chenvinny54

Warning, I had spotted a wrong route label at Seneca Av & Stockholm St, in the afternoon I rode a B38 LTD heading towards Ridgewood.

On the purple one, prematurely shows "Bx38", instead of B38.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See this post of the GTFS data: http://www.subchat.com/buschat/read.asp?Id=324584

I had No time to sign up BusChat, so easier for me just to post on this thread.

 

Shuttle bus is so cool; so essential to travel to downtown Brooklyn after transferring to B57. Also, it is wheelchair accessible to go to that place. I strongly like Shuttle M3; feels like a limited service from Metropolitan Av plus going to Flushing Av; first time I rode this way in my life.

Agree with me if you want to keep Shuttle M1, 2, and 3 for Phase II on Myrtle viaduct reconstruction, because putting train back just to operate between Metropolitan Av Middle Village and Myrtle Av Wyckoff Avs, will be inconvenient for every commuters.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry, i just bumped a thread because, I am reporting my indirect posts as they are not my final suggestions. Next time, I should stick to my drawing pad, brainstorm completely, before I even go to the forum.

 

BTW, Here is my final plan, based on my maze algorithm of my knowledge in CST 1101 in NYC College of Technology:

 

To make the route possibly direct, for example, if Q48 heads East, direction is E/N/West = W/S; main direction (East/West) must be head the most, 1st Alternative (North/South) is less frequent, and last (South/North) is least frequent, on each trip.

 

Outbound Q48

Start at 81 St at North of Roosevelt Av, where Outbound Q32 buses serve;

North on 81 St;

East on 37 Av;

South on Junction Blvd;

East on Roosevelt Av;

North on Main St;

East on 39 Av;

Terminate at 39 Av/138 St, for transfer to Q13, 16, and 28, just ahead.

 

Inbound:

Start at Union St and North of Roosevelt Av;

South on Union St;

West on Roosevelt Av;

North on Junction Blvd;

West on 37 Av;

South on 82 St;

West on Roosevelt Av again;

Terminate at Roosevelt Av and close to 82 St.

 

This time, I've made up my mind completely based on my drawing board, that I better off move Q48 to 82 St - Jackson Hts Station because 74 St bus terminus are full.

 

I also take back what I said about Q72. It should stay as of now.

 

Overall, routes that I finally want in airport:

 

M60-SBS, my proposed Q23-SBS, Q70-SBS, and Q72

 

...and what existing LGA routes I want OUT of airport:

Q47, and Q48

 

If the disabled want to ride the subway, they have to take Q48 to Junction Blvd station. Nevertheless, in the future, we hope we will have more elevators working at most of popular stations, including 82 St - Jackson Heights, lifting into/from station from street level.

About Q23-SBS, what I mean is that, from Metropolitan Av, it will go straight up via 71 Av and 108 St, in both directions, no turns made unless at Ditmars Blvd, and (Inbound) at Union Tpke via 108 St and 71 Av.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

False equivalency....

 

Since the Q48 sees poor usage inside the airport & the Q47 sees even worse usage inside the airport, then both of those routes should be phased out? What you're completely failing to consider with this whole thing, is how well for itself the Q47 does outside of the airport - Which cannot be said about the Q48, being that it only serves Corona & East Elmhurst (outside of Flushing) - 1/2 of which it does virtually nothing for (East Elmhurst).....

 

The MTA actually got it right when they merged the defunct Q45 with the old Q47 to form today's Q47....

 

Trying to phase out the Q47, in part, with a Q23 SBS variant that meanders all over the place is counter-productive on multiple fronts.....

Never mind leaving Junction b/w 23rd - 35th avs with squat.... Don't know if you know Morse code, but I'll translate it for ya:

 

There are too many holes in this plan & the ship is sinking fast, captain...

 

You were better off leaving the Q47 to end in the vicinity of Vaughn College.....

 

 

 

* The Q47 inside the airport is lacking, The Q48 inside the airport is lacking....

Quick, let me think up a way to kill two birds with one stone.....*

 

...is exactly how I envisaged his methodology behind this whole thing.... He needs to go back to the drawing board or something, because it's too impulsively composed for me to bother breaking it down the way you did (all of which I concur with, btw).... There is literally no point of shifting the Q72 to Marine Air - when the current serving of that (airport) terminal with the Q47 is the reason the Q47 has the abysmal usage inside the airport that it does (as in, it serves no other airport terminal - unlike the Q48).... By that logic, he may as well kill off the very Q72 he's creating

Okay, you're right that I was right in rather terminating Q47 at Vaughn College.

Q48, there are more people between Corona and Flushing, through Roosevelt Av, serving just one Station (Mets - Willets Point) + LIRR, and a Station (111 St), besides Flushing - Main Street.

But then, about my Q23-SBS, i should've be better off letting it go straight via 108 St to airport, little faster than phasing off Q48 to Flushing, and keep its inbound terminus same as local Q23, but opposite from that (across Union Tpke), so that inbound heads straight down via 71 Av, and right turn at Union Turnpike to terminate, and let outbound reverse (OB: head west via Union Tpke, right on Woodhaven Blvd, no stops made, and right on Metropolitan Av, also no stops made) exactly the route local Q23 to 71 Av/Metro. Av.

The Q48, (I won't simply throw this route away again just because it's usage is poor in airport) lets see if it is appropriate to go to Jackson Heights w/o following the subway line and let it head South. Since there are lots of people in Corona too, call this proposed route a crosstown, and 103 St and 111 St stations are not ADA accessible. Tell me if you think that's still too indirect.

Existing Q72 will be remained, but due to traffic in LGA, short turning may be happening.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That "Q23 SBS" is not even like the regular route for the most part, so it may as well be a different route. I still don't agree with this plan for a few reasons:

 

1. What exactly is the SBS replacing at Atlas Park Mall from the Q47? You can't just claim that it's replacing the Q47, especially since the route has no correlation with the Q47 besides stopping at Atlas Park Mall.

 

2. Why is the Q47 being eliminated? The Q47 isn't necessarily a low-ridership route (it brings more than 8K riders on a standard weekday, which is 1K less than the Q48 and Q72 combined).

 

3. I would rather cut the Q72 out of LGA than send it to Terminal A. The Q47 should remain serving it, especially since the savings brought by terminating buses outside Terminal A would be negligible. Perhaps some buses during the rush hour, and the last few buses of the day can terminate at 80 Street & Astoria Boulevard, but that's about it.

 

4. Some of the roads the SBS takes will cause the bus to not save any time over corresponding local service

 

5. I disagree with any southward extension of the Q18 from Grand Avenue. I don't support an extension replacing part of the Q67, and I don't support this either. Many riders on the Q47 coming from Glendale & Middle Village are going to Roosevelt Avenue for subway service. I, like many other riders, would not want to have a longer bus ride to the subway, only to have the as an option. If you want more options, you have to stay until Northern Boulevard, where you only have the or . I would not want to have a longer bus ride to a more unreliable and less frequent subway service, especially on the weekends. Either that or take it to the , which would be indirect for many trips.

 

I feel that ridership on the portion would seriously dwindle south of Grand Avenue (all you would see on a consistent basis are local riders, only taking the bus within the neighborhood). You would push more people to use the east-west routes (Q38, Q58, Q59) and the Q29. Not really a good idea (each for their own reasons). Not only that, but the Q18 has reliability problems, worse than the Q47. Yesterday, I saw 3 Q18s making the turn from Hamilton Place onto Grand Avenue (back to back to back). With buses running every 20 minutes, you can imagine how long those delays are. The Q47's delays are due to (but not limited to) the current long-term detour buses are taking.

You're right; also I looked at google maps, there's plenty of road closures happened at LGA, causing to comply to your #3 suggestion about Q72. We wish that road obstruction should be reopened ASAP.

Also, why the Q47 had to be moved to Grand Av from Calamus Av? That can oversaturate Q58 and Q59.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That "Q23 SBS" is not even like the regular route for the most part, so it may as well be a different route. I still don't agree with this plan for a few reasons:

 

1. What exactly is the SBS replacing at Atlas Park Mall from the Q47? You can't just claim that it's replacing the Q47, especially since the route has no correlation with the Q47 besides stopping at Atlas Park Mall.

 

2. Why is the Q47 being eliminated? The Q47 isn't necessarily a low-ridership route (it brings more than 8K riders on a standard weekday, which is 1K less than the Q48 and Q72 combined).

 

3. I would rather cut the Q72 out of LGA than send it to Terminal A. The Q47 should remain serving it, especially since the savings brought by terminating buses outside Terminal A would be negligible. Perhaps some buses during the rush hour, and the last few buses of the day can terminate at 80 Street & Astoria Boulevard, but that's about it.

 

4. Some of the roads the SBS takes will cause the bus to not save any time over corresponding local service

 

5. I disagree with any southward extension of the Q18 from Grand Avenue. I don't support an extension replacing part of the Q67, and I don't support this either. Many riders on the Q47 coming from Glendale & Middle Village are going to Roosevelt Avenue for subway service. I, like many other riders, would not want to have a longer bus ride to the subway, only to have the as an option. If you want more options, you have to stay until Northern Boulevard, where you only have the or . I would not want to have a longer bus ride to a more unreliable and less frequent subway service, especially on the weekends. Either that or take it to the , which would be indirect for many trips.

 

I feel that ridership on the portion would seriously dwindle south of Grand Avenue (all you would see on a consistent basis are local riders, only taking the bus within the neighborhood). You would push more people to use the east-west routes (Q38, Q58, Q59) and the Q29. Not really a good idea (each for their own reasons). Not only that, but the Q18 has reliability problems, worse than the Q47. Yesterday, I saw 3 Q18s making the turn from Hamilton Place onto Grand Avenue (back to back to back). With buses running every 20 minutes, you can imagine how long those delays are. The Q47's delays are due to (but not limited to) the current long-term detour buses are taking.

You're right; also I looked at google maps, there's plenty of road closures happened at LGA, causing to comply to your #3 suggestion about Q72. We wish that road obstruction should be reopened ASAP.

Also, why the Q47 had to be moved to Grand Av from Calamus Av? That can oversaturate Q58 and Q59.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's not what a headway is..... Headways refer to the frequency of service (in minutes).

 

As for LGA usage I'd say, Q47 usage < Q48 usage < Q72 usage < Q70 usage < M60 usage.....

Q47 usage is easily worse than Q48 usage, so I have no problem w/ taking the Q47 out of the airport..... Q72 OTOH isn't great by any stretch, but it isn't near as bad as Q47 & Q48 usage....

Guys (to NOT only B35 via Church), I have a better suggestion, the Q23-SBS, and is going to kill Q47 and 48 for their low ridership.

 

Q23-SBS will operate from Glendale - Atlas Mall to replace Q47, and operate through Flushing via College Point Blvd, with stop for Skymall, and Roosevelt Av, to supersede Q48 to LGA, serving only Terminals B-D-C, and going out and terminate at Ditmars Blvd/102 St. To Flushing from Glendale - Atlas Mall, right on 80 St right on Metropolitan Av, left on 71 Av, go straight up, then 108 St, right on Horace Harding Exp to College PT Blvd. Then to LGA, via Roosevelt Av WB, just serve Mets - Willets PT Station plus LIRR, and 111 St station, right on 108 St, straight up to Ditmars Blvd, then entering LGA @ 94 St.

Existing local Q23 will remain in service.

 

Q72 will be taking over Marine Terminal A to supersede Q47 from/to 35 Av/73 St. Then, inbound to Rego Park, via 35 Av EB, right on Junction Blvd, and its regular route. Outbound: its regular route, left on 35 Av, right on 74 St, and via existing Q47 route.

 

Q18 will move to 69 St via Woodside Av, to replace the South part of Q47 from/to 69 St/53 Av.

The Q72 I'd just keep in the airport...

 

As for the Q47, don't know what new headway you're referring to, but I don't have too much of a problem with your route suggestion....

The "new headway" I was referring to, is the new route I suggested to you.

As for Q72, you're right, but we are not sure about the ridership though to/from the airport.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not remotely defending the airport usage of either of those other 2 routes....

 

- I've always thought the Q47 should end over there @ Ditmars/82nd; the problem is the turnaround....

- I wouldn't bother kicking the Q72 out, and it has nothing to do with its airport usage... Before sometime in the mid 2000's when it used to end at Ditmars/94th, buses used to turn around inside the airport anyway.... So I don't really blame them for eventually running buses inside there to actually serve the terminals......

 

Aside from that, the difference between the Q48 & the Q47/Q72 is that there would be no reason to try to phase out those routes because of its poor airport usage.... Again, the reach of the Q48 is much too narrow - and extending it eastward (or combining it with some route in Flushing wouldn't help matters).....

Then how about we will have Q47, and Q72 serve east Elmhurst, and eliminate Q48?

Q47 will have its turnaround from Ditmars Blvd/90 St, right on 90 St, and then terminate at 23 Av, in front of Vaughn College.

Q72 will serve the same area, and terminate around Ditmars Blvd/100 Street after the roundabout. That is turned from 94 Street, and having this new headway to avoid airport due to low ridership you said.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Q22 extension to Kings Plaza. Thoughts?

Good idea but then that is parallel to Q35 from Beach 147 Street/ Rockaway Beach Blvd. Or propose that for peak hours only.

 

Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

That's the point we're making.... That's why it's dangerous for pedestrians.

Agreed. I also passed there and thats the possible reason why some customers couldn't catch the bus; also, theres a ped light that needs to be removed after that ramp shuts down. However, that is up to DOT.

 

Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

But with proper communication people can be convinced to warm up to said proposal once they understand it.

Yes i know. I tried to be confident and use my proper communication. Thr proposals i did on my edition of nyc subway map, are coming from my dream. Well, today im still editing it, i added enginerrboy6561's proposal idea, the (X) train that takes almost to anywhere starting from The Bronx. Also i am about to draw the line too, not the since it didnt stop at 2 Av, move the to the second avenue line. Probably when the NYC got enough budget, the MTA workers will revive the .

Therefore, let the second avenue line construction worker dig to connect the track to the 2 Av station.

It’s not about dark-skins or the white–black dichotomy and jailing all the naughty boys sounds like a child’s unsophisticated, wishful thinking without any detailed thought process behind the process or side effects.

 

A helpful method I was taught to reach a goal is to work backwards from the results you want. What resources are available? How are the resources allocated? What needs to be done with the resources to produce any intermediate outcomes? You haven’t considered any of those things.

 

We just had a series of posts on why that kind of operation is a bad idea. I suggest you read it (starting here and here).

Okay unionturnpike and CenSin, i admit it, if your workers dont want to change the to the queens blvd line, fine have it you way. Im really sorry for attemping to make your job little more difficult with my horrible proposal ideas. Well, i started to feel interested on the (X) train proposal made by the engineerboy6561, which will operate from Pelham Bay Park, to Borough hall, going through Main street, something like that.

Similiar to Create your own bus route! in our MTA Bus Operations forum, create your own subway route. Assign your subway route a route bullet, describe the route, station locations and transfers, assign cars (past, present or future subway cars), and assign a yard. Most of all have fun!

 

This is my own Create Your Own Subway Route:

 

70(8) Third Avenue

• New I.R.T. (A Division) Route

• Uses R62s

• Serves Third Avenue, Webster Avenue and East Gun Hill Road

 

Stations

Manhattan

• East Harlem-Park-Lexington Avenues Transfer MNRR

 

The Bronx

• East 138th Street Transfer

• The Hub-East 149th Street Transfer

• East 156th Street

• East 161st Street

• East 168th Street

• Claremont Parkway

• East 174th Street

• East Tremont Avenue

• East 180th Street

• East 183d Street

• Fordham Plaza

• Bedford Park Boulevard

• 204th Street

• Williamsbridge-210th Street

• White Plains Road Transfer

• Seymour Avenue-East Gun Hill Road Transfer

 

The 70(8) is based at Unionport Yard in The Bronx

Okay, this is going to be a possible extention on one of my subway map proposal, the second avenue line, agreed to bring the into Uptown, and thus reviving the back to run locally from Astoria Ditmars Blvd to Whitehalls.

But we will make sure NYC will reach around $10 trillion by the time when the final phase of the second avenue construction is finished.

We the people wishing our Country an excellent luck

there are things that are more important then what you are proposing

For example:

Four Tracks SAS

Third Avenue Line and 163/Lafayette Avenue Line in the Bronx

Fordham/Pelham Pkwy Line

Concourse to WPR

Worth Street/Grand/Utica Avenue

Nostrand Avenue Extension

Hillside Extension to LNP

Southeast Queens extension of Archer Line to Rosedale

Rockaway Beach Branch

Four Track Myrtle Avenue/Union Turnpike Line

Fort Hamilton Parkway Line

Extension of Flushing Line via the LIRR Central ROW

Whitestone Line

Conversion of Port Washington Branch to Subway

Queens Bypass Line

Long Island Expressway Line

Extension of BMT Myrtle Line to Woodhaven Boulevard

Extension of IND Fulton Line via Linden Boulevard to 229 Street

Extension of Liberty El to Jamaica Center

Branch of Fourth Avenue Line to SI

Conversion of Flushing Line to B Division

Extension of BMT Astoria Line via Ditmars to LGA and then to Flushing

Tenth Avenue Line extension of Canarsie Line continuing via 50th Street and Northern Boulevard

TriboroRx

...oops I got a bit carried away

Ok Unionturnpike, i found out the detail for 42 street bryant park and 34 street herald square. When the queensbound approaches 42 Street, it will switch to the local track, so it can be guided to queens blvd line via 53 Street. The southbound may switch to the express track right after departing from 42 Street. Therefore northbound local track from 42 Street is going to Queens via 53 St. The southbound local track lets the train switch to express track after leaving 42 Street. https://goo.gl/photos/5hFV5bFcDivdg6eP6

For the , the northbound switches to the express track in its middle of the trip from 34 Street to 42 Street. The brooklyn bound one

switches to the local track before it will arrive at 34 Street. Therefore the northbound express track after 34 Street is taking the to The Bronx, via Central Park West.

https://goo.gl/photos/BEDTq4vEt1GyUTLa6

<p>

 

It’s more of a political matter:

• Refugees are a drain on the economy and tax-funded resources;
• They make places less attractive to live in;
• Trouble can be found wherever they go.

Okay, now i know, that can be mostly dark skins; to me it is really painful to see them. The ordinary ones are not well educated because of the segregation back in the 50s wheb the white individuals got plenty of schools and colleges, on the other hand the blacks dont, and they were categorized between whites and skin colored, assuming that they hate each other.

Anyway to make NYC be more freelancer via sufficient budget, we hope that lots of UK, which is the most rich country in the world, living their high life standards. That is a reason why i considered to Uniontpke about that, i just trying to help NYC raise up their economy, also by jailing anybody who causes the major trouble via their bad demeanor, and to play this role smoothly, hire more cops.

 

If NYC had being rich like UK, then the MTA workers wouldve follow my proposals. In other words, MTA subway needs more budgets to raise up the electricity capacity, to free more space of the tunnels, such as Cranberry Tube to Coney Island from Hoyt Schemmerhorn Sts, and the 53 Street Tunnel from the local track at 47-50 Rockefeller Center.

there are things that are more important then what you are proposing

For example:

Four Tracks SAS

Third Avenue Line and 163/Lafayette Avenue Line in the Bronx

Fordham/Pelham Pkwy Line

Concourse to WPR

Worth Street/Grand/Utica Avenue

Nostrand Avenue Extension

Hillside Extension to LNP

Southeast Queens extension of Archer Line to Rosedale

Rockaway Beach Branch

Four Track Myrtle Avenue/Union Turnpike Line

Fort Hamilton Parkway Line

Extension of Flushing Line via the LIRR Central ROW

Whitestone Line

Conversion of Port Washington Branch to Subway

Queens Bypass Line

Long Island Expressway Line

Extension of BMT Myrtle Line to Woodhaven Boulevard

Extension of IND Fulton Line via Linden Boulevard to 229 Street

Extension of Liberty El to Jamaica Center

Branch of Fourth Avenue Line to SI

Conversion of Flushing Line to B Division

Extension of BMT Astoria Line via Ditmars to LGA and then to Flushing

Tenth Avenue Line extension of Canarsie Line continuing via 50th Street and Northern Boulevard

TriboroRx

...oops I got a bit carried away

Anyway thank you for the list of subway line routes. To know them all, when im free, i can research what avenues and streets, or landmarks are locating via these routes. My proposals are regarding to just some of them. Others are not fully constructed yet.

why would the UK help us, and specifically for a transit plan that does not serve NYC's needs.

i just saying, while i was bit carried away of my repeated quote "two heads work better than one". I meant i am thinking about NYC hoping our hometown to get really rich, to get what they need for their future. I dont meant to push them, they can take alot of time to grow our economic budgets big, and make the population really proud, such as displaying out attractive commercials possible can be an excellent role to play. Best thing is, avoid any causes of downfall.

To let America fulfill my suggested long term goal, i wish the UK will help US more often. I also wish the UK our luck too, work together to reach more quicker. More budget made, more subway lines for us to revive out and implant them in formal way, but also with reasoning. Of the UK and US as the future partner, it is always two heads better than one.

Note that I remember the fact, UK lives a really high standard. They are always rich, hardworking, and professional.

The G concept is interesting, however, there is no capacity to spare in the 53rd Street tunnel. If there was additional capacity it would go toward boosting service. The switch at West Fourth Street would delay service.

 

Your is running express and running via 53rd Street. There is no switch from Sixth Avenue Express to 53rd Street. You could have the B run via 63rd Street as the switches are there. The problem with your service pattern is that the M would have to switches from the Sixth Avenue Local tracks to the Sixth Avenue Express tracks to access Central Park West making this pattern unpractical. See here.

http://nyctrackbook.com/Images/p14.pdf

 

Also, how are you going to have enough space in the Cranberry Tube for your rush hour service. The capacity there is 26 TPH. Unless you plan on cutting or via Fulton this won't work. Why would you rob Peter to pay Paul, when Paul doesn't even need to be paid?

To let America fulfill my suggested long term goal, i wish the UK will help US more often. I also wish the UK our luck too, work together to reach more quicker. More budget made, more subway lines for us to revive out and implant them in formal way, but also with reasoning. Of the UK and US as the future partner, it is always two heads better than one.

The G concept is interesting, however, there is no capacity to spare in the 53rd Street tunnel. If there was additional capacity it would go toward boosting service. The switch at West Fourth Street would delay service.

 

Your is running express and running via 53rd Street. There is no switch from Sixth Avenue Express to 53rd Street. You could have the B run via 63rd Street as the switches are there. The problem with your service pattern is that the M would have to switches from the Sixth Avenue Local tracks to the Sixth Avenue Express tracks to access Central Park West making this pattern unpractical. See here.

http://nyctrackbook.com/Images/p14.pdf

 

Also, how are you going to have enough space in the Cranberry Tube for your rush hour service. The capacity there is 26 TPH. Unless you plan on cutting or via Fulton this won't work. Why would you rob Peter to pay Paul, when Paul doesn't even need to be paid?

Also, to let NYC keep on track on my l9 ng term suggestion, I recommend the NYC economy to make more money, and attract more refugees. Then the economy will make more money than now. I suggest them the goal to make at least a trillion dollars biannually, so they can afford to upgrade the electricity capacity in order to light up more hunk of watts for 53 St queens manhattan tunnel track for the downtown loop , and incresse the amount of TPH for the Cranberry Tube, to let the train perform rush hour service via the for the customers living near the Coney Island station. In this case, customers crowding around that station can travel to Times Square via 8 Av or Penn Station, without changing to another train, and other crowds on the , can get to manhattan on time via the express service.

Once again, i still need to refresh my memory to follow how the track connection operates the from one place to another.

Thabk you for your kind cooperation again, and i hope you have a wonderful day.

The G concept is interesting, however, there is no capacity to spare in the 53rd Street tunnel. If there was additional capacity it would go toward boosting service. The switch at West Fourth Street would delay service.

 

Your is running express and running via 53rd Street. There is no switch from Sixth Avenue Express to 53rd Street. You could have the B run via 63rd Street as the switches are there. The problem with your service pattern is that the M would have to switches from the Sixth Avenue Local tracks to the Sixth Avenue Express tracks to access Central Park West making this pattern unpractical. See here.

http://nyctrackbook.com/Images/p14.pdf

 

Also, how are you going to have enough space in the Cranberry Tube for your rush hour service. The capacity there is 26 TPH. Unless you plan on cutting or via Fulton this won't work. Why would you rob Peter to pay Paul, when Paul doesn't even need to be paid?

Ok, Unionturnpike, then when i am free, i will edit the map, revive the and operate on the fulton line, and thus operate at the Cranberry tube for rush hour only, when you all guys improve the electricity capacity for the track to Coney Island. As a result, that will be around 42 TPH. This plan will be for at least next decade. That is the future if NYC economy makes at least a trillion dollars per year starting from year 2020, while the second phase of the second avenue subway is under construction.

Same service enhancement goes to the line, for the 53 Street Tunnel. Let the economy make another few trillions in budget, then the line for downtown loop will be the next phase for the MTA workers.

The track connection for service sport, I'll answer you later. i will refresh my memory, and see how the track transports the cars from where to where.

Anyway, thank you for your kind cooperation. I am the new person to discover how the subway track is connected and addressed by the track controller.

Also Wallyhorse,

When one or more mta customers in queens are about to be late to any games taken in Atlantic Barclays Center, they can take the thats coming from Jamaica 179 Street (express during peak hours), and reach at Atlantic Barclays Center on time, in case the train (also can go to Atlantic Barclays) somehow comes little less frequently depending on track condition, and sometimes runs little bit slower in Manhattan.

you are literally putting Wallyhorse's ideas into map form. It looks so much worse that way! Ugh!

Ok im very sorry whether this is hurting you. But may i ask you how i putting Wallyhorses idea into a map form makes so much worse, and how i fix this to make it much better?

Wallyhorse,

I am not talking about . The service of that stays the same. I am regarding to . To let the queensbound get to the queens blvd line, after it depart from 47-50 Rockefeller Center, the operator should switch track to Queensbound line with the track control, then it will command the track to slide the to the very right side to run via Queens Blvd from the express track.

For the , from local track, the operator should command the track to slide left to run via Central Park West.