RR503

I say build more substations to increase the overall electrical capacity of those two lines and run more trains before giving them open gangway trains just yet.

Is that the limiting factor? I was under the impression that it was the terminals (esp. on the ) 

I stand corrected then!

Mea culpa.

However, it still seems easier to me for them to turn trains at QP

What Lawrence St. said; 2 routes for 1 train. Also, it's nice to avoid merges like that one; it fluidizes ops. 

No, it is not just a foamer plan. They are seriously considering either having it go to 96th Street or Queens Plaza. Someone from OP told me.

Yeah I've heard QP, but never 96th...

Wasn't the plan to have the run to 96th Street on weekends since sending it to Forest Hills was pointless?

Nope, I'm pretty sure that's the foamer plan. I don't think that they've given specifics yet. 

While I agree the neighborhood's concerns should be taken into account, I think it's wrong to give them veto power. Public transit is for the greater good, and as such, alternitaves should be looked at through the lens of what's better for both residents and for riders in general. In essence, we should be doing what's best for all riders, not what's best for lower Manhattan politics.

Haha. That “6” key is right next to the “5.” I wonder if the streets being 10 blocks apart had to do with selecting 63 Street instead of some other street for the construction of the new Queens tunnel decades ago.

I think 63rd Street being selected had a lot to do with the geology of the East River in the area, along with ease of construction in Manhattan. IIRC routings as far north as 76th and as far south as 62nd were considered. Also remember that the 63rd St tubes were built with ESA in mind.

If they were concerned about cost in phase 3, they would cut the Queens Boulevard connection at 53 Street. I think we’ll see them cut the storage tracks at 14 Street as well. And if they’re really strapped for cash, they’ll probably even resort to a cheaper cut-and-cover option at Houston Street using the provisioned space and figure out how to get to Grand Street from there some other time.

QBL connection is at 63rd, I think. I see that being built hell or high water; Queens will raise the dead otherwise. 

I can see the other things you mention though. 

Ah this argument rears its ugly head again...

One thing you have to understand with public expenditures is that the money is just for that one purpose. The city is not allowed to just go divert the money to schools. It's not how it works...

I understand that they can't divert the money directly, but they haven't even funded it entirely yet. We all know that in politics, regions have unspoken quotas of capex they can have. In this case, New York could spend 6 bil on this, which would be all well and good, but they could also use their 'allotment' on something more cost effective, like getting a grant to replace sewer lines, update the water system (and finally finish CWT3), rationalize the city's grid, etc.

As for the argument about minorities, point taken, but you could instead target some of the above listed monies at such neighborhoods. Already we're seeing this strategy with the 125th st terminal rather than a bx extension.

I really do think sometimes that the best thing that could happen to the MTA would be lots of republicans in the state and city govts. I'm a democrat through and through, but it'd force them to cut costs.

Honestly, if the MTA can't keep the phase 2 costs to a reasonable level, I don't think it should be built. The money can do more good elsewhere. Imagine if the city spent 6 billion on new schools, for example...

How about swapping the for the ? The can go local to 71 Ave and then local to Parsons & the to Ditmars Boulevard. Then the can skip the local stops.

 

I make the suggestion because the and manifest is exceedingly long. I also nominate the as Astoria Express.

 

Is this feasible? I know it won't happen though. Any conductor worth their time knows it takes too (F)n long to cross Queens Boulevard by rail.

 

Sent from my m8 using Tapatalk

No for 3 reasons.

1. The R would lose access to Jamaica yard, requiring deadhead moves to/from CI.

2. You'd be cutting service on 60th Street -- a much busier corridor than 63rd.

3. You'd be adding a merge to the F and N lines.

Especially considering BQX, that's supposed to connect LIC to the 4 Av Line, apparently quicker than the existing rail service

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BQX is a crap idea. It's all about deblasio's ego along with his developer friends and not about transport. The fact that they had to falsify travel time and market data for their 'study' speaks volumes about it, I'd say.

The problem with LRT in NYC more generally is that most of the corridors you mention should be getting subway service. LRT is just a bandaid

They in the entire 100 years of operating have never had (excluding the on Sea Beach and on the Rockaways) a subway line running DIRECTLY parallel to a railroad.

So? It's legal and done all over the country.. I actually quite like the idea...

I was simply pointing out why we won't see the run to SF and why we won't see that again. 

Please point to where you say that. 

Which is exactly why I would ONLY do it at off hours (between 8:00 PM and 5:30 AM weekdays and 8:00 PM Friday to 5:30 AM Monday) and revive the BG-SF shuttle to cover the rest of the time (with actually the and both running to old SF when the isn't running to Brooklyn.

And, pray, what market does this serve? Is the 500 foot journey between stations that perilous?

The delays on lex from the merge will be awful, rush hour or not, and if you're running a shuttle whose uselessness has been hashed and rehashed over and over again on here and elsewhere during rush hours, I don't see this being of any use.

Give up. The MTA is never starting BG SF up again.

It took 3 minutes.

Yup!

Wiki is crowdsourced, but actually quite reliable. You'll always hear stories of crazy things slipping under the radar, but that's life. You can trust it.

And for all of you who still won't trust it, then you shouldn't use Google maps either. It's crowdsourced too.

So just now, I changed the power of the 179s to "rats on treadmills." Let's see how long it takes them to fix it. Start your clocks!

They already start a bunch of s from 137th...

Why not do express from 145th to 96th as a pliot? I for one am not convinced we need exp in the bx. We're doing it for the benefit of riders at 1 station... 

This is one of the reasons I would be looking long-term at extending Phase 2 across 125 with a connection to the 8th Avenue line at St. Nicholas Avenue.  That way, in such a situation with the you could have either the or or both be extended to run with the on the Concourse Line to Bedford Park Boulevard (aside from having such a line run to 125-Broadway to connect to the ).  

Jeez. Where aren't you extending the SAS. I've heard LGA, the bronx and now this from you.

And needless to say, JUST ADD SERVICE! We don't need to spend an extra billion on connecting an already pricy crosstown extension to the bronx just so the MTA can run extra service from the east side when the is out for mx. 

Interesting; thanks!

Will 179s and 160s be allowed to run together in a consist?

What happened this AM on the , , , lines???

Either way, the has to be extended to 9th Avenue.

Explain?

Because I'm sure there will be those who want any new line that serves Howard Beach (closest station to the Airport) and the Casino at Aqueduct to serve lower Manhattan that some still consider to be "The Financial District" even if we know better.

Both those stations have the . Riders North of ozone park can transfer to the or , or ride south and take the . If they want more Lower Manhattan access, they can push for an extension of the to OP and a devotion of the to Rockaway terminals.

The load button on the bottom right corner. Click, choose the file, and you're all set.