Railroad Forums 

Discussion relating to the past and present operations of the NYC Subway, PATH, and Staten Island Railway (SIRT).

Moderator: GirlOnTheTrain

 #681384  by railfan365
 
As many of us know, the downtown G Train terminates as Smith-9th, one stop shy of stopping at 4th Avenue where riders could have made a convenient transfer to the BMT without changing to the F for just one stop.

Can anyone tell me if it's just penny pinching as to why the TA doesn't modify the crossovers so that the G can go that one stop further and then conveniently switch-back, or perhaps extend it to Church?
 #681474  by Passenger
 
Too much trouble given the existing track configuration and the constraints imposed by the structure of the viaduct. It's more than just penny-pinching. You'd need a total rebuild.

But that brings up another question. It's quite clear the relay at Smith-9th is part of the original design of the IND. I suppose there was no free transfer at that time, so that was not a factor.

But still, why originally the relay at Smith-9th? It's not an obvious place for a terminal.
 #681774  by DaveBarraza
 
When the Culver viaduct rebuild project begins Phase 2, the G will be extended to Church permanently. It's okay was one of Reuter's last signatures.
 #681934  by RailBus63
 
DaveBarraza wrote:When the Culver viaduct rebuild project begins Phase 2, the G will be extended to Church permanently. It's okay was one of Reuter's last signatures.
The permanence of G train service will depend on ridership and funding - if neither are there, I can see the G being cut back again to Smith-9th once the project is complete. I read a quote somewhere from a NYCT spokesman to that effect.

When I rode the line over Memorial Day weekend, I noticed that G trains were terminating at Smith-9th as usual, then crossing over to the southbound express track at 4th Ave. and running all the way down to Church Ave. empty to relay. I've never seen them do that before.
 #681939  by RailBus63
 
Passenger wrote:But that brings up another question. It's quite clear the relay at Smith-9th is part of the original design of the IND. I suppose there was no free transfer at that time, so that was not a factor.

But still, why originally the relay at Smith-9th? It's not an obvious place for a terminal.
I believe that Smith-9th was intended all along to be a temporary terminal - after all, it makes no sense to build a four-track subway and end it at Church Avenue unless you are planning to eventually build further out into Brooklyn. They just probably never expected that it would take another two decades to do so.
 #682159  by Brother Wayne
 
Originally, the southern terminal of the G crosstown local ("GG" in the initial lettering scheme of the IND subway) was at Church Avenue, not at Smith & 9th Streets. South of Church Avenue, the line expands to two subterranean levels with four tracks on each level. When it was opened in the 1930s, the track configuration was similar to what still exists in the "hole" east of the 179 St terminus at the Queens end of the F. The four tracks on the upper level were to feed into a future extension of the IND subway, while the four tracks on the lower level were to permit relays and lay-ups for the G. In the 1950s, when it became clear that the funding for subway expansion to replace the old Culver elevated would not be forthcoming, the TA opted instead to connect the four upper level tracks to the existing elevated structure so that trains on the South Brooklyn IND could continue all of the way to Coney Island (this is the current F route). The G continued to terminate at Church Avenue until the 1970s. During the fiscal crisis, the MTA eliminated service on the express tracks between Bergen Street (lower level) and Church Avenue, which made it possible to cut the G back to Smith & 9th Streets; the G now relays in the vicinity of the 4th Avenue Station on what were built as express tracks. Like many "temporary" service cuts in the 1970s, this one became more-or-less permanent. Increasing ridership on the Brooklyn F in recent years has led to talk of reintroducing express service (possibly by extending the V into Brooklyn), which would require the extension of the G back to Church for operational reasons. With the current MTA budget woes, however, these proposals have been shelved. It's too bad, since the configuration of switches in the vicinity of 4th Avenue only permits one train to relay at a time, which contributes to erratic service on the G line.
 #682186  by Kamen Rider
 
From what i've seen, the G was extened in 1968 to Church ave to allow for express service between Church ave and downtown Brooklyn, only to end in 1976.
 #682241  by Brother Wayne
 
IND maps from the 1930s and 1940s clearly show "GG" service from 71/Continental Avs in Queens to Church Av in Brooklyn.
 #682447  by Kamen Rider
 
From nycsubway.org's Smith 9th page;"A note about the route of the crosstown "G" train. Even the earliest maps of the IND show this route to end at Smith-9th Street. Runs to Church Avenue were infrequent."

Wiki agrees with that, and I've seen maps giving blatenly wrong information in the past.

edit:, here's the PDF for a map from the late 30's http://images.nycsubway.org/maps/ind_1937.pdf
 #682783  by Passenger
 
I definitely remember the GG terminating at Smith-9th in the early 1960s, so it wasn't a service cut from the 1970s. Those were R-1/9 cars. Original rollsigns?

IIRC, GG to Church Avenue was on rush hours when the inner tracks were being used for express service.
 #693143  by b&p rupture
 
I recall hearing or seeing that the D originally went to Church Ave, before the original plans, (extension of the line south via FT. Hamilton Pkwy) were abandoned, and the line was grafted to the elevated Culver line. I can't personally attest to that scenario though. I do remember Express F trains Jay to Church, rush hours only, in the 70's, with the GG necessarily being extended to Church Ave. at those times.

FWIW the map linked above by Kamen Rider makes it look like the E went to Church Ave. and GG terminating at Smith-9th. Kinda hard to read though.
 #693191  by Kamen Rider
 
the D ran to CI via the culver until Chrystie Street.
 #1052546  by railfan365
 
On the subject of the Culver viaduct rebuild - having been there several times recently, I'm wondering if anyone knows if that ugly black shrouding is being eliminated now that the structure is being renovated?
 #1053182  by SlowFreight
 
Lemme get this straight...there is actually a lower-level platform at Bergen? It's been my dream to take an express to Church and flip back one stop.