Things Do not look Bright for the BQX

Hi Folks:

  I came across an interesting article in "Railway Age" titled:  The Federal Transit Man:  Brooklyn's Streetcar Named Desire.   This article was authored by Larry Penner and appeared in the May 18th 2020 edition of "Railway Age".  Sorry but I cannot add a link.

Basically,  in our post virus environment,  which hopefully will come soon, the State and Federal Governments will not be in a position to fund many transit projects that are not essential.   The Brooklyn Queens Connector is such a project.  The planning process pre virus is already behind schedule and with a new Mayor coming in,  a new mayor could not be on board.  {Remember after years of planning,  a new mayor in NYC with a strike of the pen,  killed off the 42nd Street light rail project?}.  There were so many "ifs" pre-March 2020 about the project about planning, funding, efficiency and so on.   We really do not know what rapid transit usage will be after things get back to normal in New York City.  Will millions of New Yorkers  flee New York State and there will be no need for BQX or an extention to the 2nd Avenue subway?    Are we entering a post rapid transit era where car and taxi transportation is coming back?

Some of thoughts above was not found in the article. It seems to me the water shed moment was when the 42nd Street streetcar project was destroyed.  The planning process just takes too long with two many ifs.  If a project gets through the planning process and there are funds available,  it takes one stroke of a pen to destroy it.   What happens when the economy and people are in trouble?  In my opinion, the BQX was too complicated and the more complicated a system, the more something could go wrong.   Why build a BQX when there will be no people around anymore?  I believe in the KISS principal,  keep it simple, stupid.   Identify a street that leads to a subway terminal with heavy bus traffic and little community opposition.   Build something very simple, using good second hand equipment in good condition from overseas, and you will see the public use light rail transit in New York City.   Yes LaGuardia, your curse on streetcars is still in effect.

Remembering the Culver Line

Hi Folks:

     The transit related website subchat had this week a great deal of information and photos dealing with the Culver Shuttle.    I would like to list some thoughts about my experiences but I cannot give you written proof of the same:

1.  I remember when the section of the Culver Line was painted from the south of the ramp at Fort Hamilton Parkway to Ditmas Aveue.   It was 1958 and the color was green.   The structure was never painted again.  I remember as a child being in the street  at 13th Avenue and 37 Street and seeing the painters working.  They were very sloppy and a lot of paint drops fell on a wooden track bumper for one of the South Brooklyn RR track sidings right next to the apartment house at the southwestern intersection.  Those drops were still visible years later as the bumper still existed.
2. I do not remember but it was suggested the the Culver Line's south bound (western side of the el) track was shut down for a while and there was a shuttle operation for a few days?  The site states that the TA was getting that track ready for permanent use so the northbound track became the shuttle track.  Of course,  after the snowstorm in 1960? the western track became the only track in use.   I do not remember such a switch because as a child,  a child would not use the subway every day.
3. There were a lot of South Brooklyn track sidings in those years around 13th and 14th Avenues under the el.   There were two basic tracks equipped with trolley wire under the el ,  and sidings parallel to factories specially near 37th Street and Old New Utrecht Road.  One track went under the southwestern stairway to the el and it was equipped with trolley wire.
4. At the location of 37th Street and Old New Utrecht Road from the above staircase,  you could have seen a very basic knife switch to cut of power to the SBRR trolley system.   It was out in the open and not protected.
5. Between 14th and 15th Avenues, on the eastern side of the el, but not under it, was a short stub track that was equipped with trolley wire suspended from the easterly side support pillars of the el.
6. In the 1970's at a university I came across  a "New York City Regional Plan" dated from the 1920's and even at this early date,  there was discussion to extend the IND subway at Church Avenue southward.   But listen to this, if  I remember correctly,  the portal would have been at Eighteenth Avenue!   Remember at this time, the el over Gravesend (McDonald) Avenue was only ten years old.   What would this have done to a Culver Line?
7. Many years ago,  I spoke to someone at ERA headquarters and he was interested in the Independent Subway extension south from Church Avenue.  Hes said that in the underground pocket used for relays south of Church Avenue at the approach of the ramp,  there are signals ( I do not know if they are working or just the shell) facing south.  This would mean that the pocket in some plans could have been extended beyond under the ramp perhaps southward to 18th Avenue.   Were would the new ramp be planned to be?
8.  

More to follow later.

Today is the 45 Anniversary of the Demise of the Culver Line

How time flies!  It has been forty five yeas since  the end of my favorite line. I am not talking about the present day "F" train,  which is fine,  but the section of line between Ditmas Avenue and really 36th Street - Fourth Avenue.    The culver line had it all:  A subway section at Ninth Avenue and the section(s) near 36th Street, a brick lined tunnel from around 1900,  a ramp,  an elevated structure with trolley freight running underneath,   intersections with the Church Avenue trolley,  intersection with the Cortelyou Road trolleybus,  intersection at Ditmas Avenue with the Church McDonald trolley and a trolley turn around loop midblock on the west side of McDonald Avenue,  intersection with the then "D" train at Ditmas Avenue( no track connection), and unused steel girders south of the Ditmas Avenue station on the Coney Island bound side.   Some people will forgot that when the Culver Line became a shuttle in the fall of 1954,  the northern terminal in non-rush hours and week ends was the busy station at 36th Street and Forth Avenue.   In the years after 1954,  the north destination was Chambers Street by way of a loop that returned to the starting point at Ditmas Avenue.  Around 1958-59, there were drastic cuts that made the northern terminal Ninth Avenue.   But at first,   both tracks on the elevated structure were used.    I think that a December 1960 snowstorm shut down the Manhattan bound track for good and the line became a one track on train shuttle between Ditmas Avenue and Ninth Avenue full time.  Be careful what you wish for.   I was happy with the snowstorm because school was closed, but that was used as an excuse by the TA to get the track out of operation.  Who knows,  may be if not for that snowstorm, the second track would still be operating to the end?  Of course, there were other snowstorms after December 1960.   It is making the Culver a one track shuttle that drove away passengers.  If the steel girders south of Ditmas avenue were used to connect the BMT culver to the IND at 18th Avenue,  more passengers on the "D" train could have had a quick and transfer less ride to lower Manhattan,  but it never happened.   We are lucky that we had the Culver shuttle all together.   I do not have proof of this, but I read somewhere that the original plans was once the IND "D"train was extended south to Coney Island,  in the early 50's,  the Culver line section from Ditmas to Ninth Avenue were to be replaced with buses.  This meant that a lot of us would never have known about the Culver Line.
Thanks,
Tramway Null(0)