#7 Subway West Side Extension Hudson Yards Javits Center

Work has started at Times Square in preparation for the extension. Early this morning I spoke with some contractors at 42 street on the 'A' There was some environmental testing for asbestos on the unused lower level beneath the southbound platform. One of the workers told me that, "yes, the lower level did block the 7 from expanding past its current endpoint." He said that the lower level trackbed is almost the same level as the 7, and that a small door has been cut into the end of the 7 tunnel. This opening can be seen from the end of the 7 platform at Times Square, on the left side.

I worked on the 42nd St/8th Ave Station Rehab and had plenty of time to review the as-built drawings. Despite this, my take on the lower level being at the same general elevation as the 7 tracks was always disputed by railfans who heard from a friend that read a post of a guy's cousin having saw something different.

Blasting of the access shaft for the chamber that will eventually hold the station for the Javits Center started this past week.

The terminus shaft at W28th Street has had a secant wall (a really big cassion that will hold up the building that will use the air rights the MTA will sell off after the extension is complete) installed the past week and after load testing, the soil excavation for that shaft should start.

Progressive RR'Ing

Yesterday, MTA New York City Transit (NYCT) lowered the first of two tunnel boring machines (TBMs) under 11th Avenue in Manhattan, officially marking the start of excavation work on the 7 line subway extension.

Excavation work complete Spring 2010, line in operation 12/2013.

This is going to fall under Otto's category: "Wouldn't it be great if...."

I believe the RPA a long time ago discussed a scenario where commuter trains could run on subway lines and vice-versa, basically, a "Wouldn't it be great if...." scenario about massive new construction.

Here's a thought. MNRR wants to run to PSNY when ESA is built (all these acronyms make me miss the Army>.....). The 7 is being extended to 11th and 34th, with a provision for future extension down to 23rd (where service tracks will extend to as planned). Would it be at all feasible to run MNRR trains on the 7? As I recall, the 7 is somewhat of a different animal. It does not really connect to the rest of the IRT. While it's part of the A division, and uses the shorter/thinner cars, would B division cars be able to run on it? What physical connections are there from the 7 to the rest of the system?

Sharing with the railroad would not allowed by the fedral government.

BMT/IND cars would be crushed in te stienway tunnels.

the 7 has a single X-over to the astoria line at Queenboro Plaza.

I'm aware they can't share trackage, I was actually thinking replacing the transit service for commuter service, but clearly, that wouldn't work due to Steinway as you mentioned. Thanks for the info on the A vs B division cars. In that case, I'd rather they just extend the 7 to 11th, and let MNRR use any new tunnels down to 23rd/Chelsea and perhaps beyond.

The 7 east of Queensboro Plaza was built to BMT specs and could (technically) carry a BMT sized train, but the Steinway tunnels are off limits to anything not IRT-sized. Similiar issues exist with PATH and the Hudson Tubes.

R36 Combine Coach wrote:The 7 east of Queensboro Plaza was built to BMT specs and could (technically) carry a BMT sized train ...

Except for the current platforms, right? When were those put in?

Thanks.

they're, in function, original (obviously been replaced over the years)

All Dual Contract consruction was built to the BMT's loading gauge, with the exception of the platform edge. ignoring the platforms, a B Div car can fit into quite alot of the A div tunnels. If the platforms were retracted, a 10' wide car could run from Woodlawn to Grand Central, and from Times Square to Borough Hall.

A often occuring part of the various IND second system plans were the recapture of some of those lines for use by the IND, such as in the original 1929 plan, the White Plains Road El.

I may be wrong but I do believe the tunnel widths on the A Division are narrower. If you see a #4 train coming out of or going into the tunnel just below 161, it looks like it barely clears and I think the curves are tighter too. Catwalks come right up to the side of the cars too, or am I wrong on that too? The elevated structures are designed for both. That is why when the BMT took over the Astoria Line, all they had to do was cut back the station platforms. By the way, did they shut the line down for a weekend to accomplish this? All they had to do then was cut a few feet off the wooden platforms. Now you'd have to replace the concrete platforms. Wow what a project that would be. That's why that would never happen.

Wouldn't the 7 extension to Path been a better idea?

Same problem, PATH is a railroad.

Although the IRT equipment could not run on PATH, PATH equipment could run on the IRT and since their equipment is basically IRT equipment there should be no clearance issues. Very little difference between R-142 and PA-5's (the PA-5 is basically a 142 built to FRA crashworthiness standards). However where would you connect them? Run PATH up 6th Avenue to 42nd Street? Don't think you're going to see that anytime in the near future.

One of the original plans for the H&M was to run to Grand Central, extending from 33 Street, though.