RR503

I also vote for proposal 1. Broadway is extremely inefficient because trains switch from exp-local in regular service, and that plan would remediate that. It would also give Astorians a guaranteed one seet ride to the Financial District, and in doing so, vastly increase service on the line south of Canal, which may help alleviate congestion on other lines in the area.

Sometime later this year -- see the slide quoted above. Also: excellent finding RRB!

Are you sure about the M7s? I have it from multiple v reliable sources that BBD shipped cars from quebec/plattsburgh to pueblo for testing... (I'm not dumb enough to read wiki as if it's fact don't worry)

Mildly off topic, but what's with the public speakers at MTA board meetings. Most of the ones who aren't from an organization seem to be such a joke... Lots of name calling directed towards MTA officials, endless whining, and holding of grudges...

I don't understand. You are reducing the two useful services -- and -- to make way for something that serves literally no purpose. NO ONE will use transfers at Queens Plaza. It gets you Broadway, sure, but you already have the , and covering midtown, and let's face it, few riders will plan their commutes around the given its unreliability, and even fewer will opt for a walk outdoors. Get over it. And even worse, you're screwing Eastern Queens riders while doing it by moving their s to the express track, forcing them to transfer, creating roosevelt v2. You can't plan subway service because it's cool or it's novel, or you miss a service pattern. The time for on Queens Boulevard has passed. Pragmatism must rule, not romanticism.

Yes. They actually forgot to include a PTC locker in the specs so they're adding them now... Oh the MTA...

I am pretty sure the M8 arrangement was special -- all other locomotives/EMUs that I can think of were Puebloed. Silverliner Vs, M9s, M7s, ALP-45/46s...

....And also messes up and service with terminating trains.

Nope you're right. The Pueblo tests are to make sure the cars meet standards, but once certified, other cars of the same type don't have to test.

Apologies -- was late and I was abbreviating. I also vote for leaving QB alone, sending to 96th, and expanding service. Any that can't turn at whitehall should go to some SBK terminal -- 4th ave local is begging for more service, and there's been space for more ever since the brown was nixed.

Eh probably not. There are no skipped stops for riders until after Midtown, and those going to FiDi would have to get a local anyway so...

Second avenue will be fine. It's only 6tph. That's one train per track every 20 minutes. Also, that's a recognizable service pattern. D to Barclays/2nd Ave has been done before.

Yeah. Also will have to cross the local track to get to the 11th st cut.

Actually I'm pretty sure it's entry into service -- they run the cars around and see how they hold up under real operational conditions.

Eh. They pulled the amendment and resubmitted it. That gives them 30 days. I'm with those who think that Cuomo threatens to pull the IDC (cringe) and give senate control to the democrats and Flannery et al cave.

Can't we move on from this? In other news, I waited 40 minutes for an F train yesterday afternoon... Ideas as to why? My phone was dead so couldn't check MTA website.

Another interesting proposal was on vanshnook's website. IDK what I think of it as an idea (haven't had time to think properly yet), but thought it was worth sharing. http://www.vanshnookenraggen.com/_index/2017/05/the-future-of-the-2nd-avenue-subway/

...which has no capacity to spare because the E and M use it. When we start coming up for solutions for the L closure that are a hindrance to other commuters, we need to check ourselves. Despite all the media hullabaloo, their lives are not more important than others.

I actually took part in a station survey a few weeks ago focusing on that station, and it seemed that the Astoria/QBL split was pretty even, with R trains also arriving more crowded than N/Ws (though that was probably a function of the R's longer headways).

Foreseen issues: 1. You'd have to totally redo queensboro plaza to achieve those routings efficiently, a not-insignificant task. 2. You'd have to convert all platforms/tracks on the 7 to B division specs, and then reconstruct platforms on the Astoria line to serve A division cars. 3. Unless you swapped the N and R south of Canal (which would lead to yard issues with the N, unless corona got a rebuild), you'd get R trains crossing exp-local at 42nd, obstructing Ns which would be crossing local-exp, causing massive delays. 4. By rerouting R trains away from Queens Plaza, you're eliminating vital transfers for QB riders, making their lives more complicated.

Definitely would -- they studied it. I think they have it in one of the EISs.

You know, after the third quote of the rendering pic, I think we get what it looks like.. Notwithstanding, this is all to create a backdrop for Cuomo 2020 ads. Ah politics...

As would I, but seeing as that wasn't what I was suggesting, joke's on you!

I would suggest one of the abandoned platforms along the Nassau St. Line or the lower level of 9th Ave. Agreed. I doubt the merge could be much worse than Prince or 42nd on Broadway though.

You could do that, but a) the engineering of a 2nd ave-nassau connection is difficult (see 2av thread -- ppl have posted about it) and b) doing so limits you to ~18tph from 2nd ave to Brooklyn. If we're looking solely in terms of impact on Brooklyn service, building a connection to the Fulton St local tracks via Court Street gets you the biggest bang for your buck. Problem is, the Williamsburg Bridge can only do 24tph. and run 12 together, and the runs 9ish for a total of 21. Do you really want a new service with ~3tph? I'm all for s down 4th in theory, but you have to consider route length.