Interborough Express set to use light rail, a success of trolley cars

[@Tigerwarhawk]

Something tells me that a lot more than 115,000 people will ride this train daily. The lengths of the trains can be extended, so I'm not concerned about that.

[@TechJolt3d]

From what i've read when the ibx report first came out, light rail will be slightly cheaper to build, but more expensive in the long run because of higher maintenance costs. I still think it should be heavy rail connected directly into the subway system so that we could have the G, IBX, and Z connect queens to brooklyn effectively. Though light rail might actually finish in our life time compared to heavy rail.

[@dante6563]

This right here is the right answer! It should be heavy rail. It should be another shuttle line using subway trains. I think the MTA is underestimating how many people will use this.

[@TechJolt3d]

@@dante6563 I found a good article by vanshookenraggen which goes over the plan, it actually has a really good argument for why light rail is fine

[@KevinFields777]

The problem with heavy rail and subway is the cost of obtaining right-of-way and the fact that there would not be a great alignment with enough stops where people need them.

[@andrewweitzman4006]

Mind you, it depends on the *sort* of light rail. Using high floor trams like Edmonton means you get almost subway-like capacity. The problem is that the on-street platforms can't be the curbside-style stops you see on the trendy all-low-floor trams that come from the French tramways. But the all-low-floor trams are harder on the rails, more expensive to service, and have much lower capacity than high floor trams. Ottawa's infamous Confederation Line is an example of using low-floor trams for the wrong purpose. Honestly, the only reason the MTA is going for street running is that section near All Faith's Cematary because they don't want to bit the bullet to make a new tunnel. The IBX is damn near tailor-made for an automated light metro like the new REM we have here in Montreal.

[@TheRandCrews]

@@KevinFields777but they’re already using a current right of way, that would need adjustments for connections and construction of stations.

[@stickynorth]

A very good choice. Most of the new systems in North America use this technology which is also known as pre-metro... Here in North America, Edmonton, was the first modern system to open in the 1970s and it runs in both a downtown subway for miles as well as down existing Rights of Way like abandoned rail lines and down city streets.

[@leonpaelinck]

Pré metro sucks. Better to have either light rail or proper metro

[@TheRandCrews]

But those light rail systems are practically running downgraded versions of metros for a city with less density and less population. Maybe in the future with all the new housing reform in Edmonton it will get more and similar riders but New York is a whole different ball game, when it’s 98% grade separated already. Frankfurt Stadtbahn U5 is high floor trams, but almost running metro style service with some fully walkthrough trams, but that’s inherited system.

[@felizgonzalez2554]

sounds good 👍 idea💡 hope it fix the mta problem in the town activo desde Allentown pennsylvania

[@jackieroberson42]

Not to knock "light rail's" but in my opinion this should of of been another "cross town" subway line. I remember seeing another video about why they couldn't use a subway for this project but "originally" a commuter train was proposed along with "possibly" doing a light rail or a bus. So really what would have been the difference with doing a subway train because another letter line "to me" would of been awesome!!!!!!!! As far as getting a light rail line for this project goes, what about that project that they had proposed from Downtown Bklyn to Astoria? That was supposed to have been a light rail, in which that would of been awesome!!!!!!!!!!!

[@brooklynelite5428]

You're absolutely right. I even said that about the pointless AirTrain to jfk instead of extending the LIRR and extending the A line there but no brilliant minds in that one. So I agree to create a new subway line or extend the existing ones , not hard it's already complete. You're just adding to it. It's bad enough that we're losing street lanes for bikes lanes and crap and adding that to the street I don't see as a good idea.

[@durece100]

Sorry. Can't use Subway and commuter rail because it's too large and too heavy to fit on the freight tracks. Light rail is better option.

[@user-dj7wv5ok2x]

@@durece100 Btw, freight trains are MUCH LARGER AND HEAVIER than passenger trains, especially subway vehicles! There'd be NO TROUBLE AT ALL installing subway-type rail equipment along that line.

[@durece100]

@@user-dj7wv5ok2x Well, there's trouble. Subway heavy rails are "too wide" to fit in narrow tunnels. MTA never had light rail in the past years.

[@user-dj7wv5ok2x]

@@durece100 But those tunnels AREN’T narrow; they’re wide enough for freight trains.

[@ciprianvp7272]

I think is a great idea,instead of wasting money on other things

[@user-dj7wv5ok2x]

Presently, the GREATEST waste of transportation dollars is the stuperhighways.

[@bTwice2x]

What about the tunnel from queens to red hook. It supposedly about 30stops, that no mayor has ever wanted to touch since it was talked about in the 60's

[@BirbarianHomeGuard]

If they use light rail, they need to use high floor trains like LA to maximize capacity. Low floor is a bad idea.

[@durece100]

No high floors. That's dangerous if someone falls onto tracks and can't get back up.

[@agihiruda]

High floor proved to be unreliable and hard for the physically disabled people/people with strollers to enter. RMTransit has discussed that when he explained why the high floor line in Amsterdam failed in his video.

[@nyxw]

@@agihiruda If you have a high floor line with a stop at street level of course it'll be hell. But when you are designing a system mostly grade separated you have the funds to just raise the platforms. No issues there whatsoever. What you have to guarantee is that trains acquired for the line are exactly at the height of the platforms

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

​@@durece100idiot

[@durece100]

Not everyone will take any subway line goes through manhattan.

[@chunhchan]

So 2027 means 2037

[@AtticusThings]

Why... On earth... Did you ask a toy train store owner rather than an urban planner? The capacity will limit who can use it. heavy rail is better, flexible, and future proof.

[@durece100]

Heavy rail and suburban rail doesn't fit to use for freight train track. Light Rail is the better option.

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

​@@durece100It absolutely does. Light rail is a very bad option

[@durece100]

@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 Light Rail isn't bad, so stop whining that you want a heavy rail. You don't understand how difficult to use a heavy rail is.

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

@@durece100 😂 And you don't understand what reality is. Heavy rail is faster, more accessible, more reliable, can be more frequent, and has a much higher capacity.

[@user-dj7wv5ok2x]

@@durece100 If you use the subway ALREADY, why should it be so "much more difficult" to have the IBX as a heavy rail (subway equipment)?! Besides, new maintenance and training facilities must be built at GREAT TAXPAYER EXPENSE!

[@sanitman1488]

With what currency?

[@ZeBoy85]

The only parts that concern me are the non-grade separated parts, what are they going to put boom gates there? That’ll suck!

[@TommyTom21]

light rail vehicles typically just run along streets no different from a bus. If it intersects with a road there would be traffic lights, but no gate system.

[@user-dj7wv5ok2x]

@@TommyTom21 And the LRVs would be given signal priority thru the intersection.

[@luislaplume8261]

What environmental impact? Look at Philadelphia that has modern trolleys and Newark, and Jersey City, N.J. I made more of an environmental impact when I tied 3 M80s firecrackers together and lit the fuse to blow up the locked door of an abandoned wooden house in my old hometown of NYC 55 years ago. The shock wave shattered the windows across the street! 😊 In reality I made a small homemade bomb of those 3 M80s tied up.

[@travels3577]

How will the snow and ice effect it 😮

[@k.s.fergusson5909]

Ask Europe…

[@durece100]

Don't be so lazy.

[@Thelastairbendy]

no different than any other outdoor lines within 100 miles

[@luislaplume8261]

Are you kidding? Look at the videos of the old BMT trolley lines with their mechanical track sweepers and snow plow trolley locomotives! 😊

[@TheRandCrews]

Overhead wires fair a bit better in the winter than third rail, that’s why the REM in Montreal chose it designing the system which gets more snow and colder in the winter than New York.

[@user-dj7wv5ok2x]

ANOTHER STUPID DECISION MADE BY TRANSIT OFFICIALS IN NEW YORK CITY HISTORY! The first was turning the second avenue line west onto 125th street, which is a hyperactive fault zone. This is the second, deciding on LIGHT RAIL instead of well-established subway equipment, which would be interchangeable with equipment used on other lines, and would also use the szme maintenance and training facilities.

[@stevenhill3136]

Electric cleaner air future a win for the health of New Yorkers

[@MKOMKONNNN]

hanging wires again

[@stickynorth]

Yup. That is what most of the world is using these days due to its simplicity and cost...

[@luislaplume8261]

​@@stickynorth1 inch thick copper wire is easier to install and electrify than 3rd rail.

[@brooklynelite5428]

Yes we need them for our trains you can't use a 3rd rail and diesel is not an option

[@user-dj7wv5ok2x]

@@luislaplume8261 But blows circuit breakers at astonishing rates....

[@user-dj7wv5ok2x]

@@brooklynelite5428 A third rail can be installed in an "underground" slot between the running rails----just as was done with the trolleys in NYC history.

[@felipeoliveira2219]

Sounds good... they say 5.5 bi? put another 4.5bi = 10 bi they say 2027? put 4 more years 203.....just being real

[@joerusso4219]

Yeah like they are going to have this done in 4 years, Total Baloney? 4 billion will just pay for the graft to the politicians and construction companies before they even start clearing all the garbage out of that railroad cut.

[@wingn3849]

Take any estimate of completion with a literal ton of sand.

[@joshuaedwards5822]

I say bad idea buy let's see ...

[@durece100]

That's not a bad idea. It's good to use a light rail in nyc. Plus, it's quiet.

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

​@@durece100It is. It's not and it's not.

[@durece100]

@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 You never ride a light rail, have you?

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

@@durece100 I have, but you clearly haven't

[@durece100]

This is very easy to get back on the LRT platform after falling onto the tracks, unlike heavy rail.

[@TheRandCrews]

Unless they go high floor for a bit more capacity

[@durece100]

@@TheRandCrews Why? Low floor platform is better, safe, and easy to get back on the platform.

[@nyxw]

@@durece100 Not really. Low floor is worse for capacity because the boggies have to be inside the carriage, removing seating and standing space. Not only that but it is also more expensive to maintain, since they are very hidden away instead of being exposed. The safest way to do this would be Platform Screen Doors, which won't open until the train is stationary at the station, eliminating the risk of anyone falling onto the tracks.

[@durece100]

@@nyxw You never ride a light rail before, haven't you? Low floor isn't the worst because of over crowded people. I been on a Hudson-bergen Light Rail before as a New Yorker myself.

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

​@@durece100you clearly have no brain cells