Collin

Can you please use grammar that makes sense? My understanding is the R160A-1s are all in ENYY. Some were at 207th for the starting in 2013, but they were returned to ENYY as the R179's entered service. My questions are why do R143's sometimes run on the , and why haven't R179's run on the ? Now the needs a dedicated fleet compatible with QBL CBTC, but that wasn't the case before.

Like NYC, they have two divisions. The rolling stock is named differently depending on which division it's part of. The deep tube division (like our A Division) goes by year. The subsurface division (like our B Division) uses letters. I converted everything to the deep tube naming convention.

What if NYC named their rolling stock like London where it's by year? Here's what the names would be, from 1964 to now using the year they went into production. R32: 1964 Stock R38: 1966 Stock R40: 1967 Stock R42: 1969 Stock R44: 1971 Stock R46: 1975 Stock R62: 1983 Stock R62A: 1984 Stock R68: 1986 Stock R68A: 1988 Stock R142/A: 1999 Stock R143: 2001 Stock R160A/B: 2005 Stock R188: 2011 Stock R179: 2016 Stock R211: 2020 Stock

JAMAICA LINE STATION AND JUNCTION MODERNIZATION: All times beginning 7/01/2020 To improve service, we are rebuilding the junction at Myrtle Avenue, replacing the Lorimer Street and Hewes Street stations with one station at Union Avenue with a connection to the , and modernizing existing stations. To accomplish these projects, the following service changes will be in effect. Phase 1: 7/01/2020-1/01/2021 The Manhattan-bound tracks and stations will be upgraded. There will be no Manhattan-bound service at Flushing Avenue, Lorimer Street, and Hewes Street. All Manhattan-bound trains will run express from Myrtle Avenue to Marcy Avenue. Skip stop service will continue to operate during rush hours, but Jamaica-Center bound trains will run local between Marcy Avenue and Myrtle Avenue. For service from Flushing Avenue, Lorimer Street, and Hewes Street, take a Jamaica Center-bound train to Myrtle Avenue and transfer. For service to Flushing Avenue, Lorimer Street, and Hewes Street, transfer at Marcy Avenue to a Jamaica Center-bound train making all local stops. trains will operate in two sections, between Middle Village Metropolitan Avenue and Myrtle Avenue (signed as ), and between Forest Hills 71st Avenue and 2nd Avenue Lower East Side. Phase 2: 1/01/2021-7/01/2021 The Jamaica Center-bound tracks and stations will be upgraded. There will be no Jamaica Center-bound service at Flushing Avenue. The new Union Avenue Station will be open on the Manhattan-bound side only. All Jamaica Center-bound trains will run express from Marcy Avenue to Myrtle Avenue. Skip stop service will continue to operate during rush hours, but Manhattan-bound trains will run local between Myrtle Avenue and Marcy Avenue. For service from Union Avenue and Flushing Avenue, take a Manhattan-bound train to Marcy Avenue and transfer. For service to Union Avenue and Flushing Avenue, transfer at Myrtle Avenue to a Manhattan-bound train making all local stops. trains will continue to operate in two sections, between Middle Village Metropolitan Avenue and Myrtle Avenue (signed as ), and between Forest Hills 71st Avenue and 2nd Avenue Lower East Side.

They must have extra seats somewhere to reinstall. Put them back in, group the single cars into 5 car sets, and either run them out of Livonia on the or transfer them to Westchester Yard for service. Any leftover cars can be used for a garbage train.

There was a 90's plan that would've had all Dyre Ave trains run local from 3rd Avenue 149th Street to East 180th Street. All trains and trains to Nereid would run express. The way the flyovers north of East 180th Street are designed, it would be more efficient. Local stations between 3rd Avenue 149th Street and East 180th Street would've had their rush hour service cut from 12 tph to 7 tph, but when residents were polled they said they would have preferred to have Lexington Avenue service over 7th Avenue. For some reason, there was community opposition, I'm guessing from Dyre Avenue customers who would've lost express service.

With a cut and cover design, it's possible to build 4 track lines for not that much more than 2 track lines. Not saying that everything needs to be 4 tracks, but it can't be ruled out for major trunk lines. You keep bringing up this point about how the extra track pair built with a 4 track line is that much track that won't be built elsewhere. That may be true, but the ride time and availability of express service must be considered. Extending the current Jamaica Line would make zero sense because it's too slow. Even an upgraded line with stop consolidation and removal of the sharp curves between Cypress Hills and Crescent Street would be too long. An extension on Hillside Avenue however would be much better because the trains would go express after Forest Hills if not 179th Street. As for the flagging issue, why not build physical barriers between the tracks so that adjacent tracks can still operate at normal speed? We act as if these regulations are hard set and can never be changed, but I think they should be looked at periodically to see if there are better ways to do things that still keep workers safe but allow for fewer service disruptions. While single tracking with timed overtakes is definitely a viable option on 2 track lines, but can only be done with 20 minute headways. Many areas in the subway run 10 minute headways overnight where there are two services running on the same track (pretty much every Manhattan trunk line)

Because Phase 1 is already built without provisions for express tracks on the same level, express tracks would need to be in deep bore tunnels on a lower level. 86th Street and 116th Street should have express platforms. The thing is that two services can already run on a 2 track line. I have ideas for where to send them. One would run on a 125th Street Crosstown Line stopping at Lexington Avenue (transfer to connection to Metro North), Lenox Avenue (transfer to ), St Nicholas Ave (transfer to ), and Broadway (transfer to ). The other would go into The Bronx on a new route up 3rd Avenue, Boston Road, and Crotona Avenue, eventually taking it by the Bronx Zoo and Botanical Gardens. Not sure I understand point 3, but clearly building unnecessarily deep stations drives up costs dramatically both for construction and operation. I think the MTA is just too afraid of the rabid NIMBYism and lawsuits they'll start if they suggested taking the quick and dirty approach with cut and cover. Local residents and businesses threw a bad enough hissy fit over the 14th Street busway. Imagine if it was getting dug up for 2 or more years. It certainly says something about the power of NIMBYism if the MTA is willing to spend billions more on super deep subway lines just to avoid it.

To your point, a lot of that lies in the construction methods. There's too much emphasis on eliminating community impact and not enough on getting it done fast. Cut and cover construction is the best method. Not only is it cheaper and faster to construct than deep bore tunnels, but it makes the stations a lot cheaper to construct. The number of escalators and elevators needed for a deep station adds to the cost. If the station is built closer to street level, there might only need to be stairs, plus some elevators for ADA compliance. It's best to take the quick and dirty approach in terms of construction methods. It'll be inconvenient for a couple years or so with the street dug up, but at least it won't cost billions per mile and take 10 years to build. For Second Avenue specifically, Phases 3 and 4 need to go back to the drawing board. It's not worth the cost of building the line if there will be no track connections to other parts of the system. If it's super deep below existing stations, then the transfers will be very inconvenient. Hopefully there's a silver lining in Phases 1 and 2 taking so long in that Phases 3 and 4 may get looked at again. I think Phase 3 should be initially built as a 2 track line, with the inner tracks only. If added, the express tracks would be the outer tracks. 55th Street would need to be a 4 track station with terminal capabilities. There should be 2 services on the south portion of the line. One would run from 125th Street, and the other would either start at 55th Street, or run on the QBL local tracks and 63rd Street Tunnel. The bigger question is what happens with them on the other end. One option is to connect with the Williamsburg Bridge so that one of the services can replace the in Brooklyn. Then the could be reinstated and run to Church Avenue, allowing for full time express service. The other service I think should terminate at Grand Street with layup tracks to the south until Phase 4 is built. Once Phase 4 is built, it could either end at Hanover Square, run either through Montague and connect with the 4th Ave local, or a new tunnel connecting to IND Court Street (Transit Museum would need to be relocated). Vanshnookenraggen has proposed having the 2nd Ave services replace the over the Manhattan Bridge and having them go over the Williamsburg Bridge instead. I don't think that's the best idea because it makes transfers to 2nd Ave from the Myrtle/Jamaica Lines impossible.

I don't get it. Are you saying the way NYC built their system is worse than in other cities? I don't agree with that at all. I think the closer stop spacing is a good thing to an extent. People don't have to walk as far to reach a station, and with the local/express option, you get the best of both worlds. It can be a problem on certain lines without express service which is why I mentioned stop consolidation for the Jamaica Line. The prevalence of 3 and 4 track lines, and the interlined nature of the system also means that there is more redundancy to maintain service during construction and other disruptions. If one track is down, trains are rerouted to another. In a system with separate 2 track lines, there are no possible reroutes. One issue shuts down the entire affected area. That's what allows the system to operate 24/7 which is almost unheard of elsewhere. In fact, the design of the system makes 24/7 operation easier and cheaper than closing it overnight. The area served by the system (472 stations), and the higher capacity and flexibility achieved with 3 and 4 track lines are what I think makes the NYC Subway the best in the world, and no one else even comes close. Are there issues with it? Yes, and they need to be fixed, but that isn't changing my overall opinion.

Subway systems in other cities don't cover the vast geographic area like in NYC, so they'd have less of a need for express service. Like I said earlier, imagine Rockaway without full time express service on Fulton Street, or if there were no QBL express service. I know the QBL has a problem with the overutilization of express trains and underutilization of local trains, but is the same thing true on Fulton, 4th Ave, or Eastern Parkway, the other outer borough 4 track lines that have full time express service? I think what causes the QBL problem is that the local stations with the highest ridership are in the 71st-Roosevelt group. The Roosevelt-Queens Plaza group has lower ridership, so when you account for people moving over to the express at Roosevelt, people coming on at 65th Street, Northern Boulevard, 46th Street, Steinway Street, and 36th Street don't fully replace them, so when the trains go into Manhattan, the locals are not at capacity.

2nd Avenue is in far more need of a 4 track line than Jamaica because without it, you don't have the routes that could be used to provide additional outer borough service. Personally, I think Alt 2 is the best balance of cost and improvement. Local service becomes faster than it is now, and there are ways to provide more options like a true express service, and a connection to the Fulton Street Line. To extend beyond Jamaica, I believe a full replacement of the existing line with a 4 track subway is the only option. Without full time express service, the travel time would just be too long. Imagine if the Fulton line wasn't 4 tracks and all the trains to the Rockaways had to make EVERY stop. The closest thing currently to that in the system would be the and . There are 25 stops on the before it finally goes express at 96th Street. While the has rush hour express service from East 180th Street, it only goes to Lexington Avenue, so most people are stuck with slow local service. The has 26 stops before it gets to a point where any express service along the same line is available, unless you're lucky to get one of the trips. What both routes have in common is that their customers have some of the longest commutes in the city.

Alt 2: I figured that NIMBY opposition to a new el would just be too great, even though that would be a far cheaper option. New el construction (similar to Airtrain) would be a lot less noisy at street level, but try telling that to people who live right next to it. I wonder if that would make the Fulton line connection impossible. I consider that an important part of improving Jamaica Line service. I would think that with Alt 2 improvements, the local ride would me made of similar length to the current skip-stop ride. That would mean that skip stop service could be ditched in favor of a zone express. Obviously the whole line would need to be 3 tracks and the question is what would the express stations be. The new Union Street station in both Alt 1 and 2 would be configured local. I think Woodhaven Boulevard is an obvious choice to be an express station. Though my earlier plan called for all new stations being configured local, I think the new Norwood Avenue station should be express since it would replace the current Norwood Avenue and Crescent Street stations which combined have pretty high ridership relative to other Jamaica Line stations. This would provide a really good express service which would take a lot of people off the . Alt 3: While an outlandish idea, I think it's a defeatist attitude to say that it can never happen. With enough money it can. The question is whether NYC construction costs could ever be brought down to reasonable levels. It's ridiculous to think that in the 1920's and 1930's, we could build subways better than today.

What does locked out mean in this context?

I believe it's 14-15 tph for all trains combined. Highest frequency I can find on the is 6 tph. With 8th Avenue CBTC, I would think there could be 18 tph and 12 tph .

It would look something like this. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LUoJWyxgpIn9ZSNegmlIKn14C2Ie18OJ/view?usp=sharing

I know the 42nd Street Shuttle reconstruction is supposed convert it from 3 tracks to 2 tracks, but I was thinking that if track 2 were restored to service and track 3 kept in service, it would be possible to run up to 4 trains. They would load at each end simultaneously then meet in the middle.

In terms of removing old equipment, I don't think anything was more efficient than the reef program. Load the cars up 50 at a time and dump them. Whether it was good for the environment or not is what's questionable, and why it was discontinued. As far as delivering new equipment, I'm not sure why new cars aren't delivered by rail anymore. It last happened with the R142's. Are the rail lines once used no longer active?

So in other words we're headed for 1981 again.

I think they should bring back the GOH program for the R142 and R142A fleets. My understanding is they are not prepped for CBTC like the R160's and R179's. When the R262's come in, they can take the R142's and R142A's out of service for the overhauls on some rolling basis, while a sizeable chunk of the R62 and R62A fleets remain in service. Once all the R142's and R142A's are back, the remaining R62's and R62A's can be retired. The R142A's that became R188's won't need to be overhauled.

I've long thought that the Jamaica Line is in need of a serious upgrade. It's one of the oldest lines in the system and not only is it slow, but it has a lot of choke points making it less efficient. I've come up with a series of alternatives to upgrade the line. Alternative 1: Keep the full current route, consolidate stops, improve terminals and junctions. Under this alternative, the full route of the line would remain the same. Some stations would be consolidated. Cleveland Street and Norwood Avenue would be consolidated to a new station at Shepherd Avenue. Hewes Street and Lorimer Street would be consolidated to a new station at Union Avenue with a direct connection to the . The Myrtle Avenue Junction would be rebuilt as a flying junction. Trains going to the Myrtle Avenue Line would ramp up to the outside of the local tracks just after Flushing Avenue, go south on Lewis Avenue, and make a gradual turn onto Myrtle Avenue. The upper level would be returned to service. This would require demolishing some nearby buildings, but would reduce merge conflicts and allow for faster service since the curves would be much more gradual. Jamaica Center would be upgraded as a terminal so that it could handle more than 12 tph. The current service pattern would be maintained, but possible increased frequencies. Alternative 2: Partial replacement and reroute: Under this alternative, the section of the line between Broadway Junction and Cypress Hills would be replaced with a new subway under Jamaica Avenue, eliminating the two sharp curves. The new segment would be 2 tracks with provisions for a 3rd. New stations would be built at Van Siclen Avenue, Cleveland Street (between Cleveland and Elton Streets), and Norwood Avenue (between Norwood Avenue and Logan Street), all configured local. If an express track were to be added, Woodhaven Boulevard would be reconfigured to an express station. A track connection would also be provided to the IND Fulton Street Line The station consolidation of Hewes Street and Lorimer Street, Myrtle Avenue junction rebuild, and Jamaica Center terminal upgrade would also happen under this plan. The service pattern with 2 tracks would remain the same, but with increased frequencies. Service pattern with 3 tracks and Fulton connection: : Express service during rush hour, local other times. 8 tph : Local service from Broadway Junction. 8 tph. : Current service pattern. 12 tph : Fulton express to Broadway Junction, then Jamaica local, all times except late nights. 12 tph : Connected to Fulton local to replace . 12 tph. Alternative 3: Full Replacement The entire line would be replaced with a subway. 4 tracks to Jamaica Center, and possible extension beyond. The local tracks would continue to use the Williamsburg Bridge to Nassau Street, while the express tracks would be routed via a new tunnel to Second Avenue Lower East Side. 2nd Avenue services would replace the over the Manhattan Bridge. Service pattern: : Local to Broadway Junction. 20 tph : Express to Myrtle Avenue, then Myrtle Avenue Line. 12 tph : Express to Jamaica Center, possible further extension. 15 tph. : Fulton express to Broadway Junction, local to Jamaica Center. 12 tph. : Connected to Fulton local to replace . 12 tph.

So they've got empty trains running all night that people aren't allowed to ride, and they can't even put in place extra bus routes that people can ride. This whole shutdown makes zero sense.

The up Junction Boulevard to LGA is a great idea. It would link the two airports. I wonder if it would be better as part of the AirTrain system so it could actually serve the terminals in both airports. I had some ideas regarding the . The current service pattern with the to Euclid, to Lefferts and Far Rockaway, and to Rockaway Park makes the most sense based on ridership 95% of the time. Everyone past Euclid gets express service, and the two higher ridership branches get direct service, while the lowest one gets a shuttle. On summer weekends, they run full length trains from Rockaway Boulevard. I was thinking that instead of this, it would make sense on summer weekends to have the serve Lefferts and the split between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park since Rockaway Park ridership is likely higher than Lefferts ridership. I think this service pattern has been considered for implementation on a full time basis, but I think it works better as an extra service for summer weekends only. I think what was holding it back from full time implementation was that Lefferts branch customers would lose express service and be stuck with a local, and because the would need to merge with the twice. With less frequent weekend service, and because it wouldn't be a full time service pattern, I don't think these would be issues.

So Archer was considered the more desirable terminal when compared to 179th Street. Does that have something to do with the airport being off of Archer?

Political theater