Theli11

6 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Your QBL plan is interesting in that it has one 8th Ave service and three 6th Ave services. I proposed a QBL with that same split a couple years ago, but with the  and  express to/from Jamaica and the  and  local to/from 71st Ave, with the  removed from QBL. The idea was to have both a Culver express (the ) while still having the  and having QBL deinterlined as much as possible. But like your QBL plan, it would have called for splitting the 6th Avenue local’s 30 tph three ways between the , K and . That’s going to be a very tight squeeze. In order for it to work, nothing can go wrong on the railroad that would require trains to be rerouted. And we all know that just isn’t possible with the NYC Subway in general. Not to mention that have 30 tph between the , K and  would force QBL to operate well below the line’s capacity because you definitely won’t be able to run 30 tph on the . Maybe 20 at the most. And you have the K dead-ending at 2nd Ave/Houston St. At least with my  plan, the  can still be the popular service it has been for the past 11 years, albeit with a tight squeeze on the 6th Ave local tracks.

I’m not in favor of returning the  to Nassau St with the  and  because that will make it a relatively unpopular service once again. I get why you want to remove the  from 6th, but I can predict it won’t go well with riders, even if there are more choices than before. As for the   and , I like them better on Brighton since the consensus seems to be that Brighton riders prefer Broadway over 6th. The only reason to do  and  on Brighton is that it’s a more simple operation that can allow the  to stay weekdays-only. But even so, it may prove to be a less popular option with riders than even the current  operations.

How about  go express via QBL, go local on 6th, reconfigure Broadway Lafayette to connect the local tracks with Grand St, and the express tracks with Culver. You'd have and  trains on Sea Beach, and connect the  (With the same North of West 4th aforementioned proposals) to the Culver Line. The  ends at 2nd Avenue and the  continues to Coney Island. If you put the in the equation you can replace the proposed  service with the or have 3 trains run on that 6th Ave Local Track under your proposed plan. 

9 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

Exactly where do see 80% ridership on the subway system ? I don't think it's hit 60 % of the pre-pandemic level yet. Just curious.  Carry on. 

It's also the holidays so not a lot of commuting for work or school. If it carries into the New Years, we'd have a different problem.

2 hours ago, Vulturious said:

14 hours ago, CenSin said:

On 12/24/2021 at 11:14 PM, ActiveCity said:

The 50th st merge is a problem. The C or E train sometimes gets held in the station when it should be held in the tunnel.

You have your priorities wrong. Waiting in the tunnel is the greater of evils.

I have to agree, if something were to ever happen and people are stuck inside the train, trains at the station can at least stay in the station keeping their doors open if a passenger wants to get off. Waiting inside a train that isn't at the station is never something anyone wants to deal with. People would start feeling cramped, claustrophobic, and eventually riling up (probably). 

Or even letting that person catch the next local train if they just missed the one up top or down below. 

On 12/12/2021 at 4:02 PM, mrsman said:

Does anyone know if it is feasible to add a switch on the 8th Ave line upper level between 50th and 42nd in such a way that local trains from CPW could merge onto the local tracks from 42nd southward and not interfere with  trains coming from 53rd onto the 8th Ave local tracks?

 

The only way I can think of this happening is the Merge being moved to right after 42nd St, and the going downwards and covered over to make room for a switch. [Going Uptown Perspective],

Same thing Downtown, just having the  pop up right before 42nd St and Merging *then* giving the enough room to switch where they need to switch at. 

I'd just prefer the switch to be North of 50th St or just local. 

9 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

How in the heck was someone able put a big hole in those seats?

Implants?

I feel like the solution to the problem presented in the article is the allowance of a free 3-legged transfer. As someone who lives on the edge of Alphabet City along the FDR, the closest stations are too far away for me to walk to on a regular commute (like to school/work etc.) I'd usually take the bus to the train. If I need a bus at the other end of the route, I'd get double fared. Another example would be if I'm coming home along 5th Avenue and I need to take a bus. Worse Case Scenario is the only bus for 10 minutes is the M4 (which only goes to 31/5th Av and I still need to get to another downtown bus for the M14D or M8). If I transfer to another downtown bus I end up double fared or not having enough rides and being forced to walk home from Astor Place. 

52 minutes ago, mrsman said:

I would leave Division A alone for the moment.

 

52 minutes ago, mrsman said:

A capital project to improve the Rogers Junction could help with the congestion of Division A trains in Brooklyn.  I could see a substantial improvement to trains here, especially if  to Flatbush,  to New Lots and  to Utica.  Another possibility is to Flatbush,  to New Lots,  to Utica, and  to Atlantic.  This option would require a turning track south of Atlantic for  trains.

 

A Division needs interlining for it to even work. Unlike the B Division there's not a lot of options for trains to go and since the IRT runs to two seperate sides of Manhattan it's just better to interline in general. Rogers Junction should also just look like the current 59th St set up. At least then  and trains won't cross in front of each other. 

On 11/29/2021 at 8:32 PM, KingsbridgeKid2532 said:

125th to 59th (A/D) use to be  about 7- 8 minutes when I was in high school. Now that leg takes forever

It's always right before it gets to 125 then it'll crawl trying to get to 145 St on both levels. 

7 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

What context was your quote in?

Taking down to 7 Trains Per Hour and Making the to Astoria raised to 13 TPH. 7 Trains Per Hour + the 8 TPH from the *** doesn't make an adequate service... via 63 to Jamaica Center does rectify this issue though. 

***Can't remember how many TPH is the  (8 or 12?)

48 minutes ago, paulrivera said:

Sorry for the double post, but Jesus what a mess.

Has to do with this: https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/police-activity-shuts-down-traffic-on-rfk-bridge-ny-only/3422362

TL;DR: Was a shooting on the Bridge, so they cut down some lanes on it. Likely a butt ton a traffic on the Triboro thus, bunched up M60s.

16 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I liked your earlier proposal better. In this one, you’re preserving all three of the merges that plague the QBL with delays. QBL is basically the same as now except for the M via 8th Ave Local. That’s not a good solution to QBL’s consistent delays (not all of which is due to MTA’s poor service planning and crappy infrastructure).

Since this topic is about untangling the CPW line, I’ll be brief about how to untangle QBL while keeping a Broadway connection. I’ve previously suggested running the and local to/from 71st Avenue via the 53rd St Tunnel while running the and express to/from Jamaica via the 63rd St Tunnel. However, that would require either the to run express in Manhattan (if the and are the CPW locals) or for the 50th/8th upper level to be left unused if the stays local in Manhattan (and the run as CPW expresses).

If the are running local from 71 St, I think the should be local in Manhattan and we either create a switch right before 50th St on both sides or we extend the Platform over the local, out to the express track. That way there's still 50th St access by Upper and Lower 8th Avenue. 

2 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Your point is understood, but whether or not you're providing adequate evidence to support it is the question.

But they wouldn't be affected if there  to 96th St and the  go to their respective parts of Queens. You'd actually have room for more service if there is no  service in the 60th St Tunnel. So yeah you might not have trains but the increased service would be enough to compensate Astoria riders. 

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

It still dosen't matter. The point is people from Astoria have the  if they want to go to 49th St. The  needs to merge at 57th St and not at 34th St where the diverge speed is lower then the other.

Of course, if you're just going to merge the  at 57th St then you're just moving the merge and not solving the actual problem which is the merge itself...

43 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

 

Jamaica Center can't handle the entire line because of obvious reasons. The uses about 45-50 trainsets (The most in the system). There's no way Jamaica center could handle the . 179th can because the terminal could turn over a lot of trains per hour. This is why 4 trains go to 179th. Jamaica Center can only handle a certain amount of trains due to the switch placement between Supthin and Parsons.

 

This is one of the main reasons why the goes to Jamaica Center and the only to 179th, LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

Yeah another busy part of Queens only using 8 car trains where most people from Northeast Queens and Nassau  County come from. Not a good idea.

That's why I'm saying split the between Jamaica Center and 179th. 12 trains to Jamaica Center and the rest to 179th with  being the supplement train. 

18 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

Replacing a full length train with an 8 car train at one of the busiest stations in Queens isn't a smart idea. JC can't handle both trains due to how the switches are located between supthin and Parsons.

 

This Idea doesn't make any sense and having the run local in Queens from Forest Hills and run to Brooklyn wouldn't make any sense at all. 

Then why not to Jamaica Center and the rest of it goes to Jamaica 179. the can just go to 179th. the  would have an improved TPH due to the fact that it's the only train running on that local track. 

I feel like we're just going to be replacing problems but I think if we're going to deinterline it should be...
168 - WTC (Central Park West Local)
 Bedford Park Blvd - WTC (CPW Local)  
 207 - Brighton Beach** (CPW Express) 
 205th - Coney Island (CPW and Concourse Express)
Now for Fulton St, we could just use the  as the sole Express Service, and make it the sole local Route on QBL, ending at Forest Hills. This means that the and trains run express with the running to Jamaica Center and the split between JC and 179th St. the can go to Astoria with the  and the can be on 96th St. With the deinterlining of DeKalb** I think most delays are cleared up with the exception of and trains. 
Back to the , with this maximized service, you can run a line as the Express train to Far Rockaway and just have trains run full time.

On 11/11/2021 at 6:50 PM, ActiveCity said:

The 125th St spur is just wasteful. Just take the M60.

The shuttle is just wasteful, just take the . /s

30 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

Okay R46 foamer. Don’t start crying like a baby when your precious 1970s cars retire from service for good when the R211s take over. 🤣🤣🤣

What is wrong with you?

12 hours ago, ActiveCity said:

That didn't age well lol.

what happened between the last two days that would make it not age well?

36 minutes ago, Amiri the subway guy said:

Question why does it matter if the SAS has multiple transfers. There are a lot of benefit with running the SAS via Williamburg. For starter it could reduce crowding on the L train   It’s doesn’t forces a transfer at 34th street herald square. And it keeps the J/Z route on Williamburg. Just saying

Three Separate things: 

The middle ground here would be SAS through Williamsburg and then down Utica to catch the . This way there's more transfers and more areas served. You could have the SAS run via the current Jamaica El until Crescent St and make a new Jamaica Av El but that's a whole different discussion.

Also none of this forces a transfer at 34th Harold Square since Broadway and 6th Avenue are always within 2 Avenues of each other (at 14th St and 8th/West 4th Sts) Both Canal and Grand St serve Chinatown and you can just transfer to the  at Canal.

Though the could reduce crowding on the a bit more since they have more transfers between Houston and 34th St, though those who actually want 14th St would be forced to transfer at some point.

13 minutes ago, Amiri the subway guy said:

Ok I made it public. What do you think of the propose routes. Any suggestions any modifications 

To clarify for everyone else what the routes are:

- Co-Op City - Gun Hill Road/3rd Avenue Local - 2nd Avenue Local (from 116th) - Hanover Square
 - White Plains Road/Gun Hill Road - 3rd Avenue Express - 2nd Avenue Express (Stops at 116th, 55th, 42nd, 14th St, and Houston St), - Culver Local (Delancey Essex to Church Av) 
 - Northern Blvd Local, 63 St Local, 2nd Avenue Express (55th, 42, 14, Houston) - Williamsburg Ridgewood Local (?!) 
There is also the  train and I'm assuming that's going to 125th either crosstown or just to Lexington
Most of my complaints are going to come from and trains since your train is pretty cut and dry.

Your Williamsburg Routing has 3 free out of system transfers, and I feel like that's just inconvenient and should have an actual transfer rather than forcing people to walk. You could've used a South 4th St routing and I would've been fine with it. The usefulness is there I just think it can be better utilized while having the same idea. I'm not entirely sure how i feel about 63 St, and whether or not the is sharing the track with the . (don't think there can be another tunnel for the either way).
 

I also think the can go to Euclid via Fulton St rather than via Culver, that way the will share the express while the can go on the local. 

Other than that this is pretty fair 

9 hours ago, Amiri the subway guy said:

Alright guys it took me months but I made routes on my 2nd Avenue line route proposals 

T train route:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XdL84NOyjOb5lgBRErMB6vSlmWaA1aOhknBm8ZEqT3E/edit

K train route: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-KNu0NkJfJh7I4o25OtO_zpP9xmwowSDAV2sznzhzo4/edit#gid=0

V train route:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-vYdLI44V4IRArd5zbFu00folsXKHfC7Dmyed3mkwC4/edit#gid=0

I think you need to make this public for us to be able to see it.

3 hours ago, Vulturious said:

Well I'm in favor of less confusion by signing all Lefferts  trains as a . Seeing as the  is most certainly getting the R211's base order, it's honestly safe to say they can call start calling them the  because they won't have to deal with manually changing the rollsigns on both sides of the R46's. Plus the R32's aren't running around the  anymore. I doubt people would complain about this change since nothing is changing at all and helps with the confusion. As for the math of it, I don't know honestly.

But like.. there is no difference. You're not adding any trains on the line and the isn't doing anything but the route. People might not complain but it's rather pointless to do anyways.

28 minutes ago, CenSin said:

A good question is… why are shopping carts allowed in a subway station or the train? No normal person ever transports something so bulky.

Assuming that The People of New York are normal.. I reckon if the MTA banned them they'd get protested on by Advocates for the Homeless.

7 hours ago, Vulturious said:

Personally, we don't really need a 3rd Av line in Manhattan. While this would allow for better transfers to other lines in Manhattan such as almost all of Lexington Av line, Lexington Av-59 St for the , Lexington Av-53 St for the , 3rd Av for the , and basically connects to SAS from Bowery, I personally would rather have another line built somewhere else. 10 Av is probably the better line to build. The west side of Manhattan, especially in midtown, is void of subway service and the closest subway line is 8 Av.

I wanna say yes and no to it. I agree that out of the options given I'd opt for 10th Avenue instead of a 3rd and 2nd Avenue subway. It's also because extending the train isn't too much of a hassle past Chelsea Piers and won't have to go far (ending at 72 St since you don't need extra west side service in the UWS.)  Past that, I've been thinking about the advantages and disadvantages between a First, Second and Third Avenue subway below 72 St - 2nd. 

First Avenue makes it easier for people in Alphabet City, and York Avenue to get a train, however, it distances itself from any transfers and is two avenues too far to be a sustainable substitute for the Lexington Avenue Line. The heart of the transfers would come from downtown.. the at 14th (First Avenue Station), The at Houston, and here it's a weird gap where it'll be outside the area for a transfer at either Bowery, Grand St or Delancey - Essex. *Of course, you could connect the to the old Nassau tracks for a connect to both but you can do that for any of the routes. You'd also be creating a turn at around 57th St, which will slow the down

Second Avenue (Current Plan) makes it a fast ride for everyone, it hits more transfers at 14th (Third Avenue Station),  at Houston, and at Grand (and hopefully we can build a complex with to connect the and at Bowery).. But still has long ones like the   at 55th St and the at Grand Central (though it's the same size as 8th Avenue's, it'll still be two block to reach the and Shuttle It has less turning and will make the train more reliable. 

Third Avenue makes better transfers all around. the and trains all have an entrance that'd place it next to the train, the train connect to the at Astor Pl and the connect to the  at Bowery. However, the will miss the train since it's right in between 2nd Av and Lafayette. You could make a way for Northbound trains to have a passageway along Houston St but it'll probably be the longest transfer. Below that this Third Avenue line will generally be identical with the Second Avenue line except for the fact that the  don't connect but you can always build that complex.. it'll just be long without a train in between it. 


Personally, I like both Second Avenue and Third Avenue options, and I think a separate Alphabet City option should be looked into. 
*I prefer Hanover Square over taking over Nassau because, Nassau is hard enough to convert, and trains need to handle as many passengers as possible. However, that connection is important if you want the train to get onto Fulton St or 4th Av.. 
I'm also not sure about connecting the  to Downtown Manhattan if we plan for it to go into Downtown Brooklyn. a  and/or  transfer should be enough for now but a transfer with   trains from the Bronx and Downtown Brooklyn would be another useful alternative. Making it a full Lexington Av substitute. 

Sorry if this seems jumbled but it's also 2 am.. 

1 hour ago, Wallyhorse said:

By moving the  to the Nassau Line, it shortens that route considerably and at least on 4th Avenue becomes a MUCH more reliable local as except for with the past Chambers (and POSSIBLY late nights with the  from Brooklyn on 4th Avenue and when extended to Metropolitan late nights and weekends with the  from North Brooklyn at Myrtle) it would not merge with any line (in this scenario, the remains express on 4th Avenue at all times though it would still stop at DeKalb late nights).  (and ) would be shortened to Chambers to accommodate the and avoid holding it up southbound at Broad save for possibly a handful of rush hour / trains that would end at Broad.

This part doesn't help because it's directing trains to Lower Manhattan (where 4th Av riders don't want to really go). You'd be forcing a transfer at either Atlantic, or Canal St. It'd still be the same amount of time to get to Midtown.
 

1 hour ago, Wallyhorse said:

The becoming 24/7 to Rockaway Park on the RBB and QBL would replace the  on most of QBL and more importantly would have an RBB service from lower Manhattan that some elected officials may want for this to happen.  

ehhh okay.

1 hour ago, Wallyhorse said:

The would serve as a weekend replacement on QBL for the  specifically at 67th Avenue and 71st-Continental, otherwise it would run as it does now other than also running late nights to 71-Continental, allowing the in late nights to return to being an express. 

I guess you don't need a replacement if you make Woodhaven an express station. Ehhh I'm not entirely against it, but I also don't see the need to have the  run late nights.

2 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

Actually, another way this could be done:

becomes brown and runs from 95th Street to Chambers or Essex while late nights and weekends is extended to Metropolitan Avenue to replace the  entirely.  

terminates at Chambers at all times (with a handful of rush hour trains extended to Broad OR if necessary to the 9th Avenue station) to accommodate the  being moved to Nassau 24/7.

becomes 24/7 and runs from Whitehall (with some trains terminating on the tunnel level at Canal Street during peak hours if necessary) to Rockaway Park via the RBB.  Perhaps with Whitehall in this scenario becoming more of a terminal with only re-routes and perhaps the late nights running as it does now), switches could be re-done so trains could terminate/start from all three tracks there and be used as such a terminal.

goes back to nights and weekends running to 71-Continental ( would still run to 71-Continental as it does now). 

Only people really affected by this would be those who use the Broadway Line between Court Street or DeKalb and lower Manhattan, but those riders would have numerous alternate ways to get there.   

I don't even see how this solves anything.