Talk:Interborough Rapid Transit Company

IRT Operates Today???

No, it doesn't. The MTA operates all subway lines in New York City. I don't know enough of the history to update the page, but the MTA has been the operating authority for NYC subways for many years. For a long time, the MTA kept the old IRT, IND and BMT designations because people we familiar with those routes. But it's been probably 20 year since they started elimiated those references as well. I believe it was part of the same effort that included reducing the names of all subway lines to single digit/letter names. (The RR became the R for example.) Now-a-days, the only refernces to the old lines are stray signs that haven't been elimiated, or a few odd references where MTA sign-makers seem to be confused themselves. (I recently spotted a modern sign in either the Union Square or Herald Square station directing passengers to "BMT" trains -- but this is an error.) Digit LeBoid 14:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, clearly no, the IRT company no longer operates, but the MTA operates the old IRT lines. And still a lot of older New Yorkers and middle age natives still call those lines IRTs. Pretty much my entire family still refers to them that way. Ford MF 17:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The MTA still uses "IRT" and the others when talking about the lines; see [1]:

"96th Street Station & ADA, Broadway/7th Avenue Line (IRT) in the Borough of Manhattan"

"For 4 (IRT) service, pay fare, use up ramp to elevator # 132; take elevator to second mezzanine and uptown platform."

"ATM switches were installed in 177 IRT and 10 BMT stations to handle transmissions."

From what I understand, the line names on emergency exits include the "division". --NE2 00:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Flushing Line has had no physical connection to the rest of the IRT?

" The Flushing Line has had no physical connection to the rest of the IRT since 1942, when service on the Second Avenue El was discontinued; today, its sole connection to the rest of the system is to the BMT at Queensborough Plaza."

Unless I am missing something the Flushing line connects to the system including IRT lines at both Grand Central and Tines Square stations.

Jdgang 03:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Jdgang

Those are not track connections. --NE2 21:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge Proposal

It would seem the article New York IRT is very short and unreferenced. Since the team was supposedly formed to represent the Interborough Rapid Transit Company and the team does not have much of a history it would seem to fit more as a footnote to the company's history than a stand alone article. James084 (talk) 23:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually it has a lot of history, it's just not in the article, which I just came across. I'll work on this over the next couple of day.Mohrflies (talk) 16:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't get to it as quickly as I thought. I recommend it remain as a stand alone article as it covers information unrelated to the team's corporate sponsor. Mohrflies (talk) 19:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

• Moved to New York IRT (soccer team). Your Radio Enemy (talk) 18:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

IRT Platform Lengths

(This is all regarding the original IRT line of 1904)

It's worth noting that the platforms could be shorter than the trains then. The doors were at the extreme ends of the car sidewall, and within a few years, also in the middle. The doors at the front and rear ends were not opened, so they could be beyond the platform ends. Thus a 4 car local of 51 foot cars needed only a little over 150 feet of platform, and 200 feet was generous.

The first extensions were done in 1910-11. Local platforms were extended a little into what had been "manholes" (equipment spaces) at one or both ends, and this small amount made 5 car locals possible using the system of not opening end doors. These small extensions can be seen at one end of a few stations where the later extension was entirely to the other end.

Also in 1910-11, express stations were extended for 10 cars, also for no end doors. These were extended the additional amount in the 1960's for modern 10 car trains. On the branches (upper Broadway and Lenox), only the uptown side was extended: running downtown, passengers had to walk through the train to reach the additional cars of express trains. Columbia University is such a station. This assumed passengers mainly got on going downtown and got off going uptown. (Note that before 1960 alternate express and local trains ran to each branch, upper Broadway and Lenox, although 145th--Lenox was local only and didn't get extended for 10 cars.)

In 1948, the branch stations were finally extended on the downtown side, in a style astonishingly close to the 1910-11 work, but slightly different in detail. The local stops at 33d, 28th and 23d got extended around that time too. The last project was about 1961-1963, making all stations 510 feet to accommodate full train lengths, using that ugly large tile. By that time, 10-car locals were being run, and stopping only half the train in the old local stations (the Lexington and Seventh Ave stations were all built to take 10 car trains without end doors open).

2) What method was used to extend the stations (cut and cover, or something else)? I have not seen anything in any of my reference books on this but it would be safe to assume that various methods were used depending on the area (cut and cover, total underground construction, and probably even cut and paste - grin).

I don't know about that last one! Almost all the stations are close to the street so only cut and cover could have been used. However at 168th St and 181st St, both done uptown in the 1910 project and downtown in the 1948 project, the sidewalls of the rock cut were drilled out, and I don't know how they did Mott Ave (149th St-- Grand Concourse) since that was a deep cut and cover originally. 191st St, not an original station, was entirely built by drilling out the rock wall of the tunnel. --96.250.192.111 (talk) 21:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC) Barry

This article needs to be merged with the early history of the IRT Article

This article doesn't have that much information and that article has a good amount of info so they should be merged. Can this article be merged within a week? Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:26, 21 March 2014 (UTC)Kew Gardens 613

The other article is about a line. This is about the entire company. Epicgenius (talk) 02:28, 4 April 2014 (UTC)