Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

LaGuardia Link N Tra

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    2,382
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LaGuardia Link N Tra

  1. Took the Q103 today from the first Stop (Astoria/2nd Street) all the way down to the last stop (Vernon Blvd/Borden Avenue). Even with a detour, I reached LIC a lot faster than I was expecting today
  2. I'm not too concerned about runtimes, because even without CBTC, I think that the would save a few minutes of runtime compared to the (I could be wrong though). To answer your first Question, I think the could remain as a local overnight and only run Express in Manhattan. For your 2nd Question, I was intendint to display that Trains would replace service to 207th during Weekends and Overnights, because this plan only focuses on swapping the and , which would require changes at 59th. Had I taken the whole DeKalb plan that was mentioned earlier, then sure, I'd make the a full time route. To respond to your first part, the whole merge at 145th is staying the same way, only with the and being rearranged, so I don't see what point you're trying to make. I don't mind any ideas involving deinterlining at 59th, but 145th has to stay inerlined IMO unless you were able to do any alterations in that area or if it were feasible to do some sort of peak express on the which I don't believe is feasible. Now regarding everything below 59th, I understand your concerns with the fact that I didn't get rid of the merge at Canal Street, but that wasn't the point of my proposal so I left it alone. I also didn't want to mess with QBL so thats another reason I left it as is.
  3. Which doesn’t make sense because the 68/68A’s won’t retire anytime soon. At the very least, we’ll probably see them within the mid-2030’s which (hopefully) things will be better by then. I thought of something similar to this, just running all Short Turn (both 111th and Willets Point bound) runs to LGA, at least it does provide a better alternative to the AirTrain but the Length and Width of A Divison Train cars is where my concern is at regarding this proposal. Guess you can’t argue with that, but it shouldn’t stop one from brainstorming ideas and scenarios with the intent to improve Transit within NYC (not just the subway system, but also the buses and railroads too)!
  4. I mean, that could explain why I saw a and moving at the same time at Rockefeller and 59th Street-Columbus Circle. If I’m not mistaken, the transponders couldn’t read whether the train was a or .
  5. Given that they entered service around 1984-1986, I speculate that they’ll retire between 2034-2036 in order to complete the 50 year cycle, that would be my best guess
  6. I've been thinking about a certain idea for a few reasons, and if this idea would be an operationally feasible one. SInce Queens Blvd is getting CBTC and 8th Avenue is supposed to get CBTC at some point in time. Neighborhoods such as Bed-Stuy and East New York are also Slowly Gentrifying, all of which Fulton Street and Pitkin Avenue Pass Through, how feasible (in terms of an operations standpoint) would it be to enact the following idea? - (15 TPH) Jamaica Center/Jamaica-179th to Lefferts Blvd/Far Rockaway via QB-53rd-8th-FUlton Express - (10 TPH) 168th Street (207th on Weekends/Overnight) to WTC via CPW/8th Local - (10 TPH) 145th Street/Bedofrd Park Blvd to Euclid Avenue via Concourse/CPW/8th/Fulton Street Local - (12 TPH) 207th Street to Brighton Beach via CPW/6th/Brighton Express - Stays as is The only 2 bottlenecks eliminated in this plan are the 2 Y Junctions below 59th Street and 50th Street. https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1VFJjSxL455GRPODxIIM-6nJXDsb3UyYk&ll=40.72070333815391%2C-73.93235774123153&z=13
  7. I've seen the track map and @Lance, Ima piggyback on what you stated given that I agree with most of your points. I don't mind that this new map is using a geographical "layout", IMO it makes it easier for me to see where everything is, but (as you stated), the map has a bunch of geographical errors that I personally take issue with. I was mainly focused on how they showed the South Side of the Manhattan Bridge as an entirely seperate East River Tunnel (which NGL, we'll need at some point), aside from that, the Chrystie Street Connection, the Brooklyn End of the Williamsburg Bridge, the Archer Avenue (UL) Line, I don't even want to know what they have going on with the Franklin Shuttle and Eastern Parkway Lines, the between Grand Centra and Hudson Yards, the 11th Street cut just to name a majortiy. (Wow, they even got the M60 and Q70 geographically inaccurate although thats somewhat minor) Another thing is that since the wants to show the locations of Trains in real time, then I think that a Track Map would've have been better suited for this job as it would give a more accurate description of where trains are at any given point in time. (personally not the biggest fan of how 3rd Party apps display the real time location of Trains) although there would be no point in showing non revenue connections, yards or abandoned stations. Last but not least, presenting GO's and unlanned reroutes are something that are a step in the right directions as they will help riders determine what their next steps will be without getting caught in too much mess (if any), but these are just my 2 cents on this whole beta map. (A little extra comment is that the addition of SBS routes would be nice)
  8. 68/68A’s would remain though unless the R211’s (if all Options are exercised) managed to replace some of them
  9. The only way I see that happening is when people whom (like Byford) actually care about improving Transit are appointed. But I don’t see that happening under our current governance. Also (slightly off topic), what role does the mayor play (or is the mayor supposed to play a role) when it comes to The ?
  10. This right here is why I’m reluctant to support any Deinterlining arrangement for Queens Blvd, and all because the is 8 cars. If we were to go with the 8th>53rd>QBLocal; 6th>63rd>QBExpress arrangement, then that means that either the would have to be split into the and again or the BMT Eastern Division would need to be expanded in order to handle 10 car trains. I prefer the latter option but I don’t know how feasible that would be. Now on the inverse: if we were to do 8th>53rd>QBExpress; 6th>63rd>QBLocal, then riders between 65th and 36th lose access to Queens Plaza and Court Square. Although Lexington 63rd has an OOS Transfer to Lexington 59th (which isn’t that bad IMO), any QB Local Rider would have to make a Transfer to any nearby Bus Line. Either that or Jackson Heights will be overcrowded, unless you were able to convince some riders to transfer at 7th Avenue-53rd.
  11. If that’s the case, wouldn’t the have to look into Expanding Essex and creating a Bowery-Grand Transfer?
  12. True, but in the case of DeKalb and the proposal put up by Vanshnookenraggen, the idea would be dependent on adding switches just north of 45th Street. Otherwise, I agree with you on this one.
  13. Well if you think about it, that 1 con (being that West End would get Local Service) wouldn't that bad at all because unlike the current Trains Frequencies along West End, with and service being secluded to West End-Broadway Local-Astoria, West End would be recieving an 80% Service increase, which is a lot more service than what the Train currently provides. Also, wait times for an Express Train at 36th Street wouldn't that bad at all.
  14. Because if the wants their services to improve (in addition to having their budget improved), they’re going to HAVE to do something about DeKalb Junction and the services passing through it at some point, whether that be under the current leadership or if a new management team stepped into leadership. The REAL million dollar question is “How much will the save (or potentially gain) from Deinterlining the subway system?”
  15. 1. This is only a portion of something that @vanshnookenraggen and “A320lga” (whom [correct me if I’m wrong] I think is @RR503 here on the forums cause their proposals and ideas are the exact same), given that the and would serve West End, I would assume yes. 2. Not really since the and are running on the same corridor for a majority of the time. Vanshnook did mention a deinterlined CPW. So I’d assume the answer is no. 3. There’s no definitive answer but the easiest thing to do IMO is to emulate the current late night service for the .
  16. note taken, although with a hypothetical swap at DeKalb, I'd personally make the a full time route, but then making the a full time route would make more sense given that its been serving Brighton for years. But then, how would this all factor in if Phase 3 of SAS is complete as its currently planned?
  17. While that is true, if Brighton were to serve soley 6th Avenue service, they'd still maintain access to Broadway at DeKalb (and Atlantic to a lesser extent), there's also the claim that Broadway and 6th Avenue stations are close to each other (with the exception of 14th), but there's no point in starting a debate that's been discussed multiple times before
  18. To deinterline DeKalb Junction. Meaning that trains stop crossing in front of each other in junctions so that more trains can be scheduled along certain corridors. I brought up sending the via Brighton as a response to someone’s comment. It’s not something that I would personally do. If it were up to me, I’d make all 4th Avenue service Broadway and All 6th Avenue service on Brighton ONLY IF bringing the signals and equipment (and dispatching) up to date prove to be not enough to mitigate the bottleneck at DeKalb, since it’s not one that we can easily eliminate.
  19. Ahh I see. Thanks for pointing out the part I highlighted in bold. I did intend to keep the line underground as to not interfere with the parkland at a large degree. Also, seeing that the Kissena Park corridor is one of the Quietest corridors, I see now that it’s not as good of an idea as I thought it was. So with that being the case, I have a question for both you and @Armandito: If a Northern Blvd Line ended at Flushing-Main Street to provide a transfer with the and LIRR, where would be the next best place to extend it?
  20. Backtracking the converstion a bit, I think if a hypothetical Northern Line were built to end at Flushing-Main Street, it could continue down Kissena Blvd and the former Northeast LIRR Line before ening at Springfield along the Horace Harding. (i'm just brainstorming so don't take this as an official proposal)
  21. I mean, you could rebuild and reactivate the City Hall Lower Level if you plan to route 8th Avenue service through Montague. This way, you don't interfere with the express services on Broadway.
  22. Is there a reason why the doesn't run express service along the Brighton Line during the weekends? Cause after hearing about the G.O. with Trains being rerouted via Brighton Express, it got me wondering if the BMT, NYCTA or the ever ran a Brighton Express service on weekends.
  23. If I'm reading this correctly, the wouldn't be altered in this swap that you propose? ...comiing to think of it, that's actually not a bad idea (albiet, it doesn't solve the main issue with Broadway which is that merge at 34th, but I still like it)
  24. Thanks! If I'm beinghonest with you, it was headed towards Manhattan but I have no clue about where it went after that. Proably towards Nassau would be m best guess
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.