mrsman

Another idea. Maintaining a Broadway connection to QBL, Full deinterlining of CPW, and keeping everything else as separate as much as possible. Doing so would keep the QBL routes largely identical to what they are today as they enter Manhattan from Queens, but then a few adjustments, as follows: Inwood-207 St to Rockaways/Lefferts Blvd [CPW/8 Av Express, via Cranberry St, Fulton St Express] 168th St to Coney Island [CPW Local, 6 Av Express, via Manhattan Bridge, 4 Av Express, Sea Beach Local] Norwood-205 St to Euclid Av [Concourse Express, CPW/8 Av Express, via Cranberry St, Fulton St Local] Bedford Park Blvd/145 St to Bay Ridge-95 St [Concourse Local, CPW Local, 6 Av Express, via Manhattan Bridge, 4 Av Express/Local] Jamaica-179 St to Coney Island [QBL Express, via 53 St, 8 Av Local, W4 switch, via Rutgers St, Culver Local] Jamaica Center to WTC [QBL Express, via 63 St, 6 Av Local, W 4 switch to lower 6 Av] [M] Forest Hills-71 Av to Metropolitan Av [QBL local, via 53 St, 8 Av local, W 4 switch, via Brooklyn-Broadway Local, Myrtle Ave Local] 96St- 2 Av to Coney Island [2 Av Local, Broadway Express, via Manhattan Bridge, Brighton Local] 96 St - 2 Av to Brighton Beach [2 Av Local, Broadway Express, via Manhattan Bridge, Brighton Express] Forest Hills-71 Av to City Hall [QBL Local, via 60 St, Broadway Local] Astoria-Ditmars Blvd to Coney Island [Astoria Local, via 60 St, Broadway Local, via Montague St, 4 Av Local, West End Local] Here, AC stay together from 145th through the 8th Ave express, Cranberry Tunnel to Hoyt-Schermerhorn. BD stays together from 145th to 36th in Brooklyn. The QBL routes are largely how they are now from back in Queens to Manhattan. Then, and [M} stay together from west of Queens Plaza to the 8th Ave local and W4 switch to then reach Culver and Myrtle. This avoids all manner of merging in the area of 53rd/6th. is by itself on 63rd and by itself on the 6th Ave local ending at WTC. Q,R, and W are largely how Vulturious had them, although if demand requires, could extend into Brooklyn to 9th Ave or Bay Parkway. We still separate Broadway expresses from Broadway locals, even while maintaining a QBL connection to the Broadway local in the form of an R train.

It is actaully quite a good idea. If you compare the above to the current service patterns there are many merges that are eliminated, while not drastically changing too many commutes. Untangle Broadway by having all expresses to 2nd Ave and all locals to 60th. Untangle DeKalb by following the Vanshnook plan. Untangle the current EM and EF merges in LIC, maintaining the EM merge at 6th/53rd as the new EF merge. Introduce a new BD merge at 6th/53rd, but removing the current FM merge. What is nice about this and what should be clearly mentioned is that your proposed BD merge is independent of your EF merge, even though they are near each other. The current system has the EM and FM merges that actually conflict greatly with each other. In your plan, at least every train that merges with another runs alone for at least a few blocks, making the merges far less delay-prone. Untangle merges on the CPW express. The current BC merge at 59th is maintained with DM and the current CE merge at 50th is maintained with EM. So at Columbus Circle area, the expresses are untangled, but the locals still merge in a similar pattern to the current system. This is a partial deinterlining of CPW. Untangle the merge at Canal on the 8th Ave line: All expresses (AC) continue to Cranberry and the local F terminates at WTC. Maintain QBL express service to both 8th and 6th and maintain QBL local service to both Broadway and 6th. Maintain CPW local service to both 8th and 6th. CPW express no longer connects directly with 6th, but a transfer is available at 59th. Introduce a 6th Ave service into Lower Manhattan (F to WTC). Introduce 8th Ave service into Coney Island (E to Culver). Straighten out the M routing from a backward "C" shape to more of a "J". This is better because very few passengers will backtrack and while there aren't many M riders who continue north of Midtown, far more are likely going to upper west side then heading back to Queens.

The above discussion has led me to the following idea: 96th/2nd - Broadway express - Brighton local 96th/2nd - Broadway express - Brighton express Astoria - 60th - Broadway local - 4 Av local (north of 36th) - West End JC - QBL express - 63rd - 6 Av express - 4 Av express - Sea Beach 168th - CPW local - 6 Av express - 4 Av express - 4 Av local (south of 36th via new switch) - Bay Ridge 179 - QBL express - 63rd - 6 Av local - W4 switch - WTC 207 - CPW express - 8 Av express - Cranberry Tunnel - Fulton local to Euclid Concourse trains - CPW express - 8 Av express - Cranberry Tunnel - Fulton express to Lefferts/ Far Rockaway Forest Hills - QBL local - 53rd - 8 Av local - W4 switch - Culver BLUE M Forest Hills - QBL local - 53rd- 8 Av local - W4 switch - Williamsburg Bridge - Myrtle The attempt here is to separate Broadway trains from QBL. Then have all of the QBL expresses use 63rd and all of the locals use 53rd. [The reason for this is to provide that any passenger from QBL local stops west of Jackson Heights can get to LIC without having to backtrack through Manhattan. Any QBL express passenger heading to LIC can transfer to a local at Roosevelt.] If the expresses are using 63rd, I want to be sure that none of the QBL expresses would be limited in car length, so none of those trains will go to Myrlte Ave. Instead, B will merge with D as 6th Ave expresses headed to south Brooklyn and F will remain as the 6th Ave local to WTC. The QBL local trains will run on the 8th Ave local and the W4 switches to provide access to either Culver or Myrtle routes. As QBL is very busy, it will have 4 services: BF express and EM local. Given the other constraints, if I insist that none of my QBL trains heads down Broadway (which I do) that would mean that only 3 services can service CPW. AC express and D local. This restriction willl allow B and D to merge in front of Rockefeller Center while not overloading WTC or creating a merge of trains in the Canal St area on the 8th Ave line. C will serve as the Inwood-CPW express and D will serve as the 168-CPW local. The A train, as is the case now, will be a dual aspect train. As in the current case there will be many A trains, some running to Lefferts and some running to the Rockaways. (I'll step aside from the topic of whether Lefferts trains deserve a separate designation from Rockaway trains). All A trains will run express along 8th Ave and CPW and will head to the Bronx. There is still the possibiliy of running both express and local service along Grand Concourse during rush hours, but the key is that all Concourse trains (independent of how they run in the Bronx) will connect directly to the CPW express and not the local. The A train will be even longer than before and will run in four boroughs.

It is true that given the constraints of the existing system and limited budgets, deinterlining can only get us so far. Some untangling is necessary to control the merging delays, but deciding where to do the untangling is key. Vulturious, I am trying to see if I understand what your plans are for Broadway, 6th, and 8th based on your previous post. Please correct me if I lay this out incorrectly: 96th/2nd - Broadway express - Brighton local 96th/2nd - Broadway express - Brighton express Astoria - 60th - Broadway local - 4 Av local (north of 36th) - West End Forest Hills - QBL local - 60th - Broadway local - City Hall Forest Hills - QBL local - 63rd - 6 Av express - 4 Av express - Sea Beach BPB (or 145th) - Concourse/CPW local - 6 Av express - 4 Av express - 4 Av local (south of 36th via new switch) - Bay Ridge 179 - QBL express - 53rd - 6 Av local - Culver 207 - CPW express - 8 Av express - Cranberry Tunnel - Fulton express to Lefferts or Rockaways 205 - Concourse/CPW express - 8 Av express - Cranberry Tunnel - Fulton local to Euclid JC - QBL express - 53rd - 8 Av local - WTC BLUE M 168th - CPW local - 8 Av local - W4 switch - Williamsburg Bridge - Myrtle There are a few things I like about this and a few that I don't. The service in south Brooklyn is very clean by utilizing the Vanschnook plan to deinterline DeKalb. is fully deinterlined. A and C should run relatively smoothly as well. There is no longer merging between A and C around Canal. Some of the and interference with M can be alleviated if the two trains switch their southern terminals. Having F serve WTC and E serve Culver would mean that there would be no merging going on at W4th, just switching each line's traditional southern section. * We aren't really doing much to improve QBL. That being said, it is difficult to untangle QBL given how it affects the rest of the system. Almost every configuration will have some merging in the 6th/53rd area, but this seems to alleviate it to a degree, since we no longer have M southbound merging with F as it diverges from E (and vice versa northbound). Instead, E and F merge together, while trains from 63rd are running in the 6th Ave express tracks instead of the local. Doing this may justify not fully deinterlining CPW at 59th. It may overall work better, if we are stuck with a constraint of having QBL expresses serving both 6th and 8th. All in all, this seems to be a good effort, and is certainly better for the system overall than the current configuration. * E and F are largely interchangeable in many ways. If you do use the W4 switches for M service, then the other 6th and 8th locals will also have to use the switches to prevent entanglements. F: 179 - 6th - WTC paired with E: JC - 8th - Culver OR E: 179 - 8th - Culver paired with F: JC - 6th - WTC. If the nomenclature of F to culver and E to WTC is important, you can run blue F's and orange E's to make it fit.

Yes. It is simple because it works. Implelmenting one of the above will eliminate the merges that occur on 59th. It is a fairly easy service to implement and can still provide significant travel improvements, without adjusting travel patterns too much. Assuming that nothing else changes on the B division, either of thses plans would work fine. For my own plans, I prefer BD express and AC local because it works better with my plans for Queens Blvd. But if you don't make adjustments at other parts of the system, here are the pros and cons that I have discovered: For Deinterlining generally (either plan): PRO: Smoother service patterns PRO: Fewer delays due to merging PRO: More ability to fully utilize the subway line's capacity CON: More transferring and/or walking by passengers to get to their destination CON: Passengers at express stations along the CPW trunk (125 and 145) would have a choice of either 8th or 6th express, but not both CON: Passengers at stations along the CPW trunk (between 145 and 59) would have a choice of either 8th or 6th local, but not both Furthermore, when evaluating between 1) AC exp and BD local vs. 2) AC local and BD exp, keep in mind that going with #1 will prevent AC access to 50th street, but will provide almost no other changes to other lines. E can more or less run in the exact same way. #2 will force E to be the 8th Ave express, but it does have access to 50th on the lower level. #2 will also allow for a local train to run on both CPW and 8th Ave, effectively the same street. But is important to keep in mind that once you've picked between #1 and #2, you have to stick with it. Other than late night service and GOs, it would not make sense to have a general pattern of 8th Ave express and 6th Ave local and then add in a new train that is either a 6th express or 8th local (or both). Doing that is not deinterlining. It basically reinforces the existing pattern, with perhaps a small change in the nomenclature. North of 145th, the existing pattern that each branch (Inwood, Concourse) has of one local and one express works very well. While it does induce some merging on the switches at 145th, a careful examination of the switches there will indicate that there will be less merging than at 59th. This is because the Concourse line that is 3-track merges in with local to local and express to express. The only interference occurs in the reverse peak, where both the Concourse-CPW express and the Concourse-CPW local will share the same track along Grand Concourse. Since it is only a problem in the reverse peak, it simply does not afffect that many people or trains.

The situation on Broadway really speaks to the needs for at least a minimal amount of deinterlining. The impacts there are the most severe and the changes to the general structure of the ridership pattern, the least effected. 96th/2nd - Broadway express - Brighton local 96th/2nd - Broadway express - 4th Ave express - Sea Beach Forest Hills - QBL local- Broadway local - 4th Ave local - Bay Ridge Astoria - Broadway local- Whitehall A pattern like the above would eliminate merging between local and exp tracks. The number of trains allocated to each line may need to be slightly adjusted in order to make this work. It would seem that some of the trains should become trains so as not to overload 96th/2. At the same time, some of the trains should become trains to provide enough service for the Astoria line. Of course, deinterlining would open up more capacity on all the lines, so a service increase on all Broadway services would be welcome, but if the service allocation is to be "revenue neutral", then overall fewer Q's and more W's would tend to be an effecive rebalancing to provide enough service to all the lines. It would be an overall increase on 2nd Ave, a slight decrease on the Broadway express, an increase on the Broadway local, and a slight decrease in Brighton local service. Yes, 49th is an important stop. 49th would still be full reachable by Q or N trains with a cross platform transfer to a R or W. Under the above plan, every train from Astoria will stop at 49th.

THe current plans for 125th street will not significantly pull riders from 456 or Metro-North to be worth its while. I agree. But I do beleive there is some value to having a 125th street crosstown that hopefully extends to St Nicholas or even Broadway. If the bend at 125th is a first step towards that, then it is valuable. A routing like this can provide a one-transfer access between the Upper East Side and all of the Bronx that isn't served by 4,5,6 But I also agree that there is far more worth in continuing north into the Bronx. Ideally, SAS will split between Bronx and 125th. IMO, A Bronx extension does the most good if it takes over the routing of the 3rd Ave el. It will have transfer opportunities to , , and . I would like to see a 3rd Ave routing contiune until at least Fordham, for access to Metro North and Fordham University. At that point, perhaps the subway can travel east and then tie in to the Dyre Ave line. Whether such a service can pull off passengers from 4,5,6 is somewhat speculative, but at least a routing like this will have enough of its own ridership to be justified.

The OP's plan isn't really a CPW deinterline. While it provides that all CPW express stay on 8th Ave express, the CPW locals are split between 8th Ave local and 6th Ave express. If such a plan were operated, you are necessarily limiting the amount of trains that can run on the 6th Ave express in midtown, essentially leaving a blank space in the midtown service that is filled by trains further uptown. Not ideal. I agree with paulrivera, that the key to a successful re-arranging of the CPW trains is ensuring that both the Washington Heights side and the Concourse side both have some level of CPW express and CPW local. It can run in similar operating pattern as today, except that we are going to avoid having the trains criss-cross at 59th. So we have four services: 1) 207 St - CPW express 2) 205 St - Concourse - CPW express. Rush hour Concourse express. 3) 168 St - CPW local 4) Bedford Park Blvd Concourse local (rush hour) OR 145th (other times) - CPW local For a good part of history, the service pattern was: 1= , 2 = , 3 = , and 4 = [service pattern 1]. The current service pattern is 1= , 2 = , 3 = , and 4 = [service pattern 2]. A de-interlined service pattern would have 1&2 being the same color and 3&4 being the other color. CPW express to 8th Ave would provide: 1= , 2 = , 3 = , and 4 = [service pattern 3]. CPW express to 6th Ave would provide: 1= , 2 = , 3 = , and 4 = [service pattern 4]. Now, if you are still interested in deinterlining, your choice is between service pattern 3 and 4. To determine which is better, you may have to look at some of your other goals and figuring out what else you desire to accomplish on the other IND lines. A good part of the analysis will involve operations, and yes, rider preferences. My preference is service pattern 4, CPW expresses to 6th and CPW locals to 8th. As T to Dyre Ave mentioned, there is definitely a preference to keep CPW locals as 8th Ave locals since CPW is the same street as 8th Ave. Another factor is that when you do this, you force trains from Queens as being an 8th Ave express. When this happens, trains can still stop at 50th/8th, given the track configuration and and will also stop there since both are local. (If and were both express, then both trains will skip 50th, which is generally not desirable.) One key point to look at is what you want to accomplish south of Canal on the 8th Ave line. Currently, some 8th Ave locals terminate at WTC and some merge in with the 8th Ave expresses to continue in the Cranberry tunnel. In order to maintain this service pattern, you cannot run more than 20 TPH on the 8th Ave express. If you do, then you are limited to not running more than 20 TPH on the local tracks, so that all of the local trains can terminate at WTC. My deinterlining plan has QBL expresses running at 30 TPH on the local tracks approaching Canal, so I must limit the express tracks to 20 TPH, so that some of my locals can merge into the Cranberry tunnel. I accomplish this by running a solitary train on the 8th Ave express, which is also a QBL local originating in Forest Hills, which is also limited to 20 TPH. I would not be able to run the entire CPW express here, because there is no way that I can limit the combination of A and C, if both are running as the CPW express, to 20TPH. For a more complete look at my plan, see the top post on page 7 of the deinterlining thread: https://www.nyctransitforums.com/topic/51985-de-interlining-problem-or-solution/page/7/#comments One final word about the Fulton express service. As others mentioned, while there is desirability in designating a difference between trains to the Rockaways and trains to Lefferts, especially to clarify the service pattern for unfamiliar riders who may be headed to JFK or the beaches, one has to view the Fulton express as being one line. Currently, we have the to Rockaway and the to Lefferts. If we were to redesigante the Lefferts service as , we have to be sure that we are simply redesignating a portion of the existing service, not creating a whole new line. For all intents and purposes, and should be identical north of Rockaway Blvd and should be viewed as one line in terms of assigning trains and the like. It may be easier to view it as A1 and A2, with a full A train north of Rockaway Blvd.

As part of the way of bringing the discussion full circle, we remember that one of the benefits of the Montague tunnel closing was that it allowed for a more reliable 4th Ave local, because that train did not go into Manhattan and was not subject to all the merge delays along the Broadway local line. Among the ways that we can theorize to maintain this reliability (while keeping Montague tunnel open) is by seaparating the locals from Queens (Astoria and/or Queens Blvd) and terminating them at Whitehall or City Hall, while bringing the 4th Ave locals onto the Nassau tracks and re-introducing the Banker's specials type service. Another possibility is just to remove all of the delaying merges along the Broadway local as part of a larger deinterlining scheme. Astoria trains (and only Astoria trains as QBL trains will no longer be part of the Broadway local) will run down the Broadway local, continuing through the Montague tunnel and the 4th Ave local in Brooklyn. What happens next is largely dependent on how important yard access for Astoria trains are. You could run an Astoria-Bay Ridge local train, that was run in some form by BMT or MTA for many years prior to 1987 and then utilize Coney Island through a mere with either Sea Beach or West End when the trains are out-of-service. You could run an Astoria-Bay Ridge or Sea Beach train service, connecting the Broadway local to both services and running down Sea Beach when a train needs to access CI yard. Finally, with the addition of a track switch south of 36th in Brooklyn, you could run Astoria-West End train service via Broadway and 4th Ave locals allowing the Astoria trains full access to CI (and Bay Ridge trains full access to the Concourse yard)

To the extent that a dedicated yard is needed for the Astoria line, the vanschnookenraggen plan of routing Astoria-Broadway local- West End is great because that train that is envisioned is completely separated from other trains. This means it will be more reliable. It is true that West End customers will lose out on express service, but their overall travel time will be reduced due to the increased frequency of train on the West End line, even factoring in a transfer at 36th. However, if a dedicated yard is not needed, perhaps the MTA can run an Astoria-Broadway local- Bay Ridge service like what was done prior to 1987. If this were done, in-service would still be separated from other trains, but will need to merge with either West End or Sea Beach (most likely) out of service for access to CI yard. At this point, one can leave alone, but suffering delays around DeKalb, or deinterline those lines so that service Brighton and sevice 4th Ave express (or vice versa). To further increase train frequencies, and would both run up 2nd Ave, so that they don't interfere with services.

Does anyone know how OMNY cards treat "walking transfers." In the Metrocard era, you can transfer for free between 59/Lex and 63/Lex. Technically, you can swipe in at any station in the system and so long as you swipe in to either 59/Lex or 63/Lex within 2 hours, you can continue your journey for free. But the problem with this is that the free transfer used here will remove your ability to transfer for free to a bus at the conclusion of your trip. As many people use this to make a non-existent transfer from to and take the to Queens and then continue on a bus to Eastern Queens, this negatively affects a lot of people. So does anyone know if OMNY has fixed the problem, allowing people to make the walking transfer between 59 and 63 while preserving your right to transfer to a bus at the conclusion of your trip, so long as your bus swipe is within 2 hours of your first swipe?

If any are interested in seeing my plan, I posted a basic outline of it on 8/11/2021 at the top of page 7 of the "De-interlining problem or solution" thread. https://www.nyctransitforums.com/topic/51985-de-interlining-problem-or-solution/page/7/#comments My plan is basically the same as posted there, with a few changes of designation: What I labelled in that thread is now a blue-M, since it serves Myrtle. The mentioned in the other thread will have Far Rockaway trains labelled as and Lefferts trains labelled as . Aside from this, and are identical in the new plan. What I labelled in that thread, is now my orange-K that I explained above. Orange-H in that thread is now to be referred to as in the new plan. I made this change to keep along 179th, since that is more familiar. I dump the Brown-K and continue to refer to that as . Even though it is a pet peeve, is more familiar as the skip-stop alternate, leaving K for the new 6th Ave service. For any comments on the general operation of the plan, please refer to the plan in the de-interling thread and make comments in that thread. The new designations break the "purist" lettering scheme that I had on 8/11/21, but it preserves H on the Rockaway Park shuttle and also preserves to 179th and M to Metropolitan Ave.

The Rockaway Park shuttle should actually just simply be redesignated as the . Both internally and on signs, maps, and the like. The 42nd shuttle can be redesignated as a purple 8. Yes, not the trackage of but essentially follows the same routing connecting two of its major stations. This will leave the Franklin Ave shuttle as the sole train. Part of my deinterlining plans provide for 4 services along 8th Ave: &M as the locals, & as express 4 services along 6the Ave: & K as the locals, and & as the express 3 services along Broadway: as local, and as express. WIthout getting into too many details of the reroutes of all of the above, the new letter Orange-K is a service that starts at Jamaica Center in Queens, runs express from Union Turnpike to Queensbridge, goes over the 63rd street tunnel, runs local along 6th Ave, then switches south of W4th to what are now the 8th Ave local tracks (but running under 6th and Church) and ending at WTC. It is quite similar to today's , except that it runs along 6th Ave and the 63rd street tunnel. Since I have 4 8th Ave services, I need a new letter for one of the services. I use M, since I route an 8th Ave local through the W4th switches to the Williamsburg Bridge and then to Myrtle, so it seems appropriate to call this an M train, since it still follows the M routing south of W4. But pushing the M to 8th Ave would mean that I need a new designation for my 4th 6th Ave service, so I bring back the K. [It is a deinterlining plan making heavy use of the W4th switches. 6th Ave locals head to WTC or Fulton. 8th Ave locals head east on Houston to Culver or Myrtle lines.] The letters that I use in my plans: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M, N, Q, R, S , Z. The new routings are the H as the current Rockaway Park shuttle and the K as described above. Most of the letter routes do something different, but run along part of their traditional routings. G, J, L, Q, S, and Z are unchanged from today's pattern.

Let me see, if I understand, your plan: R from Canal to Bay Ridge via Nassau and Montague tunnel and 4th Ave local from Forest Hills via QBL local and Broadway local to Montague tunnel continuing as a Brighton express from Astoria swtiching onto the Broadway express north of 57th and continuing as a 4th Ave express onto Sea Beach. from 2/96 along Broadway express continuing as a Brighton local from Bronx/Upper Manhattan along 6th Ave express to 4th Ave express and then transferring to service Bay Ridge from Bronx along 6th Ave express to 4th Ave express servicing West End There certainly appears to be a lot of mixing going on in the above scheme. Also, it seems that too many train services are serving the 4th Ave express. So far, it seems that the vanshnookenraggen plan appears to be the best method of addressing the situation in South Brooklyn. Broadway locals are separated from Broadway express and are separated from 6th Ave expresses very cleanly. The only downside appears to be that West End will lose their express service, but this can be addressed with the increased overall service, which lowers overall travel time. At the same time, for purposes of this thread, I really want to entertain the possibility of a Nassau-Bay Ridge service and then seeing where everything else ends up. (Y) I will call the service Brown-Y, for lack of a better name, and it will run from Canal to Bay Ridge via Nassau and Montague tunnel along the 4th Ave local. from Forest Hills via QBL local and Broadway local to Whitehall from Astoria via Broadway local and Montague tunnel to 4th Ave local, continuing as service on the Sea Beach line and will be 6th Ave expresses and will service the Brighton line, one line express and one line local. will start at 96th/2nd and run along the Broadway express and over the bridge servicing the 4th Ave express to West End. The 6th Ave lines (assuming that CPW is also deinterlined) will have no interference with any other line. As such, and can run at full capacity. is also fully separated and will run also run at very high capacity. But both Sea Beach and Bay Ridge passengers will all transfer at 36th for express service, if desired. Under the above scenario, it is Sea Beach passengers who will lose their direct express service as opposed to the West End passengers. But the above scenario does produce a very frequent 4th Ave local service between Montague tunnel and 59th street serviced by the combination of and Y trains. It will provide bettter access to all of Lower Manhattan for many passengers in south Brooklyn, often with only a single cross-platform transfer. Most importantly, Broadway in Manhattan is deinterlined as no trains will shift between local and express tracks there.

What were the plans for the Canal Street crosstown? I imagine that to the east, the line would connect into the Manhattan Bridge [as they did before 1967 connecting with the north tracks of the bridge], but where would the line go to the west of Broadway?

An amazing analysis. Thank you. If an express train were possible to run from Broadway Junction to Marcy, then it is worthwhile keeping, but the existing configuration of only skipping the three stops between Marcy and Myrtle does not seem to make any sense. This would be even more pointed if they ever made a connection between one of those stops and . At the very least, MTA should put forth an OMNY connection to to allow a similar free transfer to what exists at 59th/Lex - 63rd/Lex.

I like the way they did the reading of these lines. Even though many of us would group the lines by how they are run ACE-BDFM, for the general public it is easier to read the trains in alphabetical order. Does anyone know if the transfer from Lex-63 to Lex-59 is treated as a system transfer? What I mean by that is that I know that you will need an OMNY card to make this a free transfer, but back in the Metrocard days, this was only a free transfer if you did not need another transfer. In the Metrocard days, you could enter the system at any station, ride the train to Lex-59, exit and walk to Lex-63, re-enter the system for free and ride the to Queens. However, once in Queens, you could not transfer to a bus for free, as you have already used your free transfer from Lex-59 to Lex-63. A personal wishlist of mine would be that any of these walking transfers that the MTA proposes would be a true transfer and that the transfer made from Lex-59 to Lex-63 would not count against you with regard to bus transfers. So does anyone know if a person were to use OMNY to make the Lex-59 to Lex-63 transfer, would they still preserve their free bus transfer?

This actually seems to be pretty good. In some ways, this is almost a re-creation of the old service pattern with <M> to Bay Parkway and to 95th, except that you are switching the terminals. So a Brown-R train from Chambers to 95th and a train from Astoria to Bay Parkway. If that is the case, will there also be a service from QBL local to Broadway or not? Would be the only train on the Broadway local? What would service the Queens Blvd local?

Could someone explain what connections are to be helped by this new transfer? To me, it seems like many of the connections that can be made through this passageway were already possible at other stations like Herald Square, Columbus Circle, and 14 St - 6 Av.

I agree with this as well. For the most part, unless you ride beyond Rockaway Blvd, and will be identical. Kind of like how and are identical for riders between 135 St and Franklin Ave. You simply take the train that comes first, as either train will do unless you are going north of 135 or south of Franklin. The ease of confusion is especially helpful for passengers heading to JFK via Howard Beach. Under the above proposal, all trains will get you toward the airport. And I am a little sensitive that a significant number of people taking the subway to the airport may not be regular customers of the system, so it is especially important not to confuse them and get airport passengers lost in Ozone Park. It is true that this change will still leave some parts of the system with split destinations: to Far Rockaway and <A> to Rockaway Park, to Dyre or to Nereid, the occasional to New Lots, to Jamaica Center or <E> to 179 (any others that are run regularly?). But as those are so much less frequent and don't generally involve an important destination as JFK, I am willing to let those stay as they are generally only relevant to a small percentage of end-of-the-line riders.

Can the above plan be implemented with the addition of SAS phases 3 and 4? Yes, with the following changes: A deinterlined SAS route along 2nd Ave that will continue south of 63rd street along the plans promulgated by MTA to Hanover Square.* If the line branches on the north side, you can have two routes: T and V, one route heading west on 125th and one route going further to the Bronx. Both routes will run the full SAS from 116th to Hanover Square. A deinterlined SAS means that the Broadway express trains will no longer serve SAS. SAS will be solely served by T and V trains. The capacity of the SAS line will be limited to T and V, there will simply be no more room for NQ trains along the SAS. To ease transfers, a connection should be made between 63/Lex and 59/Lex. Further, transfer connections from 55/2nd should be made to 59/Lex and 53/Lex stations. So while a walking transfer from 63/Lex to 55/2 is possible, it is undoubtedly a long transfer. If there are any SAS passengers that want to transfer to subways that serve the west side, they can transfer to transfer to and trains (to be discussed later) along 53rd street to the 8th Ave express or to the along 60th street to the Broadway locals. So if trains will no longer go to SAS, where will they go? For this we will do some process of elimination: [and V] , as mentioned above, will run along the full length SAS, which will displace the northern routing of N and Q under my earlier plan. and will be rerouted along 63rd street to take over the QBL express line. from Jamaica Center, along QBL express, to 63rd street line, Broadway express to Brighton local. 24 hours. from 179th, with service as a Hillside express, QBL express, to 63rd street line, Broadway express to Brighton express. N service only on weekdays. This change will displace the northern routing of F and orange-H under my earlier plan. will be rerouted as a 6th Ave local that serves Manhattan only. It will be run from 57/6, down the 6th Ave local, utilize the W4 switches and terminate at WTC. This train will only operate on weekdays. The platforms at 57/6 and WTC will not see any trains at nights or weekends. [57/6 station will be closed late nights and weekends.] Switches should be provided along the route to ensure that can terminate at 57th and that the parallel express trains can serve the local stops at times when the isn't running. This means and will service 23rd and 14th and that and will serve Spring when isn't running. Orange-H will no longer be serviced when is in operation, it will be replaced by . service can be supplemented with service. The changes to the 6th Ave local mentioned in the previous paragraph mean that there are now fewer trains servicing the tracks that approach WTC and the Cranberry tunnel. The earlier plan had E on the express into Cranberry tunnel, F on the local to the WTC, and H on the local merging in with the E toward Cranberry tunnel. The changes to 6th Ave local service will mean that we can put more service on the 8th Ave express and avoid the Canal merge. So and can both serve as QBL locals that start at 179th, service all of the Hillside stops and QBL local stops and run through the 53rd street tunnel to the 8th Ave express. The trains will continue into the Cranberry tunnel with trains serving as Fulton express to Lefferts or Far Rockaway (and a small number of rush hour trains to Rockaway Park) and serving as the Fulton local terminating at Euclid. is 24 hours and will not operate late nights. E will serve the Fulton local stations when H isn't running. It should be noted that the increase in service now contemplated for the QBL local/ 8th Ave express line will mean that we can no longer have all QBL locals stop at Forest Hills. So, the QBL locals should start at 179th, or alternatively if a new branch to Rockaway or along the LIE is proposed, then half of the QBL locals can be directed to the new branch. All other service metioned in my previous post will be the same. * If T [and V] service is directed into the Nassau line, instead of Hanover Square, all of the above would still apply, with the following additional changes: A reverse branch will be introduced in the Montague tunnel. This means that some trains will terminate in Lower Manhattan (City Hall or Whitehall) and only some will continue into Brooklyn along the 4th Ave local and the West End line. Some of the SAS trains will terminate in Lower Manhattan (likely at Broad St) and some SAS trains will continue into Brooklyn along the 4th Ave local and the West End line. Routing in this way will mean that at least some of the SAS trains will serve transfer heavy stops like Court St - Boro Hall, Jay St, DeKalb, and Atlantic and have access to the CI yards.

I largely agree. Nearly all of my deinterlining proposals have solely involved the B division. IRT is already partially deinterlined, and do not interfere with any other lines. In the Bronx side, I view the 149th Concourse station in a similar manner to Delancey/Essex. If one wanted perfect deinterlining, you would run along 149th and along Jerome, but that will definitely force a ton of people to make the transfer as there are significant number of White Plains Rd and Dyre customers that want to go to the East Side. So the current is a good service to account for that. The West Side and the East Side IRT lines are far apart from each other for nearly all of their run in Manhattan that they are not really interchangeable. (In contrast, deinterlining plans for BMT in Brooklyn largely do work because teh Broadway BMT and 6th Ave IND do run within one avenue of each other through most of Midtown.) Similar to the situation in the Bronx, a perfect deinterlining will send M to the Nassau line and increase 6th Ave local service to the Rutgers tunnel, but that will force a ton of people to make the transfer at Delancey/Essex since many of the JMZ riders want Midtown, so the current is a good service to account for that and minimize the transferring at Delancy/Essex. Many B division deinterlining plans retain M service to Midtown (in some manner) including my most recent plan above that makes the connection as a service. So basically, I am happy to live with the current service and teh current service even though it amounts to a parital interlining. For the Brooklyn side of the IRT, the layout of the tracks is such that deinterlining there is probably more feasible than in the Bronx. But it will certainly require significant capital investment. (For the most part, my plans are deinterliining on the cheap with the only capital expenses considered are an increase in free transfers like 63/Lex-59/Lex, Grand-Bowery, Broadway/Laffayette-Prince and the addition of switches on the 4th Ave line south of 36th.) If the capital improvements were made, I would be in favor of sending all to Flatbush, all to New Lots, all to Utica, and all to Rockaway Ave (utilizing the yard leads near Junius to reverse trains). will reverse branch with somewhere east of teh point where splits off the line towards Nostrand Ave. This would require fixing the at-grade junction and the additon of a pair of switches.

^^^^^ The last M mentioned above should be M in parethesis, not

I thought of a new de-interlining plan. This plan will make extensive use of the switches south of West 4th, that allows 8th Ave locals to transition onto the local tracks under Houston and the 6th Ave locals to transition onto the local tracks under 6th Ave towards Church Street, in the direction of WTC and the Cranberry tunnel. If one looked closely, if 8th Ave locals transition onto Houston local, and 6th Ave locals transition onto southern 6th Ave, there would be no interference between any of the 8th and 6th trains, even though there is a significant re-routing. I believe something like this could better separate the existing B division trains from each other and avoiding the usual problems of running M express or having the QBL locals skip Queens Plaza that affect other de-interlining plans. It can also avoid (or at least delay) the need for extending the platforms along the BMT eastern division. CPW local -8th Ave local - Culver. For most of the day, will run from 168th Street down CPW and 8th Ave as a local train. It will then utilize the W4 switches to run under Houston and Essex to continue as the Culver line toward CI. When doesn't operate in Manhattan, service on A is extended to 207 St Inwood. CPW local -8th Ave local - Myrtle. During rush hours, will operate as the Concourse local emanating from Bedford Park Blvd. Most other times, will emanate from 145th Street. It will travel down CPW and 8th Ave as a local train. It will then utilize the W4 switches to run under Houston and then follow the route of the current M train along the Williamsburg Bridge to Broadway Brooklyn and Myrtle Ave to end at the Metropolitan Ave station. Late nights, is a shuttle along the Myrtle el. QBL local - 8th Ave express - Fulton express. From Forest Hills, will serve as the sole QBL local train and travel through the 53rd street tunnel and then along the 8th Ave express tracks. From 42nd southward, operates in a similar manner to today's A train by running for most of the day as the Fulton express and sending about half the trains to Lefferts and half the trains to Far Rockaway and a few occasional rush hour trains to Rockaway Park. During late night hours, will run local along Fulton, and service on QBL local will be extended to 179th. CPW express - 6th express - Sea Beach. For most of the day, will run from 207th street as the CPW express and 6th Ave express and follow the tracks onto the Manhattan Bridge, continuing onto the 4th Ave express. will then follow the Sea Beach line to Coney Island. Late nights, will serve as a Sea Beach shuttle from 36 St to Coney Island. CPW express - 6th express - Bay Ridge. will operate from 205th street Norwood as the CPW express and 6th Ave express. During rush hours, will provide directional express service along Grand Concourse. will follow the 6th Ave express tracks onto the Manhattan Bridge, continuing onto the 4th Ave express. South of 36th, new switches will connect 4th Ave express to the local tracks so that can serve every station along 4th Ave between 36th and 95th. Other than rush hour express in the Bronx, will operate the same service throughout the day, although less frequently during late night hours. Bay Ridge trains will have access to the Concourse Yard. QBL express - 6th local - WTC. will opearate from Jamaica Center as a QBL express and travel throught the 63rd street tunnel and then along the 6th Ave local tracks. It will then utilize the W4 switches to run under 6th Ave to service Spring and Canal and terminate at the WTC. This is a 24 hour service. QBL express - 6th local - Fulton local. will operate from 179th and service all stops between 179th and 75th Ave. At that point, it will merge with in the express tracks and travel throught the 63rd street tunnel and then along the 6th Ave local tracks. It will then utilize the W4 switches to run under 6th Ave to service Spring and Canal and then it will merge in with the tracks to run through the Cranberry tunnel and become the Fulton local that terminates at Euclid. will not operate late nights. South of the W4 switches, my version of the , , and trains will operate very similar manner to today's , , and trains, respectively - utilizing the Canal merge and running a similar service pattern along the Fulton line. Unchanged. Unchanged. A personal preference would replace Z with K-brown as a means of keeping the letter scheme more orderly. Unchanged. 2nd Ave / 96th - Broadway express - Brighton line to Coney Island. This is unchanged from today's service and will operate 24 hours. 2nd Ave / 96th - Broadway express - Brighton express. Identical to the current except that will operate as an express along the Brighton line and terminate at Brighton Beach. Could also be demarcated as a service, if deisred. No service late nights or weekends. [If SAS is extended north and branches in some manner (like one service to 125th street and one service up 3rd Ave to the Bronx), then having both a and a as separate designations would be necessary.] Astoria - Broadway local - West End. Trains from Astoria will utilize the 60th street tunnel and run along the Broadway local to the Montague tunnel and then service the 4th Ave local and continue along the West End line to Coney Island. 24 hour service. Astoria trains will have access to the CI yard. My current designation scheme leaves M, P, and every letter beyond S as open. M and P, ideally, can be used for additional BMT service (like new branches off the Broadway line) and any letter beyond S should be used for newer services like SAS into Midtown and Downtown or other future service patterns that are not along existing trunk lines. The letter demarcation tries to re-create the original IND lettering scheme, while trying to maintain modern demarcations as much as practical. I.e. making the alpahabetical scheme make sense: - IND trains emanating from Washington Heights/Inwood - IND trains emanating from the Bronx (Concourse) - IND trains emanating from Queens JKL - BMT Eastern Division - currently undesignated in my plan, but should be used either for BMT eastern division or BMT Broadway line - BMT Broadway line. is currently undesignated in my plan. - shuttles TUVWXYZ - SAS and other future services

I agree. That's why I said above that I prefer the Nassau tie-in. It will make all those transfers that much closer. I'm just worried that if it is not feasible, the minimum that MTA could do was provide an in-system transfer to the Fulton station from the Seaport station. People can certainly complain about the hard transfers that now exist within the system, like PABT-Times Sq or Pacific-Atlantic, but at least the transfer are there. I think that it would be far worse to have a Seaport station without also providing the transfers to Fulton. As far as new transfers to stations that have been around awhille, like Grand-Bowery, I think in that case specifically, the transfer is not strictly needed until the SAS service comes. In today's service pattern, what possible service pattern is gained by providing the transfer? Broadway-Brooklyn to 6th Ave express is basically served by the operation of the train with a (possible) cross-transfer at Broadway-Laffayette. 6th Ave express to Lower Manhattan is served by the transfer at W4th to [Fulton] or the transfer at the transfer at Broadway-Laffayette to [Canal, Chambers-Brooklyn Bridge], the only station area that would not be reached would be Broad St. South Brooklyn [Manhattan Bridge trains] to Lower Manhattan can be reached directly by transfers to at Atlantic or DeKalb, or by taking and transferring at Canal to a downtown train. South Brooklyn to Broadway-Brooklyn can be reached by taking instead of and transferring at Canal [or perhaps just taking a bus within Brooklyn]. But that would be far different with regard to SAS. SAS will need every connection that it can, as we discussed above, it is naturally distant from everything. Depending upon the actual routings chosen, if a tansfer can occur at Chambers, then Bowery-Grand would not be necessary. But I think it would be necessary if there would be no other connection for to SAS. It would be even more necessary, if JZ terminates at Chambers and SAS ties in to the Nassau line between Chambers and Fulton. The only way JZ passengers can reach their old stations of Fulton or Broad would be by transferring at Bowery-Grand to downtown SAS trains. ----- As far as connecting SAS to Queens, I do like the EFNV that I proposed with the semblance of at least minimal deinterlining with EF QBL locals to 53rd, N QBL express to 63rd to Broadway express, and V the QBL express service direct to SAS. I do see your point about providing different commuting patterns that may not go over very well as it is a significant change. So how about the following: EF as QBL expresses to the 53rd street tunnel. E to 8th Ave local to WTC. F to 6th Ave local to Culver. This was the tradtional QBL express service for a long time. M trains will terminate at 57th/6th and will no longer service Queens. W trains willl be Broadway locals and will use the 60th street tunnel to Astoria. The number of W trains to be increased to keep Astoria service the same, now that N will no longer service the area. R trains will continue to be Broadway locals, using the 60th street tunnel and connecting to the QBL local line. This is done to preserve connections to LIC area for QBL local passengers. I envision a reduction in the number of trains that do this to about 6 TPH during rush, since these R trains effectively limit the productivity of the 63rd tunnel. The primary QBL local services will be N and V. N, Q, T, and V trains will all run through the 2nd/63rd junction in different patterns: N QBL local - 63rd tunnel - straight through 63rd - Broadway express Q Upper 2nd Ave - turn - 63rd - Broadway express T Upper 2nd Ave- straight through 2nd Ave - SAS V QBL local - 63rd tunnel - turn - SAS In a sense, I take my earlier plan, but switch the routings so that EF are express and NV are locals. Supplemental R service is maintained to allow QBL locals access to Queens Plaza and LIC. Alternatively, we can drop the R and direct that QBL local passengers heading to LIC use V to transfer at 53rd to EF to go back into LIC. It's roundabout, but it's possible. Using Manhattan to connect one part of Queens to another. [Kind of similar to folks who may go from South Brooklyn to Canal, transfer to JZ to head to Williamsburg OR perhaps Astoria customers who take N to Lexington and then head back to the QBL local on R.] Operationally, it would be far better to get rid of the R, since the 2nd/63rd junction is bound to be a big bottleneck -- it would be better to not have three train desingations on teh QBL local. Understandably, it is unforutnate if anybody boarding the QBL local west of Roosevelt would need to go to Manhattan to get to LIC and Court Square.