R42N

I agree with most of your points Darkstar8963. Last week, they said trains were going to run express from Astoria Blvd to Q-Boro, but the work was cancelled, so the ’s ran local, but the ’s remained up the upper east side. I don’t think the R68’s are the problem, truthfully. Even if it’s a that must come back as an they will sometimes just switch the front rollsign and that’s it. Heck, 1 of the 3 sets of R68’s they have has a jammed rollsign that shows the upside down . The big issue is the fact that the is a completely un-reliable route. Even during peak rush, Ditmars will be behind, so to keep up with demands in Brooklyn, they will dispatch 2 to maybe 3 ’s in a row to make sure there isn’t a 20 minute gap in Sea Beach. Additionally, when the Astoria work isn’t completed on-time, then you might not see a in Queens until 4pm. On your point about the millennial hipsters, while it’s wrong of me and totally opinionated, I completely agree. I remember when I immigrated from the Balkan mountains in the 1970s, and everyone in Ditmars Steinway spoke Greek. There was a great, safe, feeling that made Astoria my favorite neighborhood. To me, that 14th Street/Greenwich/Williamsburg culture makes me sick, and I would move out of Astoria if that culture came here.

Right, that’s what I’m saying, Wikipedia is great for entry level knowledge, but at an advanced level, I recommend other sites, including these forums. as you said, for more precise knowledge.

This is still my point. Everything on Wikipedia is objective and unofficial. You believe what you believe, and I believe that saying “all trains” stop at Coney Island while “most trains” go to 5th Ave/59th is inaccurate , because it is. Wikipedia is a (frequently wrong) encyclopedia, not a news source, so if it was reliable, it wouldn’t make these small mistakes. It’s not just the , there are countless issues that keep me away from Wikipedia, like how the R42 is only assigned to the and even though they are clearly also running on the . This expands far beyond New York transit, Wikipedia is great for entry level quick knowledge, but makes many mistakes at the advanced level.

I understand what you are saying, but per the internal work programs, the ’s are ’s the same way Second Ave ’s are ’s (which I ironically found via Wikipedia) https://progressiveaction.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/sub-division-b-general-distribution-fall-2016-wp-book.pdf That’s exactly my point, Wikipedia is not a transit guide, which is why I don’t rely on them, due to their spotty knowledge. Take a look at that schedule, there are seven ’s that do not originate at Coney Island, as they come in from the yard, yet that isn’t mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia, while the three AM (N)’s, that to the public appear as ’s northbound, and usually appear as “last stop” southbound until 57/7, receive their own “branch” on the station guide.

. I find Wikipedia’s knowledge of the SAS service a little spotty. For example, it’s states, that the train makes selected trips to 96st / 2ave, which is true, but it only does this in the southbound direction. All northbound runs have been signed as ’s via Sea Beach since January, yet there is no acknowledgment of the ’s running northbound on Sea Beach on Wiki One counter argument would be that they are internal trains, but then aren’t all trains internal trains? Why are it’s selected trips shown on Wiki? Of course, I don’t rely on it, but I find it interesting when, at the 72nd street station, it promotes northbound ’s, when there has never been a northbound train outside of a service change.

While it’s probably not that fast, and off-topic, I used to love riding the R32 Train through the 60th Street tunnel 20-30 years ago. As a child, it felt like it was going 80-90, with the wind making the highest pitch sound imaginable through the railfan window (my ears are still bleeding), even though it was obviously slower.

From Beebe, they will have to run additional Q102 short turns, but even then, that’s a 10-15 minute delay. Between 39 and QBoro the buses crawl as they go through Northern Blvd, resulting in heavy delays. My plan would be to walk to 36 street on the / , which will overcrowd the already placed Queens Blvd Line.

This makes sense, and it’s far more logical, but 8 months without service will be tough... I’m contemplating moving my parents to one of those high rise condos right off Beebe Ave, but since my father has trouble walking for extended distances, he can’t walk to Washington Ave or Queensboro Plaza, so the hope was, when service was effected, he could take the train to Hoyt Ave and transfer back. Again, 8 months with no convenient alternative is not fun, and while it’s totally selfish of me in the grand scheme, I’m not sure if I want the station to be “enhanced” (especially if elevators aren’t coming in).....

I was under the assumption it was one platform at a time, but I guess that plan is scrapped?? It isn’t mentioned on any of the articles that are covering the closures. https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20170914/astoria/nw-subway-station-closures-30th-avenue-36th-avenue-oct-23-mta-renovations

Only at 36th Ave.

Saying "activate before boarding" is a cheap way to make money. From Fleetwood to Scarsdale, for example, I can roughly take 10 trips on 3 passes (30% chnace the conductor comes arround). If I use ETix and "activate" before he comes to me, 10 Trips needs 10 passes. Thus, there is no beneifit on activating your ticket before she/he comes around.

Did you by chance watch that public hearing discussing the opening of the SAS? Nearly every other speaker asked for additional 4th Ave local service, due to poor headways. An additional 1-2 TPH would be fine and is manageable at Bay Ridge. Even so, I don’t think it would be more than 1 extra TPH up QBL. You could add the 4 additional ’s to compensate the , and then run two QBL up SAS. The extra would cover those two QBL runs.

As someone who lives along the Astoria line for years, I’d say the situation at Astoria is as good as it could be without be overwhelmed. It changes on a day by day basis, but generally you are looking at a train every 4 minutes at peak timing, with the odd time where it’s every 2 minutes, and then the other times when it’s every 6 minutes. It really does change every day, so I just go by the “general range” TPH. And I agree with you on your last point, I think service is fine with both the and , and DeKalb pretty much eats up any proposal you throw at it, and adding a fifth line puts a huge strain on it and the southern terminal. The only real-feasible scenario (at least at the present time until Phase 2/R211) is some extra service from a 6th Avenue Line that doesn’t go to DeKalb. So, either some ’s, or extra ’s. Obviously, with the extra service coming up to compensate riders, it seems like running extra trains up SAS is a win-win.

True, currently, for every 20 trains out of Astoria, I’d say 12 are ’s and 8 are ’s, so yes, the is less frequent, and you wouldn’t have different designations running different routes weekdays and weekends. Additionally, with Second Ave customers getting used to the route with all of these GO’s and Astoria used to the , it would be an easy transition. However, there are the shortcomings: Only having the in Astoria would mean having 14 TPH. That’s 14 TPH merging at 34th and having to find to short turn a few at Kings Highway. And of course the elephant in the room, DeKalb. And, it’s not five lines, it’s basically four with increased service to match the , so it’s essentially five lines again. Personally, I think there is going to have to be some compromise here. I don’t see anyway a line can be pulled off Astoria until the R211’s come in, which will be 2026, maybe 2030 if there are any delays. Short term, I think pulling some ’s up from the 6th Avenue Line is the only available option with car constraints as they are.

It’s most definitely feasible, and wouldn’t cost an exorbitant about of money. But if you could, can you explain how this would benefit the situation? I just think it’s unrealistic to have five lines that would have to run at regular headways on the Broadway Line, at least until Phase 2 opens.

This is a very good question. Personally, I think anyone between Broadway Junction and Canarsie would prefer to transfer at Broadway Junction (not everybody of course, but most people), which I’d assume would leave people seeking service from Bushwick Ave to about Graham Ave. That’s a lot of customers, but maybe not 13 TPH. I think it’s a matter of sending them to a workable southern terminal that accommodates riders. So, if Myrtle gets too much, it might make more sense to send them to Broadway Junction. Correct, I didn’t make that clear enough, my apologies. I still think of ’s going westbound on the Williamsburg as “southbound”, my fault.

Personally, I don’t see the Broadway Swap coming into effect (if at all) until Phase 2 opens. Astoria needs the 13-14 TPH it currently has (if not 14-15. And Sea Beach needs the 9 TPH. So, basically, while you’d be “swapping” you’d essentially be adding an extra line, especially if the Sea Beach train isn’t the same as the Astoria train. Without designations, the broadway swap would need these lines at consistent headways: Line 1: Forest Hills - Bay Ridge Line 2: Astoria - Whitehall Line 3: Astoria - Sea Beach/West End Line 4: 96st - Coney Island (Sea Beach) Line 5: 96st Coney Island (Brighton) On Phase 1 alone, I truly don’t see any reason to justify an entire line being added to Broadway. When Phase 2 comes into effect, and service really needs to be pumped up, then, I think adding a line from 6th Avenue or Broadway could make some sense, but Phase 1 does not need an increase from 11 TPH to 20-21 TPH.

No, it won’t, but having crowded trains without additional service will go down worse. Personally, it’s all in how you present it. Take Wallyhorse’s proposal, for example. It could be billed as a service enhancement with the return of the . Currently, the runs 8 TPH, that will be increased to 12-13. Where are you going to terminate those 4-5 extra trains? You could maybe terminate 1-2 more up in Forest Hills, but is extra 6th Avenue service needed up QBL? There’s already the Express and plenty of Locals, and then you’d still have confusion with the three overflow trains that wouldn’t be able to go up QBL. You could have Wallyhorse’s or go up SAS with those 4-5 TPH, and then terminate an extra 2-3 southbound at 2nd Avenue. That’s a 6-8 TPH train, which would be doable with the extra cars. Is there anything really wrong with that? Sure it’ll be some confusion, but you are going to have to terminate those extra ’s somewhere, and SAS will need extra service by the time the closes. Of course, the kinks would need to be worked out, to make the proposal do-able, but it’s a fine proposal.

The Broadway swap couldn’t happen until the R211’s come in, or until the R179’s if you want to hang on to most of the R32’s and R42’s, which are going to have to go sooner or later.....

At least it’’s a good proposal. Does anyone remember the proposal 5 years or so ago, saying the R142A’s should stay on the so the posters favorite express announcement “making express stops in the Bronx” could live on? That must have been reiterated a dozen times, but always gave me a good laugh. Anyway, I kind of like his proposal of the split , I think car constraints are the one big hold up, that kind of kills most of these proposals, unfortunately.

That’s fine, I get that the LIRR needs new cars with more urgency. I, also, love the M3a’s on the MNRR, they have more seats and swing and sway considerably less. So, to confirm, as far as one can tell, there will be no M9’s heading to the MNRR?

Nice pictures, and a nice canopy, but the lack of uniformity is troublesome, in my perspective. While the regular green entrances aren’t stunning or modern, it’s nice that most every non-special entrance looks the same (with small, subtle, differences over the years) I was under the impression that after South Ferry, Hudson Yards and now 2nd Ave P1, the new “theme” was the arched/rounded glass with the familiar globe, regardless of the size or placement: I think that, while, it’s good to have new an improved entrances, uniformity is important, and the MTA should consider picking one “theme” and sticking with it.

Ok, so, there's no timetable to replace the M3's on MNRR? They refurbrished them well, but they are old cars. Maybe the next generation (M10?)

Ohh, I guess I shouldn't have trusted Wikipedia. So what will replace the M3A on MNRR?

Thanks, and, I agree. I'd return the favor and say Lance and other moderators have done a lot of things to where they are, and between the lines he makes sense, but not everyone has the same level of subway expertise as others. I could have kept quiet during my commute, said nothing, but instead, because I was interested in discussion, which is the purpouse of the forums, I spent time looking at the demands that people asked for, issues, PDF schedules and current TPH, and made what I thought is the most fair solution. I'm however not a transit professional, and have a career in a different field, so I was fully aware that there might be flaws. A fair moderator, in my opinnion (again, maybe I'm wrong and things are different here, in which case I wouldn't take the time to propose) would say something along the lines of "Interesting, however, there are various issues here". Questioning what goes through a persons head and making assumptions on my motives is not only un-professional, it's demaining to me, someone who has been on the Forums for half it's lifespan (since 2012) and, like Lance, enjoys all of the remarks made. That is all.