Theli11

Like an East River loop route? Not sure if anyone is incentivized to take the when you can just take... almost any East River route for faster service. This route only benefits you if you need to go from East Harlem to Clinton Hill/Bed-Stuy. There's better routes. South Ferry doesn't need more trains considering the fact that 5 lines are already in the area, I think Brooklyn is the best route for the SAS

All of this and I have no idea why you're doing any of it. There's a place for you and it's here. Most of these don't have anything to do with 63rd St being shut down.

Kinda sucks how they're not thinking in advance on this option. The bellmouth will leave them with a lot more options for the future like an expansion to the Bronx which I do think the SAS should have if they can get around to it 50-100 years.

Roach Spray + Lighter?

Is there any space of the Metro North left on Lower Manhattan?

Yeah but you'd be making people transfer to a downtown train if they need to go further down. Why take Metro North if they can just take 1 train right where you need to go.

Would having both be too hard?

Bx14 Rush Route to JFK. Have it stop at any one of the terminals and loop it back at Lefferts Blvd. Have it go up to Lefferts Blvd , 121 , Van Wyck , Briarwood then no stop until Flushing-Main St then via Linden Pl (making some local stops) until Whitestone Expressway. Making local stops, along Bruckner Blvd and up Rosedale Av, (connecting to the and the ), then turning on Tremont, going up Webster, stopping at Fordham Plaza, then turning to Kingbridge Road and Rush Route to Marble Hill where it terminates.

It's worse interlining because there's 3 trains being merged into each other. On the southbound track the merges with the and the which have already merged with each other at E 180th St (or Jackson Av) and on the northbound track the and merge with the at 149th-GC. Personally I don't think the is the way to go here at all and the SAS would be the best line for 3rd Avenue. If you want to send the into the Bronx I'd say send it to University to alleviate some congestion off of 149th - GC. Make 145th St the last stop in Harlem and make the first stop Yankee Stadium (barely hitting the southern end of the station) then running under the El Grant stoping at Plimpton Av ending the line at Kingsbridge- South Riverdale.

ZERO SPEED?! ZERO CONSISTENCY? The might be the train that runs the most on-time 6 trains in one direction a day and about 48 minutes from end to end. I'm not saying the is the cream of the crop but there's many reasons to hate the for everything that it stands for and i don't think speed is one of them. The and the only have the issue of overcrowded-ness and the just has the issue of merging with the . If you ever need to go downtown from Grand Concourse I'd always tell them to take the or unless they really need to be on the West Side. The should get points off for being too long by your criteria. (You should take points off for the damn not f**king around for more than 2 trips

I agree with your assertion that it shouldn't be branched off of WPR, but I disagree with the fact that the commuter rail corridor is enough. The second avenue subway can go up 3rd/Webster, through 3rd Av-138th/149th St, and go crosstown on either Fordham or Gun Hill Road. I think that the train will provide connections that will satisfy people more than the Metro North can because it's local and because it's going to be a quicker way to connect Central Bronx with the to Central Harlem, the to East Midtown and the multitude of trains in midtown. the will now be more accessible meaning that it's easier to get to Queens than before on the subway providing better connections to LGA and JFK. Not only that but by sending the to Co-Op City, You'd be serving both Fordham, Pelham Pkwy and Central Bronx with a two stop ride to anywhere they want in Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens. It's easier for people to do that with the subway than it is for people to do that with commuter rail. In my eyes, Third Avenue is really just a means to get to Fordham Plaza and branch out from there.

Avenue D says hello /s Seriously though, I'd rather do a branch straight to the Bronx instead of one through Central Park West to the Bronx/Inwood. A subway on either Third, Webster or Park Avenues to Fordham Rd to Co-Op City while also branching the to Co Op City via Gun Hill Road. I'm not saying that 125th Crosstown is viable but I think it's a piece of SAS that we should be looking at. Columbia University doesn't need another train to get there though, i think the and the does it's job mighty fine.

You'd be stopping the train for so many reasons. People wanting to change cars to be closer to the staircase, people wanting to move away from something inside the cars (like a unhygienic person or someone making a disturbance), people wanting to go to another car with more space on it, and list goes on and on. Eventually they're gonna stop caring about the detections because honestly, it could be anything. Hell it could be a pigeon setting it off, who knows?

Some Bus Time errors I've noticed: On MTA Bus Time (and subsequently all apps/entities that use MTA Bus Time like the Transit App and the Onboard Announcements), the M9 skips Avenue C/12th St and puts Avenue C/14th St before the light on the Northbound Side, which is where the stop had previously been but it's now moved to across the light. The M14D on the other hand has the route go on 13th St, 14th St and the 14th St Service Road for some odd reason (which also displays in other apps). It still lists the M14A stop as being separate from the stop on 14th St with it stopping after it turns the corner, and still has the L92 listed (though the stops listed are just M14A stops).

But.. why? There's no real point to doing this and the fact that the and the rest of the IRT are in the same division makes things easier. They can swap cars if need be, whenever new cars come in for the IRT, you won't have to make a separate set for the that'd require a whole new fleet of trains (and probably a completely different bid/train all together). It's just easier to keep it the same division than to spend money making it a new division for no reason. The cost would be the fact that we've already spent time putting CBTC for the current subway cars and line and you're spending money for no reason. Ordering and maintaining a specialize fleet is a significant amount of money the MTA can't be wasting on an issue that is as frivolous and unimportant as this.

This would actually be more expensive. It's easier to have 2 divisions of trains rather than 3. 11-Car line alleviates the congestion on the line. Removing it and making the entire line 10 cars would mean the train would carry roughly 170-180 less people per train. Seeing as how crowded the line is compared to other lines (it being the only line that goes to Flushing and has one of the most crowded terminus, and unlike other stadiums, the only subway to serve Mets Stadium. 11-Cars is very justifiable and costs can't be that bad that they'd screw up the line. Yes it was designed for the worlds fair but now it has other purposes like making the crowding on the line better. If the Flushing line was built with to do 12-cars, I'd push for it.

They should add a stop at the World's Fair Marina/Flushing Bay and just have a shuttle take them to Flushing-Main St . The route should probably just run Wall St > 34th > Astoria > Soundview/Classon Point > Flushing. With maybe a stop at College Point. I'm sure people would think of it as a nice alternative to the Subway and to the section of Queens.

I'd just think it's a way to indicate that the two trains skip that station. Don't think it'd be confusing considering every other station has both station and the lines of the stations beneath. Perhaps a " Don't Stop Here Weekdays" would work but not sure how that'd fit on the map.

Adorable.

.....

Wouldn't you just make developments in the parking lots? Is the MTA unable to buy them out? Replace the Parking lots with business, small malls, parks etc. It'll also be the fastest way to get to the North East portion of Queens, east of Utica Avenue. Queenslink isn't just about the trains either, it's about transforming a corridor to become a corridor where people want to go to. Midtown isn't going to be the only place people want to go either. With gentrification creeping into Queens, Brooklyn, Harlem and eventually the Bronx, the subway should prepare itself for that.

Bruh, if we make the QueensLink and connect it to the Rockaways you'd be eliminate the split for the train. Not just that, you'd be granting a faster commute between Brookyln and Queens. The connection to the Rockaways has more positives than negatives by creating this. the LIRR connection to the Rockaways doesn't really help out the subway or transportation as much, but the Queens link can. Closing the Rockaways off from the subway is inherently backwards.

Wouldn't this also affect Students who go to school anywhere along the line? I know a lot of Rockaway kids use the train to get to school in Brooklyn and shorter trips to the mainland would be a lot harder to make if you took the train off of the Rockaway at all. These aren't just midtown commuters going to the Rockaways it's also people who live or go to school near City Line, Ozone Park, and Broadway Junction (and transfer to the or trains). Far Rockaway is still apart of Queens and at the end of the day, they also might have students who need to make shorter trips and the LIRR doesn't really provide that for students.

Not that I agree, but I'd say extending the over New Lots Avenue (i.e. extending the two tracks out and and just making a new elevated over E 105th and Rockaway Parkway and just turn it down to the pier.

Would making the B39 a rush route to Union Square be useful for riders? Going via Avenue A/Essex, stopping at Essex/Delancey, 14th St/Avenue A, to Union Square (on the M14 turn around) and turning back the same way down, stopping at Avenue A/14 St, then, Rivington St (before the bridge). I've been interested in growing the B39s are in both Brooklyn and Manhattan for a while. I think Spring Street would be hard to turn around but if we do Union Square, we can get the B39 in and out of Manhattan quickly by making it a Rush Route in Manhattan. the B53 and the B39 could both potentially run down Broadway, I don't think there's a lot of routes that can connect to that part of Queens and that part of Brookyln as easily so I can see worth in doing that.