on the Canarsie r-o-w;
 * the Broadway Ferry still existed without passenger service; of course the Park and Hudson Lines were gone;
 * The Fulton Ferry branch of the Fulton Street Elevated was still in regular operation;
 * The 39th Ferry route existed (and exists) -- no passenger service
 * You should also consider adding the Norton's Point Line. It was analogous to the Canarsie Shore line--a former elevated service (extension of the Culver Line) that was converted to trolley operation and ran that way until after World War II. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 21:13, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Eastern Parkway was the base service. Rush hours it went to 111th St., as indicated in the descriptions. I will look up the 57th Street stub tunnel for you. This same tunnel is now connected to 63rd Street. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 02:07, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Re: 57th Street stub, the center tracks (A3-A4) rose on a +3.5 grade to clear the G tracks, then leveled off. At point of leveling turning toward 8th Avenue on a 500' radius curve. Distance: apparently about a train length from the fouling point with the G (60th Street tunnel) line. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 02:23, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * You asked: Sorry, I'm not familiar with train lengths - any idea what's above ground where it ended, or how far it went? Is the 'fouling point' where the crossover tracks leave? Any idea what the radius is on the inbound track on the G line? --SPUI 04:12, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't know the surface location. "Fouling point" is the first location where, if a train stopped it would interfere with the operations of a train on another track. A "train length" in that location and time would be about 550 feet. I will get you the radius on the inbound G track (by inbound I assume you mean "to Manhattan"?) I'll try to draw you a picture (literally) but won't be able to tonight. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 05:04, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Narrative of 57th St BMT North
I'm going to give you chaining numbers to describe locations. 1+76 = 176 feet compass south of chaining zero. -(1+76) = 176 feet north of chaining zero. The configuation was as follows, going from south to north: four tracks (west to east) A1-A3-A4-A2 left 57th Street station going north. Crossovers allow A3 and A4 to merge with A1 and A2 respectively and these tracks become G1 and G2 to Queens. A3 and A4 continue north after these switches and then there is a double crossover between them. They continue for a distance straight and rising, then begin a curve to the left.

The A3-A4 curve is 500 foot radius west on the centerline of the two tracks.

The G1-G2 curve is 270 foot radius east on the centerline of those two tracks.

The drawing I have is inconclusive as to where the bumper blocks are. The last marker is at -(1+56) (unless I'm misreading the number--it's a faded blue and may be -(4+56), which would make more sense). The spur was home-signal protected on each track and was used for a storage pocket. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 08:13, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * It definitely wasn't 36th: I'm reasonably sure it was 37th, but I'll get back to you on that


 * "About whether it's 1+56 or 4+56: if it's a top-down view, 4+56 would be over 45 degrees. --SPUI 09:24, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)"
 * I'm not sure what that implies. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 09:28, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * You mean it represents something more than an 1/8 of a circle, or is it an unreasonable number? -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 09:34, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The diagram is an official blueprint (NYRT Corp.), 1"=100', top-down. The curve as drawn is not nearly 45 degrees, so maybe 1+56 is more likely. But the problem with that is that would be a very short holding track, no better than a tail track. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 09:46, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The dot south of 59th. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 10:08, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

BMT Map (Again)
Hi, SPUI. You seem to get even less sleep than I do.

I started a new page at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_New_York_City_Subway/Historical_Discussion for our back and forth as I find dividing it between your talk and my talk a bit cumbersome. Tell me if this doesn't work for you, and maybe you want to suggest something else. I posted some comments onyour latest there. Cheers, Cecropia | explains it all ® 21:23, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

IND Numbers
Did you mean IRT numbers? Yes and no. The numbers were assigned while the IRT was still a private company, but I've never seen an indication that they were used in any way--i.e., internal paperwork as referring to a "1 train," etc. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 16:51, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can find as to when. The PSC had to approve number schemes (why, I don't know), so there must be a record. I don't know why the IRT even bothered since they used them nowhere, AFAIK. The Manhattan Elevated lines never had numbers at all. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 18:40, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Brooklyn Loops
You wrote: ''Do you think there will be enough for separate articles on the two loops and the system as a whole, or should I move Nassau Street Loop to Brooklyn Loops? The Nassau Street Loop article already talks about the Centre Street Loop. --SPUI (talk) 20:57, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)''


 * Hmmm. I'm not sure. I don't think I would move Nassau Street Loop to Brooklyn Loops because it's a relatively estoric subject while Nassau Loop was a real operating service. But maybe we could have a Brooklyn Loops article which could be started from current materail to explain the concept and a new article on the Centre Street Loop. So a qualified yes. What do you think?


 * P.S.: I've made a start on the New York City Subway chaining article, but there'll be a lot more to do. I wonder if we may need a separate article on each division, since there are letters and chaining lines and tie-points to be described. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 21:19, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Court Street Shuttle and...
It is not actually wrong but constructively wrong to call the line the Court St. IND Line is on the "Schermerhorn Street Shuttle." Yes, it runs under that street but that is an apparent anomoly, since it is actually on the Fulton Street Line: the roll signs for the destination said "Fulton-Court St."

The major point is that this is the first time I have ever seen this called the Schermerhorn Street Shuttle. Everyone and everyplace I've ever heard it mentioned it is the Court Street Shuttle (including the transit museum web site).

New York City Subway line, route and station nomenclature
I don't understand the material you added (bolded) to this paragraph:
 * In the U.S., most railroads have only two railroad directions. All New York City subway lines are deemed to run either "north" or "south". In railroad parlance, this would be described as railroad north and railroad south to distinguish from compass directions. In most cases, this is close to the related compass direction, but this is not always possible to follow. No track connections exist to allow a train to reverse direction without running around a loop or literally reversing direction by backing up.
 * Of course a train can't reverse direction without a loop unles it "backs up." But double-ended trains are never said to "back up" unless they take an improper switch and make a rulebook move. So I don't understand what you are trying to say and how it relates to railroad directions. Cheers, Cecropia | explains it all ® 22:47, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Railroad North <-> South
You wrote: ''What I was trying to say is that there are no direct connections that allow a train to go from railroad north on one line to railroad south on another line. For instance, with the planned junction of the Second Avenue Line and the 63rd Street Line, ramps in only two of the four quadrants - the two that conform to this - are being built. This philosophy may explain the lack of connections between the Sixth Avenue and Queens Boulevard Lines at Seventh Avenue, and between the Crosstown and Fulton Street Lines at Hoyt-Schermerhorn Streets. --SPUI (talk) 22:55, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)''
 * Ah, OK, though I think it would have to worded it a little differently. But actually, that's not correct. J and M Lines switch from railroad north to railroad south when they pass through Chambers Street every day. J2->R1 R2->J1. In a sense the M line has two "south" terminals. In the past at least three different services changed railroad direction passing through Coney Island Terminal.
 * That's an interesting theory on the Seventh Avenue & Hoyt-Schermerhorn stations, but I would think the Second Avenue Line-63rd Street Line situation would be because Queens to Uptown and 6th or Broadway Lines to 2nd Avenue downtown would be expensive construction for no really useful service. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 23:09, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I think you've made an interesting observation (lack of RRN-RRS switches at places where a direction switch was possible. I might also add you could add the Crosstown Line-53rd Street connection. The City made it physically impossible for GG to provide a Manhattan service. What I think would be most accurate to say is that the IND was built without any provision to go directly from RRN to RRS. The IRT has South Ferry where you can go from Broadway-7th South to Lex North, and South Ferry on the els, ditto 2-3 to 6-9 and vv. And 129th between the 2nd and 3rd els. Manhattan Jct. on the BRT. And currently, at Hammels Wye. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 23:31, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Blue Rockaway Park Shuttle
Well no, I wouldn't assume it's wrong. They've been playing around with shuttle designations and with the Rockaway services as long as I can remember (which is a long time). They have the blue on the Rockaway Park schedule PDF as well but on "The Map".

Logic says that someone in schedules decided the Rockaway Park S should show blue because it's really an extension of A service but the folks in maps never got wind of it. Or vice versa. When it comes to information systems and consistency the MTA is a world better than they were 20 years ago and a universe better than 40 years ago, but really, sometimes they just make it up as they go along. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 10:22, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

If the trains are showing a gray S I'd say that's good enough. But stay tuned--that's why I'm glad this is a Wiki. When they first colored lines every shuttle was a different color (and there were more of them then). Then they made them all green. Then they made them all gray. I would bet you it was so they wouldn't have to bother having different colored "S"s on the roll signs. :) -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 10:57, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Culver Lines
I had thought of the "other" Culver Line article as being simply BMT Culver Line but, thinking about it, it doesn't seem really appropriaate. The full sweep of the Culver Line is very broad, covering multiple owners and corporate mixtures and even survivals. I forgot to mention, for example, that the South Brooklyn Railway (never a part of the Board of Transportation or the New York City Transit Authority for legal reasons) had and continued freight operations on the surface Culver Line until the 1970s.

So I thought a Culver Line article as a combination overview and extended disambiguation was appropriate with the BMT Culver Line specifically covering the BMT elevated and subway operations and the IND Culver Line dealing with the current line and background.

BTW, while I have your eyes, I wanted to suggest (sorry) a further and hopefully some final changes in article naming. 6 (New York City Subway) et al would better be 6 (New York City Subway service). The former doesn't really say what it is, while the latter, by the addition of one word, does). Also, I don't know if we'll ever have articles on individual chaining letters, but still, remember that in addition to the B (New York City Subway) service, there are three B New York City Subway chaining lines.

If you can't get to any of the various redirects created by Culver and other things, I will as soon as I can. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 02:40, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'll move it to BMT Culver Line. No big thing. We should have reference to it in the IND article, though. I'll start the the "service" addition when I come back to it. Is it OK if we change the dab articles for subway stations to read (for example) Church Avenue (New York City Subway stations) to conform with the style for the other articles instead of Church Avenue (New York City Subway). I'll do it--I'm not trying to think up work for you ;-) -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 02:59, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sorting and defunct
Sorting: When I made it just Culver on the BMT cat, it sorted under IND Culver. By adding "_BMT" it sorted correctly alphabetically. This is a pretty self-limiting category.

As to Category:Defunct New York City Subway lines, what would be in it? It really strains the generic meaning of "subway" if it includes such as the Lexington Avenue L and the Manhattan elevateds. Even in the post-World War II era, they were not referred to as "subway" lines. How about Category:Defunct New York City rapid transit lines or Category:Defunct New York City subway and elevated lines? -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 11:16, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * SPUI wrote: "if they had survived to this day, they would be part of the New York City Subway."


 * No, I can't agree. It's rather like saying that if Thomas Jefferson were alive today, he'd be a Republican (or Democrat). We just don't know that. The political parties are not now what they were in 1800. If the elevated systems were still around, it would be a much different system, we can't be certain by any means that they would be considered the "New York Subway." They were treated as a separate entity on both IRT and BMT when they existed. In fact, after Unification, despite the fact that a number of els were axed, the system was referred to as the "New York City Transit System." -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 11:28, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * ? As a compromise it's alright, but I think "Defunct New York City subway and elevated lines" is more descriptive.


 * BTW, FYI, it is worth noting that there is a difference in New York City between an elevated line and an elevated subway line. Those lines that were built as extensions of the subways, like parts of the upper IRT Broadway Line, and all Dual Contract elevateds still extant, are, oxymoronically, elevated subways. The original elevated lines were simply elevated lines, and were designated that way on maps. Where they shared trackage (Flushing/Astoria, parts of White Plains Road and Jerome Avenue Lines, Culver, just to name some) they were shown that way. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 11:36, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * SPUI wrote: "I don't see the need for the word 'subway'."
 * I guess that depends on how you understand the term 'subway.' The BMT Culver Line, at the time it was discontinued was considered a subway line, though not a subway structure. Most of the discontinued lines were never considered subways. What category wording do you propose? -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 11:45, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * OK. And yes, the BMT had a massive streetcar system. And a bus division. And NYCTA bus transfers in Brooklyn said "BMT Bus Division" until the early '60s. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 11:50, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Re: Interesting...
Yeah, and the 42nd St. Shuttle is "0" (zero), giving it a quasi-IRT number, and IIRC when you had the orange "B" and the yellow "B", the yellow one was "t" for the long defunct T West End service. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 03:12, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

BMT Eastern Division Letter Confusion
It certainly is confusing, isn't it?

We have to start at the top by making three points: (1) the lettering scheme for the BMT was figured out for 1960 service; (2) the TA had no solid plan for what services would go where once Chrystie Street opened; and (3) once Chrystie was ready for opening, they found (3a) some of their original routing plans were not a very good idea and (3b) there was resistance to a lot of their planned routes.

1960

 * 14 to become KK Broadway Brooklyn Local with all its permutations
 * 15 to become J Jamaica Express and JJ Jamaica Local (really same service, J rush hours, JJ other times)

Between 1960 and 1967 Chrystie Street opening
The 15 service didn't change much, but the 14 changed a lot. Until 1959 the 14 service was still the Broadway Short Line-Canarsie Local, with these eastern (railroad southern) destinations:
 * Canarsie (still the primary)
 * Eastern Parkway or Atlantic Avenue (short-lined at rush hour shoulders)
 * some peak-of-rush trains to/from Crescent Street or 111th Street on the Jamaica Line to provide some of the extra rush service that was lost when the Lex L was cut in 1950.

Then in 1959, the TA tried the latest in its endless schemes to lure some traffic from the Queens Boulevard Line and most of the morning only 14 trains originated at 168th Street for skip-stop service with the 15. They were still the 14 and 15 in the a.m. and signed that way, but also carried letters on their pantographs [A] and [B] to designate where they'd stop. 15 was "A", 14 was "B". These two services today are the J ("A") and Z ("B").

Between 1960 and the Chrystie Street opening, the TA progressively truncated 14 pm service. Trains went only as far as Crescent on the Jamaica Line, and fewer trains went to Canarsie. Eventually the Canarsie-bound trains went only to Atlantic Avenue, and then to Eastern Parkway.

After Chrystie Street
SO is the Z the successor to 14? No, not really (unless you really want it ;-)). As I said, the TA intended 14 to be KK to Nassau Street. Originally, the TA wanted to run the J uptown, in order to compete head-to-head with the E and F, but they faced a revolt among 15 riders, who wanted their train to continue to go to Nassau Street. So the TA punted and, when the connector between Willy B and 6th Avenue opened, the K, the Broadway-Brooklyn Local went up 6th Avenue,,

The J, JJ, QJ, RJ
These were all the 15 service in different combinations. Initially there was no J service. This was replaced by the QJ. A few of the QJs ran to 95th Street (local) as a sickly replacement for the 4th Avenue Bankers Specials, designated RJ. When the QJ/RJ didn't run compass south of Broad Street, it was the JJ. KK service still ran as the truncatd Broadway-Brooklyn Local to provide a local service for the QJs and RJs.

When the TA discovered that running a long line from Jamaica to Coney Island and Bay Ridge was a really crappy idea, the QJ and RJ became the J and JJ again. The RJ became a branch of the RR to Chambers Street only.

If this needs further sorting out, let me know. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 08:26, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Amendment to the confusing above
OK, I have one correction, and see where the JJ confusion lies.

You are right, the JJ initially replaced the 14, but only for seven months, from 11/26/67 to 6/30/68. The JJ covered the Canarsie route and other 14 services, while the QJ and RJ covered the 15 services. But when the QJ didn't run, the former JJ covered the 15 service. The reason for this is that the TA wanted to reserve the KK to mean the 6th Avenue service.

On 7/1/68, the rush hour JJ to Nassau Street became the KK (14 service) to 6th Avenue. The off-hours QJ remained JJ. The RJ was simply discontinued at that time and the RR branch to Chambers revived. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 08:58, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Pre-Chrystie Colors
Pre-Chrystie didn't use colors; the Eastern Division didn't even use letters. Color use came in with Chrystie and they did a lot of retro-fitting, including putting decals on top of existing rollsigns.

AFAIK, strictly pre-Chrystie services weren't assigned colors; for certain they weren't used if they were assigned. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 21:08, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Apparently, the R12s did carry "8" on their roll signs during the year they operared on the Astoria Line. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 21:26, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome
Wow! I killed two birds with one stone with the diamond = stroke service info. :) But thank YOU for your recent work on the nomenclature article. That's a monumental effort! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 01:25, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Latest NYC subway map
Very nice work, SPUI. My only quibbles are that I find the division-by-division schematics kind of hard to follow; also the size of the hi-res version made my Firefox choke. Opened OK in IE6 though.

A few things I like are that it's attractive; the 1-5 coding of service times works out, I think; that it's public domain. The MTA has gotten really antsy about their "intellectual property" lately. Do you think you might "ice the cake" by adding line names? It would make it an almost universal reference.

As a sidenote, I assume that, when you say there are only two interdivisional track connections you mean only two locations where current services start on one division and end on another. I can think of a bunch more, a couple of which could be used in service, others for car transfer only: Cheers! Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:28, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Coney Island BMT-IND
 * WB to Houston St. Line BMT-IND
 * Queensboro Plaza BMT-IRT
 * Livonia Yard BMT-IRT
 * 207th Yard IND-IRT
 * Coney Island Yard BMT-IND

Re: Bus Connections on Subway Lines
What I was trying to do was to give general information on the bus routes that serve the stations. Normally there are not any changes in bus routes that serves the stations. However, if needed you can update the information.Jbc2k052 20:55, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

BMT numbers on side roll signs
Only on R1-9s and R16s when used on the BMT between 1948 and 1967. When R1s ran on the Sea Beach in 1931, they carried BMT numbers on the front (no IND-style line name) and no number on the side. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 22:21, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * This is strange - the KK used NASSAU ST even after Chrystie opened 
 * No, they just didn't get around to changing the curtain. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 17:19, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

BMT front numbers
I uploaded route numbers originally from a BMT D-type front roll sign:



Use them as you see fit. Hint: these are the only numbers that were ever in regular use on Southern Division lines, except IND style was used for a while on R1s on the 2 service and on R11s on the 7 service. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 00:27, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Chambers-HT
What's the strange part? -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 19:15, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, I suppose they wanted to have the lines in their permanent (but truncated) operation routing ASAP. Also, they avoided having to switch the A at Canal Street interlocking, the same one recently bar-b-qued. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 00:05, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Subchat
I suppose you've heard of Subchat? &mdash; Rickyrab | Talk 02:14, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

BMT Eastern Division Directions
No, I haven't heard that it all. That would cause the Eastern Division lines to be an anomaly on the BMT and IND, in which the odd tracks went north and the even south. Logically that would either require a change of direction when transferring between the Jamaica and Canarsie Lines. The entire Canarsie Line was jusr rechained and they kept the track numbering.

I think I would want some hard copy examples. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 16:14, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

BMT Franklin Avenue ????
I really don't know, not that I haven't looked. Since the line was completely rehabbed just six years ago, there are no current contracts to look at, AFAIK. The best reference would be the contracts for the rehab, which would say definitively, but I don't have those, nor have I found them on the web.

It's quite possible the line might still be "Brighton-Franklin" or even "Brighton Line (Franklin Avenue branch)." The only shuttle on the system that actually was and still is configured as a shuttle and only a shuttle is the 42nd Street Shuttle, on which you couldn't run through service, even as a G.O. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 16:42, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New Franklin map
I like your new map a lot, but I do have two small problems with it. One is that there is no little dogleg between former Dean Street and current Franklin Avenue. The current single track is where the westbound track was in elevated days, and the station platform is over what was the pre-1999 shuttle stub.

The second point is that I think we should show the connecting tracks in Prospect Park station. The O1 track is occasionally used for revenue moves and the current track gives the impression that the shuttle is a closed system. Maybe show the non-revenue tracks in a different color? -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 23:36, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Franklin track configurations
Pre-reconstruction the O2 westbound track did merge into the O1 eastbound track just compass north of Dean Street and using that track in Franklin Avenue station. Both original concrete platforms were retained in Franklin Avenue and the O2 track was covered with a new wooden platform, making a broad platform on the eastern side. This use of wood to enlarge or extend existing concrete platforms was pretty common BMT practice, very noticable on the Brighton especially.

So you had one track and two platforms. Normal operation was for the doors of an incoming Franklin train (shuttle or through train) to enter the platform, discharge all passengers or the broad eastern side, close the doors, then open them on the narrow western side for incoming passengers. You could not stay on the train or pass from one side to the other. If you wanted to go back to Prospect Park, you had to get a transfer to the IND, go downstairs and get on the IND, walk out of sight of the change agent, then stroll back out of the IND, get a transfer to the BMT, then get on to resume your Franklin ride.

This arrangement could be reversed, with the broad platform boarding and the narrow department, for example on summer weekend AM periods, but that probably ended by 1955, as I never saw it done in person.

Post-construction, it was the O2 track that was retained, all the way into Franklin. However, between Park Place and Atlantic Avenue, the new O2 track is slightly offset on the reinforced embankment structure toward the center, possibly to better balance the load on the structure. The offset toward the center is enough so that, if they wanted to restore the double track, they would probably have to reclose the line long enough to lift the current track. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 02:08, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The new platform is not nearly as wide as the original wide one. See this picture of the old platforms when they were intact: . And see these pictures at forgotten-ny.com (scroll down about 1/3 page): .The old Franklin shuttle track went almost up to Fulton Street. The bumper block new one is about 75-100 feet short of Fulton Street and the trains stop further back than that. The TA is a lot more antsy about overunning a terminal track than not so long ago. All the platforms on the line (except Prospect Park) are something either side of 200' long, not even as long as the old 250'-300' feet of the elevated car platforms. I don't believe any platform extends over or under the next street from where the control houses are. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 04:17, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, you latest map is much nicer. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 04:27, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Brooklyn City Railroad
In my slow quest to eliminate those annoying red links, I created an article on the BCRR, which was a surface rail operator. Maybe you'll look it over and see what other categories it might fit into to try to bind it to the subway stuff. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:13, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Culver Line
The point could be argued both ways, but I have no objection to your proposal. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 23:02, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The TA seemed much more intent in identifying the line as IND in the '50s then now for whatever reason. It is currenly under dispatch by the BMT, etc. I think nycsubway.org also lists its stations as "BMT Culver Line." -- Cecropia | explains it all ®`

MTA Restructuring
This is by no means a done deal. It requires legislation and the MTA is asking for $1.67 BILLION to implement it. We shall see... -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 05:19, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"From" date on NYC Subway infobox
Since we fold the entir system into the "subway" rubric, 1904 is not really the right date. I think we need the earliest date of a currently operating line (West End--1863). -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 05:13, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, West End is the earliest of the current system, predating Canarsie and even the Beach subway and 9th Avenue el. Yes, SIRy is older. I don't know what to do if they actually create the MTA Subways thing., since SIRT stands so separate, historically and physically, from the rest of the system. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 14:39, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

West End Line
SPUI, do you have any other source for "Brooklyn, Bath and Coney Island RailWAY" than Earl Pleasant's site. I have seen no other source that ever had the BB&CI as Railway, rather than railroad or rail road.

He is also wrong in saying the Brighton Line was the BF&CI RAILROAD. That is a common error. The BF&CI was RAILWAY. There was an earlier BF&CI RAILROAD, but it was a compoletely different company. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 22:00, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Number 9
No, I haven't suddenly becomes a Beatles fan. The is now officially toast, the last of the skip-stop running Friday night. I don't know how/if you want to deal with it. Cheers, Cecropia | explains it all ® 03:30, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Subway lat/long
Do you know where I can get a list of all the subway stations with their latitude and longitude? – flamurai (t) June 30, 2005 00:31 (UTC)

I gather this is a better place to ask questions, make comments or otherwise kvetch. Anyway. I saw your response to my comment at the Manhattan Bridge article, and will revise my 4th Av Line article accordingly. I'll be cribbing your MTA pdf-format source. My own talk page should be active now. --FourthAve 00:42, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

NYC Subway sidebar
When are you going to put that sidebar on my article about the 42nd Street-Port Authority Bus Terminal subway station?Ianthegecko 04:22, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

I've got good news!
Click Here!

Wha' duh' eff
You have done some magic. All those stations that I so laboriously coded, you produced. And I thought they were merely ignored/unwritten.

Talk to me spui.--FourthAve 09:06, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

The Great Subway Map Crackdown
See my recent comment at Talk:New York City Subway. Thanks.--Pharos 16:13, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm researching the easiest way to run some errands and attend Petrocollapse in New York tomorrow, and your proved invaluable. Thanks for creating it. Ground 22:43, 4 October 2005 (UTC)