RR503

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...

The idea is to eliminate the need to terminate trains at 2nd Avenue.

This way, the can run in place of the and you have one line running instead of two shorter ones.  The would simply be a Brooklyn-only service for the weekend while the takes its place on CPW and in The Bronx.

And you can if needed borrow some trains from the to make up the extra service on the .

 

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/

that's 53st ( currently used by ), not 63st ( currently )

...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.

For number 4, the QBL would lose its direct connection to the and at Lexington, but from my own experience traveling through there (former line rider from 2012-15), it looked like there were always far more people who wanted Astoria over Forest Hills. That said, it was a major transfer point for , and riders (including myself), so the loss of the at Lex-59 wouldn't be a small one.

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...

If I had a dollar someone threw out Nassau as an alternative, I would fund phase 2 of SAS myself lol

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

if that's the case what happens to the museum?

 

I would suggest one of the abandoned platforms along the Nassau St. Line or the lower level of 9th Ave. 

 

The problem with sending the to Bay Ridge is you wind up having to deadhead trains from CI Yard to Bay Ridge somehow, which would both waste time and disrupt service. Perhaps a permanent terminal of Kings Hwy or 86th-Gravesend on Sea Beach would work, though that could be a messy merge after 59th... 

 

Alternatively, you could send it down West End, but Sea Beach needs the extra service more (based on ridership), and since trains are run with crews, I'm sure logistically running it down Sea Beach makes more sense. Also 45th and 53rd are high ridership stations that could use some extra service (especially when 53rd re-opens). 

 

Agreed. I doubt the merge could be much worse than Prince or 42nd on Broadway though. 

Instead of building the to terminate at Hanover Square, why not merge it with the Jamaica Line on Broad Street and use Montague to service 4th Av?

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. 

 

Sorry...I meant run the short-turn trains in addition to the existing and service, so as not to leave the stations east of the Junction with less service. They should probably have a different letter, like K, so as not to cause confusion with the skip-stop / .

 

Extending the to Bay Ridge would certainly help out the as well, but would have to wait for the R211s to enter service.

 

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. 

It's true that an extended or train would be making a long local line even longer. And both lines have multiple merges. But I feel as though having a line going to Midtown Manhattan from the Rockaways without going through Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan first, like the does, is preferable to extending the Rock Park shuttle up to Queens Blvd. With the shuttle option, everyone has to transfer. That's likely to be a harder sell, because that's what they have to do now with the existing local and limited bus services, as well as on the proposed SBS service. Wheras on an extended or , some people might stay on. The majority might bail at the first opportunity, which is why I suggest making Woodhaven Blvd into an express station. Not to mention it would also relieve the crowding at Roosevelt Ave.

Over time, I've come to believe that a restored Nassau St-Montague Tunnel train would be of limited use to South Brooklyn riders. But now with the City having just implemented a ferry service between Bay Ridge and Pier 11 on Wall St, with multiple stops in between, I'm starting to reconsider that. There must be some demand for extra public transit between Bay Ridge and Wall St if the City is now running a ferry between them. With multiple stops and a runtime of about 45 minutes, I doubt the new ferry could be that much faster than a train extended onto the 4th Ave local would be. Perhaps the J's running to and from Bay Ridge can short-turn at Broadway Junction so that it doesn't become a very long local service. This new ferry could be a game changer if it's successful. And if so, then Transit should give serious consideration to running a Bay Ridge-Nassau St service.

Midtown would certainly be much more popular of a destination, but Bay Ridge riders already have the for direct subway service. If that's too slow, they have cross-platform transfers to the and further up 4th Ave, plus the and at DeKalb. Running another service to/from Bay Ridge and Midtown, but on the express tracks and the Manhattan Bridge would be difficult, if not impossible, without impacting the other 4th Avenue and Bridge trains.

Short turning Js at Broadway Jct would leave stations east of there with less service, something they need badly seeing as with skip stop, they're already only getting 6tph. To add 4th av service, I'd just extend the south to 95th, 9th, Bay Parkway or 86th (whichever is most efficient, and given more cars of course).

Not because of consolidation. Bombardier is doing the PTC install, Since Bombardier had shop set up there in the past, the cars are being sent over there.

Poor word choice on my part -- meaning they don't want to set up a second shop. Here's a vid of a transfer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwojBF3HEew

Does anyone know when the MARC train will run ... if the deal even went through.

I've *heard* that they'll be assigned to 613 in the AM (6:57 from PJ, arr HPA 8:43) and 664 in the evening (5:47 from HPA, arr PJ 7:30). These are both busy, non DM runs so makes sense from allocation/utilization perspective seeing as they'll probably want to keep the cars operating in solid sets.

PTC installation work at Arch st -- MTA consolidating work in one place.

A lot of it is CBTC work on QB, which is the reason I had suggested this originally.  I suspect if this becomes popular on 2nd Avenue (where it will basically double the weekend service on the SAS in what arguably is the most densely populated area of the entire country), there will be pressure to have at least some service run there at all times (including late-nights), especially from pols who serve the UES, which was the main reason for my proposing splitting the into and (with the as it is now to 71-Continental and the 24/7 to 96th and 2nd as a supplemental (5 TPH) line on weekdays and the main line late nights (3-4 TPH) and weekends (6-9 TPH)).

 

Broken record... I'll let you go back and find our responses to this.

Here's an idea:

 

Given R211s,

 

to 96th

to 14 tph

Whitehall terminates what it can, the rest goes to 9th Ave or 86th st.

 

Criticism?

Now we don't, but after the 179s, 211s, we will. Broadway is at about 1/2 of its possible capacity -- MTA needs to fix that.

The idea (I think) is then to increase to 14 tph and send the excess to bklyn. Then no service loss. 

They use some trains to help out on 2 Av.

Exactly... That's where the service should be going -- not QB. 

Ignore first two sentences -- I'm quite tired.

To help the Broadway conga; terminate the or at 57th St, and run the to Jamaica-179th in the place. So now this streamlines service on Broadway express and local. Plus the wouldn't be as long as it and probably opens up room for a Culver Express . The only con I can think of is... complicating train movement at DeKalb Ave,  would the track switchs at Lexington-63rd be able to handle the amount of trains, and where to terminate southbound trains.

It doesn't streamline broadway... You still have to merge exp -> lcl, causing delays and restricting tph. On top of that, you're creating termination delays on the at 57th as some trains will continue while others reverse, and you're adding a slow merge at 63rd. Much easier to send trips up Second, IMO, and add service to compensate for the loss in Astoria. The needs little changing -- it's long but the Queens portion isn't the issue.