LGA Link N Train

If this problem ever occurs, then you can send some trains via second Av. Build phases 3 and 4 like planned in the 1970's. That way, you can still connect SAS to the Manhattan Bridge or short turn trains at 14 ST. I'll elaborate later

https://www.villagevoice.com/2018/02/07/the-second-avenue-subway-is-already-screwed/ something I found last night on twitter. Well apparently, they're saying that the screwed up the Second Avenue Subway, but there's a logical solution and for that. It lies no further than the 1970's plans. Anyone see where I'm going with this?? The Second Avenue Subway may not be finished in our lifetime, but even if it is, it will be stuck with reduced capacity. Thanks to a crucial decision made by the MTA back in the project’s first phase of construction, according to a newly published Regional Plan Association report, the new line will never carry as many passengers as it might have unless the MTA spends billions of dollars to fix a key problem. The report, which concludes a two-year investigation into the MTA’s capital project overruns, notes that the MTA decided to reduce the number of tracks at the 72nd Street station, where the Q train arrives on the Second Avenue line, from three to two, while the number of platforms was reduced from two to one. This, the RPA says, will have a cascading effect on service, reducing the number of trains that can be run on the Second Avenue line and the Q once future phases of the project are complete. The original plan for the station at 72nd Street and Second Avenue called for two “island” platforms with a track on either side and one down the middle. Once the T — the yet-to-be-launched portion of the SAS on Second Avenue south of 72nd — entered service, the center track would act as a terminus for Q trains, while T trains would use the side tracks. Passengers would have a cross-platform transfer between the Q and T in both directions, and each train would run on its own tracks with almost no overlap. But all that changed when the MTA decided to scale back the 72nd Street station to two tracks and one platform, the way it is today. As a result, once the southern section of the Second Avenue Subway opens, the Q will likely have to run all the way up to the future terminus of the SAS at 125th Street, running an alternating schedule with the T, even though the lines will only share six stops. The only other option would be for the Q to switch to the downtown track as it approached 72nd Street, wait in the station until it offloaded all passengers, and then go back the way it came. But in order to do that, all downtown T trains would have to be held up until the Q can get going again. Rich Barone, one of the authors of the RPA report, doesn’t see this as a real solution, because the Q would be “literally in the way” of normal T service. The consequences of this decision will only be felt once the T begins service after phase three of the Second Avenue Subway project is done, which is likely decades down the road. But once (if?) that happens, Barone says the T will only be able to operate every six or seven minutes at peak hours, hardly the frequency expected from a showcase capital project. For comparison, the 4/5 currently has a maximum capacity of a train approximately every two and a half minutes, and subway lines in systems with modern signaling system can operate with a train every ninety seconds. As Barone points out, reduced capacity thanks to subway lines sharing track is the problem with “our subway system in a nutshell.” For example, since the A is restricted at multiple points along its line where it shares tracks with the C and D, even during rush hour the line can only run every six to fifteen minutes with good service. The T will be restricted to similar headways. Why did the MTA do this? The transit authority did not respond to a request for comment before publication. But according to Barone — who spoke to the MTA several times during the two years he researched the report — the authority claims it had to reduce the width of the station so it remained under the Second Avenue roadbed without spreading underneath adjacent buildings, which would have caused “geotechnical” concerns, as Barone puts it. He says the MTA was also worried about getting the necessary easements on those properties as well as community pushback to the increased construction, all problems that the report notescould have been eased by “greater city involvement” during the design phase. The MTA originally denied to Barone that the scaled-back station would have any impact on service. But when Barone gave a detailed analysis of his findings and asked the MTA to essentially tell him why he was wrong, he says, the authority’s response “was more like a punt” than an explanation; it neither confirmed nor denied whether Barone’s assumptions were correct. He characterized the MTA’s non-answer as a “red flag.” If Barone is correct, this means the four-phased project has already left lots of future capacity on the table, and there isn’t much anyone can do about it. There is no feasible way to expand the station now that construction is done, or to provide the third track necessary for Q trains to dwell without being in the T’s way. Now the challenge will be to find a way to provide more frequent downtown service on the Second Avenue line for future New Yorkers. Barone offers the idea of swinging the 63rd Street line — which currently serves the F — southbound at Second Avenue, but because the F also shares lots of Queens track with the E, one of the most crowded lines in the system, it has no capacity to spare. Other potential solutions would require billions of dollars’ worth of construction, far more than it likely would have cost to find a way to complete the 72nd Street station as originally planned. “The reality is, it’s done,” Barone concludes. “We can’t change it. We have to figure out how to work with it as it is.” Barely a year after it opened, the Second Avenue Subway is already just another subway problem to be solved.

The platform edge strip's were replaced with something new. And the side tiles from Metropolitan and Up looked shiny (except for 21 and court Sq platform level) . One time I was at Court Sq and part of the platform looks like it was replaced or cleaned or something but the bench on top remained the same.

The thing is that though is that the stations on the from Metropolitan Av and up (with the exception of 21 St - Van Alst) I get this feeling that the somehow found time to make a few tweaks in those stations (like the platform edge for example)

I passed by Court Square on the and today and I noticed that the station felt so clean. Something felt different.

So what you're telling me is that the owns BOTH the North and south halves of the Rockaway Beach Branch, but has done nothing with the northern section of it. That's rather disappointing.

The is slated to get R211's or displaced R160's for CBTC reasons. The Rockaway Park I wouldn't jump to conclusions on that one. It could get R211's or displaced R68's (this is what I speculate though) The , not too sure. If ridership levels warrant it then put R211's there The may see a new fleet. but not in the near future

Huh, my brain can not comprehend what this means

You're welcome

Well, now we know where 3086-3089 are. Going to east New York https://youtu.be/bKApc6ue_6k

Read this http://www.vanshnookenraggen.com/_index/category/maps/futurenycsubway/

Despite having to use the segment between Cypress Hills and Broadway Junction. Since I rely on getting off at Norwood Every school day (and the fact that this segment has a high ridership) I agree with you.

Ok. I have the stong feeling that were going to need a new yard sometime soon.

They're already in revenue service.

Does a school week count?

If a third Avenue subway ended at gun hill road

Subway would be a better idea, but to have it go to Gun Hill Road. ...... I don't know man.

I noticed to same thing on the r179 train I was on this morning lol

I saw many of those on QBL

Unexpectedly, I just caught one of the 2 R179 sets on the train. I'm inside of it as I'm typing this UPDATE. Just saw the other set rolling by to Jamaica Center between 75 and Cypress Hills Both R179's are in service today. And does anyone know when the next sets will arrive?

65 Street on the Queens Boulevard line [late night] does not have an entrance to 63 St. I've been around there enough times to know. Unless there is something that I missed. Well, I'm going to have to revisit this station someday

More RBB discussion on Twitter

They all went to ENY or something

well blame my Internet connection cause I'm in the middle of nowhere (literally) Under pre SAS circumstances it is. Don't forget, the and are the most congested lines in the city so converting 51 is necessary to ease some congestion off 42 The remains unchanged. (Unless you want to swap it with the ) The construction of the Bypass would depend if the really wants to build it under a post SAS timeline. say if the LaGuardia extension were built, people are going to want an express service and there's going to be that one person who will complain, that's why I have the and I never said that I would reduce and service. Thats crazy (saying this as a QB rider myself) I said that it would be adjusted, not reduced. And yes I know how morning commutes on the and are. I witness it almost every day. Well, since you bring up the 63 street tunnel, I think that in theory it handles 30 TPH. To have your and all run together, you'd need to increase capacity by 15-20 TPH. That leaves you with a total of 45-50 TPH that 63 needs to handle. And that's not what I'm proposing here

Here's an idea. Build a yard past Astoria-Ditmars Blvd with provisions to LaGuardia Airport and send trains up there. (This would be under a post SAS timeline) trains will remain the same with trains being the new local in its place. This new local service would run via second Avenue with the . The and frequencies will be adjusted to accommodate this new service. The and under this plan will have a platform between 51st and 53rd Streets as part of the complex that connects the and . The remains unchanged and I'm not sure where to put the under this scenario. Unless it could be a reactivated or something like that. But sag if it were eliminated (again) then anyone wishing to access QB from Broadway and Vice versa then take the to transfer to the What do you guys think?