mrsman

4 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

Yeah, they would probably set up the lower level of City Hall (finishing that station that was intended to originally be the stop for express trains that were to run through Montague while locals terminated on the upper level. 

That makes sense.

The pre-SAS Broadway BMT could only really run about 3/4 capacity of a generic 4 track line.  Since the express tracks terminate at 57th, one could either run expresses to 57th at half-capacity and locals to the 60th st tunnel to Queens at full-capacity (3/4 capacity for both sets of tracks  taken together), or run a similar pattern but have one of the trains from Queens merge onto the express.

In other words, assuming a subway line takes up half of the track's capacity, you can have  57th - Broadway express - Bridge,  Queens - 60th tunnel - Broadway local - City Hall, and  Queens - 60th tunnel - merge onto express tracks north of 57th - Broadway express - Bridge.  Alternatively,  could run as Broadway local, but use the switches south of Prince St to merge with the express tracks for access to the bridge.  If we have from Astoria and from Continental, each train service will be serviced by a yard.  That also leaves room for Bay Ridge trains to have a yard as they are now connected to the  train.

But in the era where trains from the Upper East side portion of 2nd Ave run on the Broadway express, we know that having the merger of  from local to express anywhere along these tracks (57th, 34th, or Prince) is disastrous.  It is that much harder to merge into a different set of tracks when merging into a "live" track set with trains coming from elsewehre (as opposed to the old system where Q terminated at 57th).  But then again, if  starts at City Hall, it should be easier to do the merger at Prince.  So very likely a service pattern that would allow  to take over Montague would mean that  does not run south of City Hall, and  will run as an Astoria-Sea Beach line via Manhattan Bridge, while running local in Manhattan.

Again, all of this would only make sense if the changes to the 8th Ave line would mean full capacity for both 8th Ave locals and 8th Ave expresses.  This is potentially possible, running two 8th Ave express services that both run into Cranberry tunnel, and running two 8th Ave local services.  Some of those locals could terminate at Whitehall, but most woujld probably continue to Bay Ridge.

So basically, there is a tradeoff.  Allowing 8th Ave trains into Montague would allow for an increase in 8th Ave service at the expense of Broadway service, since Broadway would be absolutely limited to three services if locals do not go south of CIty Hall.

13 hours ago, ActiveCity said:

"There was a plan to connect the IND Eighth Avenue Line south of the World Trade Center station to the IND Fulton Street Line Court Street station, which is currently the home of the New York Transit Museum. The stub World Trade Center station was intended to tie into the BMT Broadway Line, as they line up immediately to the east of Ground Zero, with only a few feet separating the northernmost uptown entrance of the Cortlandt Street station and the southernmost entrance to the Chambers Street–World Trade Center/Park Place complex. In order to connect with the now abandoned Court Street station, a new tunnel would be build under the East River using provisions south of the Whitehall Street station. The provision is just after where trains curve out of the Whitehall Street station going southbound, and there are two very short tunnels sealed with brick walls that were never used. This was a provision for Construction Route #32, or the "Battery Park-East River-Atlantic Avenue" Route, which was never built. Under this proposal, the Montague Tunnel would then be exclusively used by Nassau Loop trains and the new tunnels would be used for Broadway trains. This line would have been used as a DeKalb Avenue Bypass. It would have used the old LIRR Atlantic Tunnel or another street." This could've been today's train service. Unfortunately, the IND had a change of plans in 1939 and decided to have Second Avenue Subway service take over Court St and the Fulton St local. This explains why World Trade Center has no relays tracks. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kew_Gardens_613/New_York_City_Subway_Track_Layout,_Bellmouths_and_Provisions

This is interesting.  Whenever someone proposes a connection from the 8th Ave local to the Montague Tunnel, I wonder what is supposed to happen to the Broadway local trains.  The current WTC terminal certainly lmits the amount of 8th Ave trains that can be run, so if the 8th Ave local could somehow connect to Brooklyn, then you can run full load of trains on both the 8th Ave express and the 8th Ave local.  But if the 8th Ave takes over Montague, then we will be forced to limit the number of Broadway trains.  Where are the Broadway trains supposed to go?

Now I am aware that in times past we had both Broadway and Nassau trains  running in the Montague tunnel.  In most cases, this worked OK, because the track layouts at Whitehall and some of the Nassau stations allowed for certain northern trains to terminate in lower Manhattan and allow fewer trains from each route to continue into the tunnel.  So hypothetically, if one were running a full load of Broadway locals, could continue into the tunnel, while terminated at Whitehall, at the same time allowing Brown-M into the tunnel, while  terminated at Broad.  But the proposed merger of the 8th and Broadway lines would occur north of Cortlandt, which doesn't seem to provide any place to short-turn any excess 8th Ave locals.  I guess a redesigned City Hall could short-turn some of the Broadway trains.

On 4/23/2022 at 12:47 AM, Vulturious said:

Here's a dumb idea I thought of that could potentially work. Maybe?

The idea is creating a new connection from 6 Av that runs to the 60 St tunnel, a new lower level would be created in the process. I don't know how low the new connection is from the 60 St tunnel so a new lower level platform might also be needed at 5 Av-59 St. This is created for redundancy purposes, allowing all three lines running along 60 St to access 6 Av allowing another alternative for the  as well. There are other benefits, but for now the focus is mainly this. 

This seems to put too many trains on the 60th street tunnel" N, R, W, M.  Given that, I don't like it.

Now, if this were constructed as well as connections for both Broadway express and Broadway locals to access 63rd street, with existing connections maintained for redundancy and emergency reroutes, I could be in favor.

In that situation,  and  will be on 60th tunnel and all of the Broadway routes will use 63rd.   will now run from Astoria - 6th Ave local - Culver, giving Astoria trains access to CI Yard.   will be QBL local - 6th Av local - Myrtle via 60th street.

 and  will maintain their Brooklyn routes and both Broadway expresses will be routed up to 2nd/96th.   will run from 71 Av along QBL local, the 63rd tunnel, and Broadway local to Bay Ridge.

Even with this, there are still two remaining problems:

Difficult transfer to  for any trains along 63rd;

Less trains along the 53rd tunnel as  is now operating by itself.

On 4/17/2022 at 8:49 AM, darkstar8983 said:

Considering all the inter-mingling of the B Division lines,  the only services that are exclusive to either IND or BMT are:

IND:   

BMT:      

 

All the other services are mixes between the IND and BMT in some capacity:

- Changes from IND to BMT south of Grand St, Manhattan

 - Changes from IND to BMT south of Church Av, Brooklyn

 - Changes from IND to BMT between Broadway-Lafayette St and Essex St

 - Changes from BMT to IND north of Lexington Av-63 St

 - Changes from BMT to IND past the 11 St Cut approaching Queens Plaza

This is all true.  Some of the early maps post-1968 (Chrystie connection) did their best to try to keep track of which lines were BMT and which were IND and did their best to point out the exceptions.

The original nomenclature of the trains also kept track of which system was which.

The IND system controlled the first letters of the alphabet and were arranged based on their northern terminal, more or less heading east as you went down the alphabet.

A,B  Inwood and Washington Heights

C, D Concourse

E,F,G Queens Blvd

H Rockaways

The next set of letters were assigned to the BMT.  BMT originally had numbers, but post-unification they were assinged letters so as to differentiate from the IRT system.  As the early letters were taken by IND, only the later letters could be used by BMT.  But there is a system to the naming:

J,K,L,M - BMT eastern division

N, Q,R - BMT southern division

To account for many of the hybrid BMT/IND lines, the description was slightlly amended.  B and D were generally IND lines, but BMT in Brooklyn.  K (a forerunner to today's M that ran from 57/6 along 6 Av to Williamsburg Bridge and then to Broadway Junction) was a BMT line that was IND in Manhattan.  R was a BMT line that was IND in Queens.

The map posted by OP is mostly accurate in terms of the history.  But it should also be pointed out that in terms of governance, certain sections of line were transferred between IND and BMT.  (And at this point there is even less distinction as all o these lines are part of the B division.)  So the Culver line south of Church was built by BMT, but because in current layout it only connects to the IND routes, it is considered part of IND.  Similarly with the elevated train along Liberty Ave to Ozone Park, this was BMT, but as it (and the extension to the Rockaways) only connects to AC, it is part of the IND system.

I don't know how to classify the current part of the 2nd Ave subway.  As it directlly connects to  and nothing else, it seems to fit as being part of BMT, but given the newness of the construction, it does not belong as part of BMT or as IND either, but as a separate new-build line.

Referring back to my earlier post.

My service plan comment to Vulturious's post from three posts ago had the folllowing for the trains servicing CPW:

 Inwood-207 to Lefferts OR Rockaways.  8th Ave express-Fulton express.  24/7.  Late nights local in Brooklyn.  Nights and weekends servicing stops between 145th and 168th.

 Norwood-205 to Euclid.  Concourse express during rush hour.  8th Ave express-Fulton local.  All times except late nights.

[M] 168th to Metropolitan Ave.  8th Ave local.  Weekdays. [Nights and weekends [M] will go to Chambers instead.]

 Bedford Park Blvd to Bay Ridge.  CPW local and 6th Ave express.  Rush hour service to BPB.  Weekday and weekend service to 145th.  Late Night service to Norwood-205 to replace  .  

While the above is pretty good, I do think that the following alternative may also be considered.  The alternative will be more in line with the service plan that now exists, at least with respect to CPW.  Inwood trains will run express on CPW, except late nights.  A local service will run to 168th at all times except late nights.  The Concourse will have one service at all times except rush hour, but that service will service every Bronx stop, but run express on CPW, even late nights.  The second Concourse service will run local during rush hour, and will not run at all at other times.  That second service may run to 145th, or may not run at all, if there is sufficient local service running to 168th to take its place.  At least one 8th Ave service and one 6th Ave service will operate even during late nights.

With that in mind, I present the following:

 Inwood-207 to Lefferts OR Rockaways.  CPW express-8th Ave express-Fulton express.  All times except late nights.

 Norwood-205 to Euclid.  Concourse express during rush hour.   CPW express-8th Ave express-Fulton local.  Late nights,  service will be extended to service Lefferts and Far Rockaway.   will run express along CPW and 8th Ave at all times.

[M]  Rush hours: Bedford Park Blvd - Metoropolitan via Concourse-CPW-8th Ave local.  Weekday mid-day: 145th-Metropolitan via CPW-8th Ave local.  Night/weekend: Chambers - Metropolitan via Centre St BMT subway.  Late nights Myrtle/Broadway - Metropolitan shuttle.

 168th to Coney Island.  CPW Local-6 Av Exp-4 Av Exp-Sea Beach Local.   will run 24/7, but late nights it will be extended to Inwood-207.

The above changes mean that now  will run to Forest Hills, as follows:

 Forest Hills to Bay Ridge.  QBL local - 63rd - 6th Ave express - 4th Ave express.  All times except late nights.  Late nights Whitehall-Bay Ridge via 4th Ave local.

Apologize for the bolding above, that was inadvertent.  Also, a further note about night/weekend  service to Chambers.  Under this arrangement,  passengers will be able to access most of Manhattan below 125th with only one transfer.

At Essex, a transfer to  which has access to 8th Ave and 53rd.

At Bowery, a NEW transfer to  for access to 6th Ave express stations, 63rd st line, and CPW local stations.  Only 6th/14th and 6th/23rd are not accessible with one transfer.

At Canal, a transfer to  for access to Lexington Ave stations, and all Broadway stations.

At Chambers, access to  to also allow for access to the Lexington Ave express.

To reach the Financial District, there is access to  at Chambers,  at every Manhattan stop, and  at Canal.

For the most part, the missing Manhattan stations that are only accessed via  are generally walkable from one of the other lines.  The furthest ones are the  stations north of 66th, Hudson Yards, the Tribeca and West Village area, and the stations along  other than 8th/14th and Union Square.

6 hours ago, Vulturious said:

So this was an idea I thought up of with others on this thread a while back discussing how service could run de-interlined, more specifically a de-interlined B division service (this idea takes inspiration from Vanshnook as well).

B Division De-interlining plan:

•  Inwood-207 St to Rockaways/Lefferts Blvd [CPW/8 Av Exp, via Cranberry St, Fulton St Exp, via JFK Airport]
•  Norwood-205 St to Euclid Av [Concourse Peak Exp, CPW/8 Av Exp, via Cranberry St, Fulton St Local]
•  Jamaica Center to Coney Island [QBL Exp, via 53 St, 8 Av local, via Rutgers St, Culver Local]
• (Blue) 168 St to Metropolitan Av [CPW/8 Av Local, via Williamsburg Bridge, Brooklyn-Broadway Local,  Myrtle Av Local]
•  Forest Hills-71 Av to Bay Ridge-95 St [QBL Local, via 63 St, 6 Av Exp, via Manhattan Bridge, 4 Av Exp/Local]
•  145 St/Bedford Park Blvd to Coney Island [Concourse Peak Local, CPW Local, 6 Av Exp, via Manhattan Bridge, 4 Av Exp, Sea Beach Local]
•  Jamaica-179 St to Chambers St-WTC [QBL Exp, via 53 St, 6 Av Local]
•  Astoria-Ditmars Blvd to Coney Island [Astoria Peak Exp, via 60 St, Broadway Local, via Montague St, 4 Av Local, West End Peak Exp]
•  96 St-2 Av to Coney Island [2 Av Local, Broadway Exp, via Manhattan Bridge, Brighton Local]
•  Forest Hills-71 Av to City Hall/Bay Parkway [QBL Local, via 60 St, Broadway Local, via Montague St, 4 Av Local, West End Local]
• () 96 St-2 Av to Brighton Beach [2 Av Local, Broadway Exp, via Manhattan Bridge, Brighton Exp]

Here are some of how the changes would look like:

I'm not sure how all these services would operate outside of rush hour and weekday. The only services I know for sure of how they will run is the following:

•  Late nights, replaces  trains in Brooklyn, runs express between Canal St and 145 St.
•  stays the same, replaced by  trains with  trains extended to Norwood-205 St.
•  Late nights, runs via 63 St and 6 Av (basically normal  service, but to Jamaica Center).
•  Late Nights, runs local in Brooklyn and terminates at Whitehall St (basically runs Late night  service).
•  Rush hours to Bedford Park Blvd, other times to 145 St. Late nights, replaces  trains to Norwood-205 St.
•  Late nights, runs local in Queens and via 53 St (basically normal  service but to Jamaica-179 St).
•  Late nights, runs local in Manhattan.
•  Late nights, no service.
•  Late nights and weekends, no service.

The  is complicated and I'm not really too sure how to run it outside of weekday service. The  and  swapping is odd for sure, but there isn't any other way running service that isn't needed during late nights. I would've kept the  running local via 63 St, but that would be losing direct service to Queens Plaza and with the  running express, I had to swap them. The  is also complicated for weekend service, the only way I could think of running it would be to run to truncate it to 21 St-Queensbridge during weekends. At least that wouldn't complicate things further. The  replacing  trains during late nights is also odd, but it would basically run something like how the  would run during late nights which replaces  trains during those times so it's not that far of a stretch.

Vulturious, 

I do have to say that your plan seems to check all the boxes as far as limiting the number of merges, providing means for increasing service, and providing a means for most trips that are currently available to stay available.  You eliminate the merging conflicts in the DeKalb area, clean up the  merge along the Broadway line.  While some merging still exists along CPW, it only affects the CPW local.  The Canal st merge on the 8th Ave line is eliminated. 

You also have employed vanshnook's idea of routing the 4th Ave local to the West End line and bringing the 6th Ave expresses to Bay Ridge and Sea Beach.  This cleans up the merges along the 4th Ave line.  It should certainly be noted that a small downside is that West End riders lose their direct access to the Bridge (basically express trains to Midtown that save a ton of time by skipping Downtown Brooklyn and Downtown Manhattan), but it is somewhat necessary in order to clean up the merges in this area.  It should also be noted that routing  trains to Bay Ridge do require the addition of a new switch, which vanshnook talks about and which you have shown in your pictures.

Let's rethink the off-peak services for a minute:

 24/7.  [A] will service the stops between 145th and 168th nights and weekends.  [A] will also run local in Brooklyn late nights.  I also like using  to differentiate Lefferts from Rockaway services, but that isn't critical to the discussion of your plan.  [H] would be an [A] in every other way, except its southern destination.

 As you've stated, runs all times except late nights.  [A] will replace [C] during those hours, with [D] handling the Bronx segment during late nights.

 24/7.  You have presented a bit of a conundrum in your descritpion of late night service patterns.  I don't think it is wise to have a regular switch where [E] runs on 8th Ave all times except late night and [F] runs on 6th Ave all times execpt late night.  It is too confusing.  People expect blue trains on 8th and orange trains on 6th.  Let's see if we can do something else to keep it consistent.  Let's start [E] at 179th and [F] at Jamaica Center.  During normal hours, [F] will be express between Briarwood and Forest Hills, while [E] runs local, and yes some rush hour [F] trains will run express to 179th in a similar fashion to today's  .  During normal hours, both [E] and [F] will run express on QBL, through 53rd, with [E] onto 8th Ave local and eventually to Culver line and [F] onto 6th Ave local and eventually to WTC.  During late night hours, [F] will run express along QBL and 63rd, but [E] will run local along QBL and 53rd and Culver.  So in my mind, it seems that the solution is just to flip the eastern terminus of both lines, [E] 179th to Coney Island via 8th Ave local and Culver and [F] Jamaica Center to WTC via 6th Ave local.  This is today's service, except that we switch the middle portion (and the naming). 

 BLUE. [M] should run to 168th on weekdays.  [M] should run to Chambers nights and weekends.  [M] shuttle to Myrtle/Broadway late nights.  When [M] runs to Chambers, it should be only one extra transfer for [M] passengers to complete their normal trips, below 145th.  They can transfer to [E] at Essex to continue on the 8th Ave local and a new transfer at Bowery to Grand will allow [M] passengers to transfer to [D] for trips along CPW. 

 All times except late nights.  Late night service to Whitehall may be the only way to adequately serve Bay Ridge at night.  I don't like orange train on the Broadway route, but I think the unique nature of the service will still be OK.  Obviously, any Bay Ridge passenger during late nights can transfer to [D] for Bridge and 6th Ave service and the Queens portion o this line will be handled by [F] for services along 63rd and [E] for QBL local service.  Transfer from [D] to [F] can occur all along the 6th Ave line and transfers from [D] to [E] can occur at Broadway-Laffayette, W4th, or 7th Ave/53rd.  I do think  that the full length from Forest Hills to Bay Ridge does need to run on weekends.

 24/7.  The northern terminal will change based on the timeframe.  Bedford Park Blvd during rush hours, 145th during mid-day and weekend.  Norwood during late nights when the [C] isn't running.

 24/7.  See discussion for [E] train for details.

 24/7.  Astoria- Broadway local - 4th Ave local - West End local.  I am thinking that the Astoria exp you mentioned was an error, as I don't see any other train handling Astoria local.  I also think it would be better for [N] to be the West End local, since it is a 24/7 route.  [N] should always run to Coney Island, since CI Yard is the only yard serving this route.

 24/7.  2nd - Broadway express - Brighton local.

 No late night service.  QBL local - 60th - Broadway local - 4th Ave local - West End (rush hour) express.  [R] has acces to the Jamaica Yard, so running [R] to either 9th Ave or Bay Parkway for rush hour should be fine.  It would seem easier to run the West End express from Bay Parkway, to avoid merges with [N].

 As this is identical to [Q] except for the rush hour express along Brighton line, let's call this Q-diamond.  This will allow all letters [T] through [Y] for future services.  To some extent, if [K] remains unused, on a nomenclature basis it would make sense to rename [Z] to [K] which would allow J, K, L, and M to represent the BMT Eastern Division services and then allow [Z] for future services as well, but this nomenclature change isn't critical for discussion of your plan.

23 hours ago, Vulturious said:

That's not a bad idea, there definitely shouldn't be a repeat of QBL-63 St connection in this scenario. Although, I don't know how well a conversion of Lafayette Av will be. Maybe it is better to go for a new connection from Montague St to old Court St. Especially with how the  runs currently now and even before, I think we can get away with building a new connection. However, that could still hinder  service in the process so I don't know.

If the  train were to somehow become the Fulton local train, I could see a qualitative difference between the situation there and the situation on the QBL.

With QBL, if 36 St were not an express stop, and you try to fully deinterline, you could have a situation where it would be very difficult to get to a lot of destinations, since that is a great divergence point.  If the  QBL locals all went to 63rd-6th and all the QBL expresses went to 53rd-8th,  every passenger who boards west of Roosevelt will be shut off from Queens Plaza, 23rd (Queens), 53rd-Lex, and 53rd-5th.  Depending on the ultimate configuration, QBL local passengers would have to travel all the way to W4 to transfer to  or go all the way to 47-50 transfer to  to 7thAve to   in order to backtrack to the missed western Queens stations.

The situation in Brooklyn is not nearly as dire.  If  were the local and  made a connection from DeKalb station to Laffayette station, the passengers on the Fulton local stations west of Nostrand are not as cut off from  service.  Passengers boarding  at Franklin or Clinton-Washington could take  and transfer to  at Jay St.  Passengers would only need to backtrack to reach one station (Hoyt-Schermerhorn).  Passengers boarding at Laffayette could do the same or walk half a block to the  station at Fulton and cross-transfer to  at Hoyt-Schermerhorn.

So while it is certainly better if a major divergence point were also an express station, a hypothetical  via DeKalb-Laffayette connection, would not cut off passengers from their destinations, even if Laffayette remained a local stop.  Jay Street provides another reasonable transfer point, albeit not cross-platform.

On 3/3/2022 at 7:53 PM, paulrivera said:

Improved Q70 and/or M60: Cheapest option. There's not much to improve with the M60 short of making it terminate at 125/3rd or Lex, which is a non-starter.

Astoria shuttle bus: The  can do that within 6 months with an M60/Q19 hybrid variant. Cheaper and quicker to implement.

Ditmars shuttle bus: I don't see anyone riding it from Manhattan with the M60 one stop south. Probably a non-starter.

Northern Blvd BRT: Q33 revamp, I guess? But it's going to a local QBL stop, so I don't see it happening either.

Willets Point Cuomotrain: Why is this still on the table? Hard pass.

Woodside Airtrain: Just as expensive as the Willets Point Airtrain, but there's better LIRR connections here. No QBL connection here, but it's the most Midtown-friendly proposal I've seen.

Airtrain JFK extension: ehh... pass.

Astoria Blvd Airtrain: I like it, it's a straight shot routing and doesn't really disrupt any residential communities. We gotta get the Astoria Express  or  back to make it more enticing, but idk if anyone in Astoria is going to pay $8 to use it...

Jackson Heights Airtrain: I like this too, but there's no LIRR and the Q70 does a decent enough job along the same corridor. Why not have the Interboro express go there tho?

via GCP: branching off the Astoria line wouldn't be good for today's  operations. I think you'd have to swap the  and  in Queens, and run the on QBL 7 days a week to have it make sense for RTO, but that's a whole other study that would need to be done. Otherwise I think this route is fairly feasible.

and  extension: High risk of NIMBY. But they've been starting to warm up to an Astoria line extension to LGA, so we'll see...

Ferry service: You can start this within a year if NYC Ferry chooses to run it, and Marine Air Terminal is a great docking location. The existing PA shuttle buses can get people to the central terminal in short order.

My preference is the subway extention from Ditmars.  It avoids the issues with branching and would ensure a direct connection to the subway system.  Make it part of the subway (ideally without an extra fare for airports) and avoid the costly AirTrain.  Connecting  service does a good job of reaching key locations in Manhattan with transfers to most other Manhattan subways.

But not every airport trip starts in Manhattan.  Certianly travelers for LGA may also be coming from eastern Queens and LI.  The Astoria line is hard to reach from LIRR and the QBL.  Therefore, improvements to the Q70 route (like dedicated lanes) would also be needed to help travelers coming from the east.  Q70 connects to the Woodside LIRR and all the subways (and future IBX) in Jackson Heights.

On 2/25/2022 at 11:47 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

The 1968 plan also called for it to be a single track, which made no sense. Eventually, it evolved into a double track line along the LIRR Main Line, which made far more sense. Even back then, QBL had capacity issues. If they wanted to be able to truly add capacity, that second track plus a new trunk line in Manhattan (i.e., 2nd Ave) would have been key. But, to increase tph on QBL, I think a de-interlined service pattern should be tried before we spend $$$ to build two new tracks on the next to the LIRR Main Line and connect them to the 63rd St tunnel upper level.

Agreed.  Let's do the cheaper fixes to increase service and capacity, like deinterlining, before we embark on large capital campaigns.

Another important piece for QBL would probably be improving travel from Jamaica to Manhattan by alternate means.  This means that the subway will be less crowded if more people can be convinced to taking the LIRR (by making fares cheaper).  Additionally, any eastern queens travel to Lower Manhattan would be better served via  or  or LIRR Atlantic lines (and then subway from Brooklyn), so those services need to be made more attractive as well.

On 2/20/2022 at 3:29 PM, ActiveCity said:

That's what it was called in the 1968 program for action plan, but the IND Queens Blvd line east of 71st Avenue is 4 tracks so it would be logical sense to use them.

I remember reading that as well.  The super express would be linked to the Hillside local and the Hillside express would be linked to the regular QBL express and the QBL local would emanate from Forest Hills.

In some ways, it seems somewhat nonsensical, but I'll put it in another way and it may have a better distinction.  

In many cities there is a distinction between a limited bus and an express bus.  A limited bus wil only stop at the major streets - it will skip many of the local stops throughout the journey.  An express bus likely will make every stop at the two ends of the route, but then have a long non-stop section (often on an expressway) in the middle.  The regular express train would be like the limited bus, it will help people making long distance journeys within Queens by skipping many local stops.  The super-express would be like the express bus, servicing all of the local stops east of Forest Hills and then providing a non-stop (or near non-stop) service to Manhattan.

Service over this weekend is a total disaster.  So many regular lines are suspended for planned work, and all of the above lines, that were meant to pick up the slack, are experiencing incidents.  

13 hours ago, Vulturious said:

The reason why the  and  are under capacity is because of what is interfering with it from running more trains. The  and  trains all directly interfere with them, unfortunately it's not just those lines either. 

Even with the  taking up the empty slots of where the  and  aren't operating, there is still the issue of trains maybe arriving early or late. The  already has the issue of running along a line with 2 other lines, not really with the  since the  is pretty much a . I just don't know how well QBL can handle mainly around Queens Plaza and 36 St.

This is all true.  Some form of at least partial deinterlining would be needed to accommodate additional QBL local service, which would give space on the local line for Rocakaway Branch Service.

At minimum, getting rid of the  local to express shift on the Broadway line (by running  to 96th and increasing  Astoria service), and reducing intermingling on QBL, (at minimum  to 53rd and  to 63rd) would help a lot here.

I think doing the above would allow a few more local train on QBL.  At the same time, I think even the most ardent RBB proponents acknowledge that there will be a reduction in  QBL local service to Manhattan for the stations between Forest Hills and Woodhaven as there is a natural limit to the amount of trains that can be run on the QBL local.  Right now, pre-COVID cuts, there is generally a 20 TPH frequency on the line.  If the above clean-up can increase the overall frequency to about 24 TPH (which is generous), you will have to divert at least 10 TPH to RBB, so now the easternmost QBL local stations will only get 14 TPH service.

Only ways to get full 30 TPH on the QBL local would be a) reinstating  service to Forest Hills to get more trains, but not more trains to Manhattan or b) a full complete deinterlining of QBL which would mean all expresses to 53rd and all locals to 63rd (or vice versa) and would probably also mean other service rearrangements to run service so high.  You simply can't have 30 TPH to WTC, so likely the QBL trains that lead to 8th Ave will probably have to run express on 8th Ave.  This also means no  service on QBL either.

One positive aspect of  to Bay Ridge is that it would provide a yard for Bay Ridge trains.  They have access to the Jamaica Yard now, of course, by way of the  train, but the lack of yard access was always a sticking point in trying to establish an Astoria - Broadway local - Bay Ridge service, as a means of separating Broadway expresses from locals.

Another positive aspect would be the allowance of more re-routes and the ability for direct 8th Ave sevice from southern Brooklyn.

But I think overall, the connection would not allow for an increase in service overall.

Ideally, Division B would have 6 northern portals that connect to 6 Midtown track sets that connect to 6 southern portals.  If there were a one to one relationship between the portals and the Midtown tracks, you'd have the ability for the most capacity.  (This is deinterlining).  But even if we allow certain trains to still intermingle in certain places, having 6 exits on each side would still be beneficial.

We have 6 northern portals currently:

CPW express - CPW local - 2nd Ave - 63rd tunnel - 60th tunnel - 53rd tunnel

We have 6 sets of Midtown tracks (8th Ave express/local, 6th Ave express/local, and Broadway express/local).

We can connect the northern portals to the Midtown tracks on a one to one basis as follows:

CPW express - 8th Ave express

CPW local - 6th Ave express

2nd Ave - Broadway express

63rd - 6th Ave local

60th - Broadway local

53rd - 8th Ave local

[Doing the above would deinterline, but there could still be reasons to keep some trains that do interline, like a Qns service on 53rd that connects to 6th Ave or having QBL service via 60th as in today's  train.]

However, there are only 5 southern portals: Manhattan Bridge N, Manhattan Bridge S, Rutgers, Cranberry, and Montague.  The Williamsburg Bridge could be a 6th portal, but the way that the tracks are currently configured, it can only get Midtown trains at the expense of Rutgers.

The Midtown tracks can connect to these southern portals, and most currently do in a one to one fashion:

Broadway express - Manhattan Bridge S

Broadway local - Montague

6th Ave express - Manhattan Bridge N

6th Ave local - Rutgers OR Williamsburg Bridge

8th Ave express - Cranberry

8th Ave local - DEAD END

Since the 8th Ave local does not connect with a portal to Brooklyn, capacity is limited.  This is why there are only three services on 8th Ave today.

Connecting the 8th Ave local to Montague would mean that we can increase 8th Ave service at the expense of Broadway local service.  The billions of dollars needed to make this connection would not actually increase capacity, even though it does have some benefits with regard to re-routes.

What would allow for an increase in capacity? A connection to a 6th portal.  This can either mean a new East River tunnel or a new tunnel to connect with the Williamsburg Bridge.  The connection to Williamsgurg Bridge is usually envisioned as a subway between 6th Ave and the Bowery Station along Spring St or Broome St.  Another possibility is a subway along Worth Street that connects to the Nassau line. 

If the second option is chosen, it is true that 8th Ave local trains will hit two different Canal St stations, so to avoid confusion the 6th/Canal station should be renamed to TRIBECA.  But it does mean a relatively short tunnel along Worth St for about 1000 feet.  The 8th Ave trains will replace  along the Williamsburg Bridge lines.  So what becomes of the Nassau line south of Worth Street?  If teh above is implemented, there is a good argument that this small section of track between Chambers and Broad St station should become IRT and connected to the  train to allow  trains to reach the Financial District.

Someone on reddit made a helpful map of the weekend closures:

On 2/13/2022 at 1:02 PM, paulrivera said:

The  is running local on Broadway. I'm not sure if it's running local because the  is turning on the express tracks at 34 St, but if it's not, it would cause the Broadway line to be overserved according to their weekend track capacity guidelines, and heaven forbid if the  has much more than 15tph running on the same track on a weekend (5 N, 5 R, 6 Q).

Could anyone explain a little more about the 15 TPH weekend track capacity guidelines?  Where did this rule come from?  When was it implemented? Do exceptions apply, especially when there is work on other lines that would be rerouted to other sections of track?

On 2/11/2022 at 1:21 PM, darkstar8983 said:

I think to speed up CBTC installation, GO's need to be a bit more invasive, similar to FASTRACK shutdowns. The subway headways are already poor enough that people who ride the subway during off-peak hours wouldn't complain any more than they already do when service to their station is shut down. I do understand that it is frustrating that for example: there is no  service on 8th Avenue, with trains rerouted to 6 Av or Broadway. However, a full four-line closure is better than having the following:

1. Short-turning  trains at 59 St Columbus Circle

2. One-way express and one-way local service along 8 Av

3. Slow speed orders due to these reroutes because of flagging and worker safety

Having trains running on corridors where there is heavy construction and flagging makes trains operate no faster than 10 MPH through the entire work zone, which is now if I'm not mistaken, 1/4 mile before  work territory begins up until 1/4 mile after the work zone ends. The trains would make it from point A to point B faster going around the work zone completely by using another line entirely (again, similar to the  on 6 Av instead of stopping at every signal along 8 Av if it has to go express one-way). Another issue with piecemeal work zones is the use of switches that are normally unused, leading to a lot of switch problems on weekends where rarely-used switches are in continuous use for 48 hours. Also picture going to a local stop that is skipped in your direction of travel. You would have to go to an express station, walk up stairs, change platforms, and wait on a platform for another train to take you backwards towards your skipped station (in this case, picture going to 50th St on 8th Av from lower manhattan, and uptown trains are skipping 50th St). You would have to ride your rerouted express train to 59 St-Columbus Circle, past the work zone, and then transfer + wait for a downtown local train). If there is a full 8th Avenue closure similar to FASTRACK -style closures, then you could just ride the  /  to 7th Av-53 St and walk one avenue over to 8th Av and you're in the vicinity. 

I also do agree with a previously made comment (I think it was under another forum topic) where the commenter said the only people who navigate the subway well on weekends / heavy construction would have to have a PhD in urban transportation / navigation. 

 

Now on a broader scope, CBTC installation (assuming a full workforce - which is a caveat during pandemic times) could be expedited if FASTRACK-style closures are done on weekends after 10PM Fridays until 5AM the next beginning-of-week weekday (Monday, or Tuesday if Monday is a Holiday).

I've mentioned it in the past, but Sixth Avenue could have had CBTC installed in just a few months if they did the Brooklyn  swap, closing 6th Avenue, and rerouting the  to 8th Av and the  to Broadway on weekends continuously. Unfortunately I think that ship has now sailed until CBTC compatible subway cars are introduced to the  line, unless Culver can still accommodate non-CBTC cars. 

 

The MTA has also demonstrated that other Manhattan corridors can experience large-scale closures, with nearby corridors serving as an alternative during weekends (i.e. the 7th Av Line closure from 137 St to South Ferry that had the  run shuttle service from Van Cortlandt Park to 137 St only, the  and  trains suspended, and the  via Lexington, while Central Park West had the trains (  trains routed to 145 St via the  since the  train was out and the  was already in midtown).). 

I agree.  Full segment line closures over weekends is the only way to accomplish some of the large scale projects that we need to do.  I think the Fastrack system worked very well in that it allowed uniterrupted work, in a safe environment, while conciously increasing service on parallel corridors to allow people to travel along parallel routes as much as possible.

I also agree that the way that the closure is implemented is also key.  If you have fewer lines to work with, the remaining lines will be a lot busier.  Therefore, MTA should work really hard to avoid criss-crossing the rerouted routes as much as possible.

So a 6th Ave closure would involve a D/F swap in Brooklyn, because the  trains will stay on 8th Ave line and split off after Jay Street to ride down Culver, and the  will presumably join the Broadway express after 63rd/Lex and follow those tracks to 4th Ave and West End.

23 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

The time to have done the work required to connect the  to the  tracks was right after 9/11 happened or before that in 1966 when construction of the WTC commenced.

That said, I believe it's a straight shot from the end of Chambers on the to the Broadway like tracks north of the WTC to where the mall likely is unaffected or minimally affected by such, especially if they only have to open up Church Street for that.  

Agreed.  The  via Montague plans that some people have is largely because it is indeed a straight shot.  Also agree that the best opportunities for doing something along these limes was during WTC construction when there is a lot of digging in that neighborhood going on anyway.  

Having the 8th Ave line continue into Montague would mean that we could run 4 services along 8th Ave [as opposed to the current three], two express services that lead to Cranberry and two local services that lead to Montague.  The WTC dead end limits the capability of using the full capacity of 8th Ave.

1 minute ago, mrsman said:

It is certainly a hard ask to destroy billions of dollars in relatively recent construction to push  trains onto the Montague tunnel.

I wonder if we can roll back a bit to something I had alluded to back on January 20 upthread.*  Namely, providing subway service from the Manhattan Bridge that will run along Canal Street west of Broadway and then heading up 6th Ave in the neighborhood of the Holland Tunnel.  

I imagine the northside of Manhattan Bridge tied to the Broadway express (as was done pre-Chrystie).  The southside of Manhattan Bridge will be tied in to new track under the existing tracks along Canal. This lower level Canal tracks will make a stop under the existing Canal Street station (similar layout as the W4th station) to provide a transfer station.  The lower level tracks will continue to 6th Ave and turn north underneath the 8th Ave express line.  The lower level will then rise up and become the local tracks that parallel the 8th Ave express, stopping at Spring St, and then utilize the W4th switches to become the 6th Ave local.  At the same time, the 8th Ave locals will utilize the W4th tracks to head east on Houston. 

The 8th Ave locals will be local along Houston street and the 6th Ave express will be express on Houston street.  Both services will provide cross-platform transfer at Broadway-Laffayette.  Then, the expresses will be routed toward the Rutgers tunnel and the locals will be routed to the Williamsburg Bridge.

What this boils down to is the following system, adding in other bits of deinterlining that may be helpful.  Only the new canal subway will be new construction:

 207 [A] or 205 [C] - CPW express - 8th Ave express - Cranberry Tunnel - Fulton lines to Euclid, Lefferts, or the Rockaways

 [M] Forest Hills - QBL local - 53rd - 8th Ave local - W4th switch - Houston Street - Williamsburg Bridge - Jamacia/Myrtle 

 168th or BPB [D] - CPW local - 6th Ave express - Houston Street - Rutgers Tunnel - Culver.  B will be full-time Culver local and D will be part-time Culver express.    

 [K]   179th [F] or Jamaica Center [K] - QBL express - 63rd - 6th Ave local - W4th switch - New Canal subway - Manhattan Bridge - 4th Ave express - Sea Beach/West End  

2nd Ave - Broadway express - Manhattan Bridge - Brighton lines  

Astoria - 60th - Broadway local - Montague tunnel - 4th Ave local - Bay Ridge.  [Yard access to Coney Island during out of service times along Sea Beach.]

 

* Slight difference is that this plan will have the New Canal subway tie into the local tracks, not the 8th Ave express.

 

 

Sorry.  Formatting goofed.  I didn't want to bold so much.

It is certainly a hard ask to destroy billions of dollars in relatively recent construction to push  trains onto the Montague tunnel.

I wonder if we can roll back a bit to something I had alluded to back on January 20 upthread.*  Namely, providing subway service from the Manhattan Bridge that will run along Canal Street west of Broadway and then heading up 6th Ave in the neighborhood of the Holland Tunnel.  

I imagine the northside of Manhattan Bridge tied to the Broadway express (as was done pre-Chrystie).  The southside of Manhattan Bridge will be tied in to new track under the existing tracks along Canal. This lower level Canal tracks will make a stop under the existing Canal Street station (similar layout as the W4th station) to provide a transfer station.  The lower level tracks will continue to 6th Ave and turn north underneath the 8th Ave express line.  The lower level will then rise up and become the local tracks that parallel the 8th Ave express, stopping at Spring St, and then utilize the W4th switches to become the 6th Ave local.  At the same time, the 8th Ave locals will utilize the W4th tracks to head east on Houston. 

The 8th Ave locals will be local along Houston street and the 6th Ave express will be express on Houston street.  Both services will provide cross-platform transfer at Broadway-Laffayette.  Then, the expresses will be routed toward the Rutgers tunnel and the locals will be routed to the Williamsburg Bridge.

What this boils down to is the following system, adding in other bits of deinterlining that may be helpful.  Only the new canal subway will be new construction:

 207 [A] or 205 [C] - CPW express - 8th Ave express - Cranberry Tunnel - Fulton lines to Euclid, Lefferts, or the Rockaways

 [M] Forest Hills - QBL local - 53rd - 8th Ave local - W4th switch - Houston Street - Williamsburg Bridge - Jamacia/Myrtle 

 168th or BPB [D] - CPW local - 6th Ave express - Houston Street - Rutgers Tunnel - Culver.  B will be full-time Culver local and D will be part-time Culver express.    

 [K]   179th [F] or Jamaica Center [K] - QBL express - 63rd - 6th Ave local - W4th switch - New Canal subway - Manhattan Bridge - 4th Ave express - Sea Beach/West End  

2nd Ave - Broadway express - Manhattan Bridge - Brighton lines  

Astoria - 60th - Broadway local - Montague tunnel - 4th Ave local - Bay Ridge.  [Yard access to Coney Island during out of service times along Sea Beach.]

* Slight difference is that this plan will have the New Canal subway tie into the local tracks, not the 8th Ave express.

24 minutes ago, shiznit1987 said:

Personally, I think the letter of a train should be determined by it's destination route regardless of it's orgin. In that case, any train going to 96st/2nd Ave should be signed as . My thing is if you are at a Sea Beach stop and are going to Manhattan even when that "" train slides in you're going to get on it since you pretty much know it's going to go to Manhattan (where else could it go?). The same is *not* true once in the city. People are in a hurry/in their own world and it's much simpler to see  and think "Second Ave". Going the other way, all SAS-Sea Beach runs should be signed as  since if i'm at 72nd/2nd Ave going downtown am I really going to question it? Yet, the poor guy at 34th St whose had a long day and needs to get home to Bensonhurst would sure appreciate seeing that big yellow  rather than having to listen to a garbled annoucement about "Q via Sea Beach"

Maybe it comes from living along Queens Blvd and all the re-routes that come along with that, but in my experience going into the city people generally just "get on" and figure it out, especally since if say the  is on the  or other sillyness you can walk two avenues. OTOH if you get on the wrong train leaving Manhattan you can end up somewhere totally different. 

 

All of the above does make perfect sense.  In most cases, the destination is going to be the determining factor and the key factor for passengers, so that along the different ends of the route, seeing the destination would likely make the routing somewhat clear.

So to the extent that there are a handful of 2nd Ave - Broadway express - Sea Beach trains out there, it makes sense to be signed  southbound and  northbound.

On 2/4/2022 at 9:02 PM, CenSin said:

 

• 
  • to/from New Lots Avenue
• 
  • express to/from Burnside Avenue
• 
  • to/from Nereid Avenue, Gun Hill Road, Crown Heights–Utica Avenue, or New Lots Avenue
• 
  • to/from Rockaway Beach
  • to/from Ozone Park–Lefferts Boulevard
• 
  • to/from Jamaica–179 Street
• 
  • to 96 Street via Sea Beach
• 
  • to Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue via Sea Beach

CenSin, this is a great idea and thank you for identifying the regularly scheduled alternate routings.  I agree that it would be nice if the diamond symbol were meant as "alternate" as opposed to "express", but given that that is most frequent connotaion, it would be hard to undo that.  Especially, given that the diamond's most widespread use is for  and  which are in fact expresses along those lines.

If I may, let's examine each of these alternate services and see what we can come up with that does not use the diamond symbol for anything other than an express version of the route.

241 - White Plains Rd - 7th Ave express - New Lots.  This train should be  Bronx bound and  Brooklyn bound if  cannot be used.

Express service along even parts of Jerome is rightfully  

The  is used so much all over the place that it is rightfully confusing! This needs a deep dive:  It seems that any Lexington train that doesn't go along Jerome or the Pelham line will be called 5.  As you indicated above, there are so many places where a 5 can go: northbound to either Nereid, Gun Hill, or Dyre; and southbound to either Bowling Green, Flatbush, Utica, or New Lots.  I think that we will need two different numbers to designate the services.  Northbound trains bound for Dyre Ave (or short turning on any segment before it) should be  .  Northbound trains bound for the White Plains Rd. elevated should be  .  Southbound trains bound for Bowling Green or Flatbush should be  .  Southbound trains bound for New Lots should be  and southbound trains bound for Utica should be <8>.

 to Rockaway Beach seems to be (was) accepted usage, even though it's not more express than regular  

I am a fan of an alternate letter to distinguish Far Rockaway and Lefferts services, so happy to contend with either  or  to denote Lefferts service without hearing from people that "you're putting too many services on CPW or 8th Ave."  Lableling the Lefferts service by a different letter is simply denoting a difference in the destination.  Running 10 TPH  and 10 TPH  is equivlaent to running 10 TPH  -FR and 10 TPH  -OP or 20 TPH of total currnet  service. [So while I am always a fan of the separate designation, many of my proposals do not make the distinction since it is easier in some people's mind to treat both as .]

 to 179th.  Yes, this is absolutely an express since it is the form of Hillside express.  While it is nice for the bus riders who transfer at 179th to have a HIllside express, I wish it ran more frequently and more reliably.  Ideally, 1/3 of all QBL express trains should run local along Hillside to 179th, 1/3 should run express along Hillside to 179th, and 1/3 should run to Jamaica Center.  I am even happy to entertain some  trains to 179th along Hillside express, but I know that it will be a little tricky since that designation is needed for Culver Express, so maybe we can't have both E and F run express along Hllside, but it's definitely something that would be appreciated in Eastern Queens. [Alternatively,  desingnation can be used for an F that is express along Hillside.

And as discussed above, the 2nd Ave - Broadway express - Sea Beach trains can be designated as  uptown and  Brooklyn-bound.

All of this is mostly because there is a slight imbalance in capacity and demand.  While it would be simpler if all  trains ran Astoria-Sea Beach, knowing that there is capacity and demand to run an  train occasionally to 96th will happen.  But it is best for passenger convenience to denote such Q/N hybrids based on their destination,  southbound and  nortbhound.  And similarly for the other alternate routings.

On 2/4/2022 at 3:13 PM, Calvin said:

It's basically to avoid confusion/questions for the passengers between Atlantic-Barclays, Canal St and Lex-63 St in Manhattan, thinking why/how the  ended up going over Second Av line. That goes for the  starting at 96 St, they quote it's via Second Av until 57/7 Av. 

There's also  to Crown Heights-Utica via Franklin Av, rush hour congestion on the Nostrand Av line and the ones that start at New Lots Av (limited AM trips) is b/c of traffic of the put-ins to start at the Flatbush terminal. 

 

Is there a way for trains to change their designation while along the route?  It would seem that such would be pretty easy to do with the computerized signs and designations.

So a train that runs along Sea Beach and then goes north on the Broadway express and contineus up 2nd Ave would seem to make sense to run as an N train in Brooklyn and then change its designation to Q before hitting Canal.  This train is identical to a Q train from Canal northward and any passenger boarding would just be happy to board a Q.  They don't care where the train originated, only where it is going.  For the passengers boarding in Mahnattan, a Q desgnation is easiser than a special-N.

For the passengers who are already on the train, they boarded a train along Sea Beach or 4th Ave that acts like an N train, but will eventually run like a Q train.  If they get off before or at Times Square, no problem.  If they are headed to 49th, 5th Ave, Lex-60, or Queens, then knowing that their train is headed to 96th like a Q is absolutely critical.  It would seem that a clear announcement that is made while the train is crossing from Brooklyn to Manhattan :

"Attention passengers.  This N train will now become a Q train.  This train will run express along Broadway and then head up along 2nd Avenue to 96th street.  This train will not stop at 49th or head to Queens.  If you need to reach those locations, please transfer to another N train at Times Square."

5 minutes ago, Theli11 said:

I'm sure the everyday rider would understand all these changes. Hell, I'm not even sure I'd understand at a glance.. For all of this you could've just had the  go via the , the  go via the  then the  down to Jay St, the and  don't even have to be this complicated, you could've just ran the  and  via Bridge, and have people use  . Idk why the  is suspended anyways. If you keep everything simple and on the usual GOs, service will usually be fine. New Yorkers are trying to get to one place to another.. The goal isn't to create a brand new map or create some weird service pattern/route but to make everything as easy, digestible and simple as possible. If it's anything the MTA knows how to make GOs have some simplicity and easy to understand logic behind them.

The idea is that the simple routing will be all-frought with mergers and bottlenecks.  You would run A and C trains along the D train corridor, then switching to the F and then swithching back to the 8th Avenue.  These merges aren't cost-free, even at weekend frequencies.  You still need to run enough trains to actually serve the passengers.

A normal weekend GO running A and C in this pattern would not be so bad.  But there are few places for the trains to go now that you also have projects along Montague and the Broadway express.

If you normally have six trunk lines (8th exp, 8th loc, 6th exp, 6th loc, Bwy exp, Bwy loc), but because of the trackwork, you now have only three (6th loc, 6th exp, Bwy loc), you have to run the trains in an efficient manner.  The Fulton line  trains from Brooklyn can only connect with the  routing (either at Jay or at W4th) if it can't run up 8th Ave.  That basically means that unless we will have  trains merging between local and express tracks on 6th Ave [the GO does this, but it is a bad idea given the number of trains that need to be run on the only trunks that are available] , the  trains will ride up the 6th Ave local, which only has access to 53rd Qns, 63rds Qns, or up 2nd Ave.

Conceivably, there are other alternatives that avoid  making a merge from express to local.  You could have all three Broadway services run on the Broadway local at reduced frequencies.  All three trains will ride on the bridge nb (but thru Montague SB) and run to their normal lines in Brooklyn, again, at reduced frequencies, since we are running three services in the space for two.   Next, you can supsend  and run the  along the  line, and run  trains.  So now we will have three services on the 6th Ave express that continues into Brooklyn.   to Brighton,  to West End, and perhaps  to 9th Avenue on the West End, the first conceivable place where it can turn back.  This allows the letters to be used for their conveninent and understandable patterns on CPW, but with the understanding that we are funnellilng all three services onto the 6th Ave express.  There is no easy way for these trains to reach the Fulton line in Brooklyn, so they don't.  It means a reduced service on CPW, but running as much trains as possilbe here.  If we provided for  to switch tracks to the local, it will further reduce the number of trains tha can run here - not good.  Now we are left with one other line, 6th Ave local, which can run and service to Queens and then can run to Culver and   to Fulton/Lefferts/Rockaways.

The bottom line, is that if only three out of the six trunk lines are operating on President Day weekend, each of those trunks will have a significant amount of trains running.  The merges in Manhattan should be kept t t a minimum to keep things going.  This unfortunatlely means that Fulton line trains cannot go to CPW like their normal service pattern, becaue that would mean too much merging when there is no capacity for it.

On 1/26/2022 at 3:56 PM, BreeddekalbL said:

@mrsman how do you send the  to kings plaza?

This was a comment on shiznit1987's plan.  Basically  along a new tunnel to Atlantic Ave and then  goes south along Utica Ave on new elevated tracks and  follows the Atlantic LIRR tracks to Jamaica.

On 1/26/2022 at 11:37 PM, Vulturious said:

Starting off with the  and , I think it would be better to keep the  as the Brighton Express and the  running local. The  currently cuts back from operating anywhere north of Whitehall St because the  has it covered for the most part as well as the  along QBL. If the  were to operate express, it would allow for the  to just cut back entirely during late nights pretty much similar to the , it would also be better and give more incentive for riders taking the  to stick with it rather than just straight up getting off and transfer over to another line to get to Queens.

I agree with this.   as the only Astoria route will be 24 hours, so it will make sense that the 24 hour Brighton local be attached to it and the part time express be attached to the part time  service.

On 1/26/2022 at 11:37 PM, Vulturious said:

Speaking of Queens, I don't see any reason to reroute the  along QBL replacing the  to Jamaica-179 St. There is no difference in running the way service runs today and in this proposal, either the  and  would still be waiting outside of Queens Plaza as well as the  and  around 36 St. Nothing is being solved here so it's better off to just let the  stay away from QBL or have the  run local along QBL with the . 

I also agree, but I do like the idea of  as the local and  as the express on QBL.  This means that the two traditional QBL express services remain E and F and both lines remain on the 53rd tunnel to Manhattan. It means less switching at Queens Plaza area.  E,F, Q 24 hour runs, with no R service late nights.  This is basically swapping the current F and M services through the tunnels and then having Q take over M's routing into Queens.  I think Q is a better train than M for the QBL local, because it can have longer train sets and it also provides a faster servcie to Lower Manhattan, given that the Q is express.  (OK a transfer will be needed at Canal to reach Lower Manhattan).

On 1/26/2022 at 11:37 PM, Vulturious said:

Your plan for the  and  is pretty cool, I never thought I would see the conversion of the LIRR Atlantic Branch be brought up again. Although, that would be hard to acquire as I highly doubt the LIRR would be willing enough to give up. However if we were to look past that, I do have a few things that should be changed here. Getting rid of Nostrand Av isn't a good idea, better to keep that around as an alternative for riders along Fulton St. Not only that, but at least the  would still have one extra station before turning off towards the Utica Av line. It would be better to add in at least a few stations (not too much) to at least provide alternatives for both the Fulton St and Jamaica Av lines. There shouldn't be a need to be competitive, although now that I think about it you're probably trying to have some sort of Super Express service. It's not a bad idea, but even with a few extra stations give or take 2 or 3 new ones, they would still be pretty far apart. Just my though.

I like it as well.  If LIRR, as planned, decides to trun the Atlanic line into a Jamiaica-Flatbush shuttle, they don't deserve it.  If the line is no longer going to connect to service to Nassau County, why should it be under LIRR jurisdiction.  If LIRR would prefer to run all of their trains on the main line to GCT or Penn, then they really don't need Atlantic anymore.  Let it be run as a subway.  I also agree that a few stops would be key.  I don't see this as needing to compete with  for Midtown service, let  be competitive for Lower Manhattan service.  If Jamaica passengers bound for the area below 14th can be coaxed off  that would be helpful enough.  I can see stations at Franklin (the transfer to  IMO is more important than  at Nostrand), Troy (just west of where the Utica line will branch off), East New York transfer to , Woodhaven (transfer to a future RBB service of some kind), Lefferts (a station here will make it easier to turn  Lefferts into a full time shuttle and having all existing trains run to the Rockaways), and then Sutphin Blvd (connection to most LIRR services).  The will be the express station that this section of Brooklyn/Queens needs since both of the existing services JZ and A between East New York and Jamaica run long sections of all-stop service. 

Could the dreamer in me have the line continue to Laurelton or Rosedale as a subway takin over the Rosedale-Jamiaca section of the Atlantic line and forcing all of the south shore lines travel via St Albans?  Frequent subway service would be far better appreciated in SE Queens. 

On 1/26/2022 at 11:37 PM, Vulturious said:

This last one is definitely something I think should be changed almost entirely. It would be better to have the  and 's northern terminals not be the same, maybe having the  operate back to Bedford Park Blvd while the  continuing to 168 St. Although, I definitely would say the  should be the one to run into South Brooklyn rather than the . The  has no reason to run into South Brooklyn, the line would be carrying air most of the time. Running the  would be the better replacement to the missing 4 Av service for the  as riders would have more incentive to just stay on it. I could still definitely see people transferring over to the  or  the first chance they get, but the  would still carry more people than the .

Agreed.  AC service as teh CPW local replaces CB service today, one service to 168th and one service as the Concourse local.

E service south of WTC replaces R.  Running this to Bay Ridge would likely be more popular than J, and E is connected to Jamaica Yard, so it should be fine.  It would be nice to have 8th Ave service to southern Brooklyn.

On 1/28/2022 at 1:06 AM, darkstar8983 said:

It’s a pretty interesting GO, but it has to be done for several reasons

- the last time 8 Av was closed on a weekend was the weekend right before the pandemic fully shut down life in NYC (March 13-16 2020), and that version just suspended the  and rerouted the  to 2 Av. This probably can’t happen due to expected longer wait times and longer travel times from end to end along the  line if it’s made fully local in Manhattan / Brooklyn. When a route has a longer travel time, headways have to be thinned or extra crews have to be called in, neither of which are possible due to the pandemic. So this time the  must remain express, and to do so, the  must run. I personally would have had the  only run from 59 St to 168 St so the  can at least be express in Manhattan but there’s the same problem of the  being local in Brooklyn and additional switching at 59 St Columbus Circle needed.

- again due to worker shortages, you can’t have any GOs or alternate services where routes are extended or run extra service. Having extra  and  service in lieu of the  doesn’t work because you would most likely only have the  crews available late nights to run the extended , and again there are probably Union rules that prohibit an extension of a workers route without pay increases for making the shuttle  crews run a 2-hour route from Bay Ridge to Jamaica Center fully local.

- the increased  service also does not fit with the limited 15 TPH train capacity on weekends that we’re now stuck with on trunk lines. 6 Av is not viable due to the  trains essentially pulling an  (meaning, taking up capacity on both the express and local tracks in midtown on 6 Av). Broadway is not available for extra service due to the Manhattan Bridge being the only route open from Brooklyn to Manhattan northbound. Overflow trains would have to end at 34 St Herald Sq anyways, so might as well run the  instead of a shortened  in addition to the normal length .

- with regards to Broadway, an argument could be made for ending the  at Canal St, meaning keeping the  express and just running the  via 59’St like they did Last time (March 2020) but it seems that the work in lower manhattan on Broadway is between City Hall and Prince St, right before the crossover. If the problem is that  trains are stored in city hall yard weekends instead of traveling to Coney Island Yard for storage, then just move those trains to the yard or park them on sea beach. They still run the same risk of vandalism like the other trains do when parked on express tracks on other corridors (Queens Blvd Express, 96 St-2 Av tail tracks, etc). However it might be the former. If it is the latter then that’s just laziness on part of the MTA and planning.

- yes I agree…one hiccup ANYWHERE and the system goes to shit during that GO. And it’s a weekend/holiday GO, which means, lots of tourism and shopping. Weekends with this convoluted service rerouting is when people should just stay home or avoid the subway if at all possible - trains just for essential workers and just drive / bike / walk everywhere

Many of the work rules make a more practical plan simply impossible.

But if we were to think it through, in the hypothetical:

First, I would think (hope) the 15 TPH rule would be suspended during such a wide ranging GO.  The available work crews would still create an average 15 TPH per line, but obviously where reorutes force new service pattern, we will see more service on such lines.

  will all share the Broadway local tracks.  will use the Bridge in Uptown direction, with    on the bridge southbound and  through Montague downtown.  will be extended to Jamaica Center.

 Suspended.

 suspended.   speical service from 207th to Coney Island will replace  on CPW and in Brooklyn.

 will begin at 96th (replacing service on 2nd Ave) merge in with  tracks along 63rd and follow  routing until W4th, and then continue on its normal routings (local in Brooklyn) to Lefferts and Far Rockaway.

 suspended, with service replaced by increased and  service.

So in Midtown, we are left with:   on Broadway local, on 6th Ave local and  on 6th Ave express.  Not great, but IMO better than all the criss-crossing that is going on with the official plans.