Amiri the subway guy

Lol how did I forgot to add that station in anyway what route should serve there or

Late reply but here’s the stations Throngs Neck Tremont Avenue Castle Hill Avenue White Plains Road Soundview Avenue Boynton Avenue Hunts Point Avenue Intervale Avenue

Now you both have very good feedback. Now I admit maybe some of the stations are a bit too close, 156th street and 143rd street are the two stations that may be unnecessary at they might be both a little too close to stations that would have a higher ridership count. I initially thought that 3 tracks would be enough but at the same time my logic was that 4 tracks would allow for the highest potential capacity but as you said it might be way too expensive, so a 3 track line maybe for peak way express would be good enough but my main issue with this is that the or would have to share the gun hill road terminal meaning they would have to share and use the exact same equipment (not saying it’s a problem) but the main flaw is in that proposal the or would have to operate on a pattern to balance out service, therefore I propose creating a IND Throngs Neck Subway. The would start at Lafayette avenue Tremont Avenue running down Lafayette avenue and 163rd Street it then merges with the at a 161st street junction. This could fill up another Bronx transit desert.

Let’s move on from Brooklyn and queens for now since it appears we have a common goal, and it’s to make 2nd Avenue line attavive as possible. So let’s focus on, the Bronx. Now People say that SAS is supposed reduce crowding on the , but the is just as if not even more crowded. I ride the daily in the Bronx. during the rush hours they get crushloaded to the brim. And then34 Avenue el was a subway that you guess it operated in 3rd avenue Bronx. It closed in 1970s due to the elevated route structure being obsolete, when the Bronx population was growing in the region the 2000s and 2010s this became a huge problem the Bx15 and Bx41 buses ridership levels shows this. So my proposal is to build a 4 track line serving as the long overdue replacement for the 3rd avenue line. The west side would be supplemented by the existing Broadway express would be express during daytime weekdays, but run local during Weekends and late nights. The east side would be supplemented by a proposed 2nd Avenue local the which would be the daytime weekday only local service for 3rd avenue and 2nd Avenue operating 6:30 AM - 10:00 PM. During all other times when the isn’t operating use the . The would start off at Mosholu Parkway west Gun hill road then running east down to Webster Avenue. It would stop at Bainbridge avenue 204th street and Bedford Park Blvd where at Fordham Plaza it’s meets with the the local service only stations would be 181st street Claremont Parkway 168th street Morrisania 163rd street 156th street 143rd street and the all local and express service stations are Fordham Plaza Tremont Avenue 3rd Avenue 149th street 3rd Avenue 138th street. This will more than help out central Bronx. It will also reduce crowding on the . Since Broadway and 7th Avenue run at close proximity to each other the is the perfect alternate route. Note the route is Fordham Plaza - Hanover Square. Is this perfect, too under capacity, or overkill? any feedback suggestions or criticism.

The thing is the 2nd Avenue line doesn’t have that much major job options 6th avenue serves in the heart of midtown. The whole project will be very expensive and difficult Fulton street for is smarter proposal since the service there is abysmal. South Brooklyn doesn’t even have a overwhelming demand for east side. Just use the

Here’s a suggestion during daytime weekends hours the would run from Bedford park blvd and then on 6th Avenue it would instead run local with the and terminate at 2nd Avenue. If the weekend ridership isn’t high enough of grand concourse to warrant the extra service. The will only run to 145th Street. The idea I’ll go with is new weekend Central Park West/ 6th Avenue Local 145th Street - Lower East Side 2nd Avenue This would help increase service which I heard could take 10-20 minutes. We’ll only need 8 TPH. late nights no service Use feedback and criticism is welcome

Needs to be extended to the Bronx all day during its weekday run So I personally find it pretty stupid that only goes all the way to grand concourse during rush hours and midday evening terminate at 145th street. The alone isn’t enough to handle service. People on the grand concourse line have to wait at least 10 minutes for another to arrive. Having the extended to Bedford Park Blvd during middays and evenings would double up service in the Bronx as the headways would be reduced to 5 minutes encouraging more ridership at Grand Concourse. Seriously why doesn’t the MTA consider extending the to Bedford Park Blvd to help out the

I created a new R262 forum

Welcome to the R262s forum what your predictions for the R262s assignments what factory do you want them to build want propulsion sound you want them to have Hello there I came up with two scenarios of the order happening I say split it into two order to better manage resources R262s R262As the 42nd Street will definitely get them Option 1 The would receive the R262s and be fully R262s R262As and the would mostly get the R262s but still keep some R142s. The will definitely get these cars in this scenario. The MTA would want the newest train fleet operating on the Lexington Avenue line for the CBTC project it’s very likely that the entire R142/A fleet from the and at least 50%-60% of the R142 fleet from the will be reassigned to the The R142s and R142As on the would be sent to the The R142s on the would be sent to the are fully R262s. The are mostly R262s but some R142s would remain there to save money. I mean the R262s are replacing the R62/As right. But again the newest doesn’t always necessarily directly replace the oldest train fleet. And the is the most heavily used train route in the Bronx so again needs the extra capacity that larger doors and open gangway offers. Option 2 The ridership level case so in this case I believe makes more sense is that the IRT express routes get the R262s they are very heavily used and crowded and are in dire need of extra capacity so the MTA would definitely want to have the newest and hopefully most reliable subway car fleet operating there. The would get the R262s all of the displaced R142s and R142As would be reassigned to the IRT mainline Locals the and The would be fully R262s The would be a mixure of R262s and R262As The would be mostly R262As but occasional R142s The R142s and R142As on the would be sent to the The R142s on the . would be sent to the . As a bonus the R142As finally get to return to the very subway route they first began operating passenger service on. In either case the is extremely unlikely to receive the R262s as the R188s are in amazing shape. The train factories I feel like should build it is Alstom Kawasaki and potentially Siemens Alstom could built the main order of 864 train which go to the and half of cars and Kawasaki builds the extra order of 500 R262As cars for and other half of Propulsion system I would like to see is Alstom Optonix IGBT–VVVF Siemens 2-level IGBT–VVVF 4 × Siemens 1TB2013-2GA02 230 kW (310 hp) 3-phase AC induction motor and/or Toshiba SEA-430 IGBT-VVVF

They will be a surplus of R160s the Q often gets rerouted to 6th Avenue so they should be fully R160. The N/W can be 85% R160 but some rare R68/As during rush hours the Rockway shuttle should just gets R68s. The remaining amount could just be spares until further notice

PS 940 R211s replace 752 R46s and 672 R211s replace 625 R68/As

Well I meant would it be worth keeping that many subway cars R68s 625 + R160s 1662 + R211s 1612 will their even be enough room for that many cars further more CBTC is limiting where SMEEs could go by 2027 the MTA wants all NTT

Here’s what I believe should happen. The main order will go on the the R179 8 cars sets will go to the But the R179 19 car will stay with the the will be fully R211 all R46s will be scrapped. The options order will than go the and sending the R179s to the After that the other option order will be for the displacing the R160s to the all remaining R46s and 80%-90% of all R68s and R68As will be scrapped. The R211 open gangway will be sent to the first. The gets R160s. The little small amounts of R68s R68As will be kept for emergency spares in the event of R211s breakdown but when the R211s are proofed to be realible R68s R68As will be scrapped. Any thoughts

Will they be enough room the R68s

Allow me to describe the reasoning for the choices and how people would benefit from it. Now usually it’s the T via Bronx and Q via Harlem y’all used to but the reasoning for it is that currently they is 50 trains during rush hours heading to east midtown the 4/5/6 trains vs 25/30 trains heading to west midtown the 2/D. The 1 is further west away from the rest of the Bronx line and only three stations so technically we could exclude it in this scenario. The B is a rush hour only extension and runs on the same route as the D so it doesn’t really count as it’s own Individual line. Add the Q train would balance the ridership access out. And Broadway is a much more attractive line to be extended to the Bronx since it stops at a bunch of major transfer points in midtown ETC (Times Square Herald Square Union Square). The T the most you get is Grand Central The main problem with sending the T train to Bronx I see is that it would leave the 2 as the only direct west side route in south bronx. There many places to go to transfer to east at 149th street via 5, 138th street via 6. Or ride all the way in Harlem for T And sending the T to 125th street crosstown would give the people on Harlem easier access to the east side of Manhattan reducing crowding on the 7/L trains. And people are saying that the Q train might be too long while I agree with this at first. Realistic that argument is moot cause I believe we overestimated the length cause let’s be honest the Q train won’t be anywhere near as long as the A or F trains. It would be around the same length as the B train. My estimate on the Q train length. Longer than the N train, Shorter than the D train.

Here’s my plan for 2nd Avenue service. 2nd Avenue local Utica Avenue Local Broadway 125th street Manhattan - Kings Highway Brooklyn The t would first run down st mark Avenue or Bergen street than run down all the way to Utica Avenue kings highway this gives Harlem easier access to east side and allow Utica Avenue to have subway service 2nd Avenue local Northern Blvd Express 4th Avenue local. Utopia Pway Queens - Bay Ridge 95th street Brooklyn The starts far north of queens than would run down the line At Parson Blvd the would than run express on a 4 track line and than a new tunnel at 57th street connecting the rest of 2nd Ave and Next in Brooklyn In runs down Adam steeet and connects to the at jay street. The would great help out a lot the northern Blvd would reduce crowding on the and the 4th Avenue while might not really be impactful might give another alternative to the east side instead of 2nd Avenue express Rockway beach branch local Rockway Beach 116th street Queens - Hanover Square Manhattan You guess it the starts at Rockway beach than runs with the until Rockway blvd than the Would run down the Rockway beach branch and then it would head down to Manhattan and connec to the express tracks running down to Hanover square Other routes extended to Bronx Fordham Plaza 3rd Avenue local extends to parsons Blvd queens Northern Blvd local extended to Euclid Avenue Brooklyn Reroutes to express track and extends to Lefferts Blvd diverted to far Rockway extended to Brooklyn Williamburg via Wilson Avenue new 5th avenues routes 145th street Manhattan - Coney Island Brooklyn 5th Avenue express Utica Avenue express retooled Parsons Blvd queens - Washington square Manhattan northern Blvd local 5th Avenue local Note replaces it

I like the idea suggestions I make. Leave Jamaica line as it is cause I don’t think Useless it’s on separate tracks Keep southern Brooklyn the same in order not to cause service disruptions and not make this harder then it needs to be but still deinterline Build a new Williamburg subway line to connect to the and Maybe one to Utica Avenue or Lower montauk Reroute the via 2nd Avenue and the run to Euclid Avenue or use the to Euclid Avenue instead is a better choice for the merrick extension

Look at least it’s not like the bitchy ass riders and Malcom smith with the R32s R40Ms and R46s. Furthermore CBTC on Astoria should be consider. In my suggestion I kept the R68s for failsafe reasons through on 2028 it’s say to have all CBTC trains by then. With the ongoing car shortage I wished the MTA kept some R38s and R32 Phase 2s. The tunnel cancellation was done to appease whiny impatient Williamburg communters. Now it will have to be fixed again in 5-10 years instead of the 50 year time frame if they just gotten it over with. 1620 R211s should be enough to share on the

Meanwhile the gets the R211As R211Ts go to The R68s and R68As will still be kept in storage for failsafe measures

The could all share R160s with each other as there’s 1,290 cars of 5 set R160s

I swear if the MTA gets scrap happy with the R68s it will clearly proof that they learned nothing from the mistakes with the R160s R30s R32s and R44s. I too hope we won’t have to deal with YET ANOTHER CAR SHORTAGE. But wouldn’t we than have a surplus of cars if the R68s stay

Hey everyone made a new forum if y’all wanna talk about older fleet. I’m made a blog about the mistakes with the R160s Delivery

Now I used to be in support of all NTT after the R211s arrive but I now view R68s as needed to stay until at least 2030. Well after the was eliminated a whole bunch and I mean like the 45% 50% of the R46s went to the

Thanks for your answers. I believe the R42s were is even worse state just look at the Rust the R42 had on top. I figured you just needed to replace the R38s roofs. Maybe we could’ve let a few small amounts of R42s but my only problem with this is that it would require a expensive SMS. The fact the MTA Knew the R44s had issues but didn’t do anything about it was beyond UNACCEPTABLE. This is the literally definition of “Get rid of the oldest train fleet no matter what”

The MTA original intended to replace the R32’s with the final R160 option orders and send the R44’s to cover for them on the C until the R179’s arrived. this was one of the dumbest ideas the MTA could’ve hatched, it was known in 1992 when the R44’s got GOH’d that their carbon steel bodies had been damaged from acid baths in the early 80’s. Heck body had literally been rotted away underneath the white stripes. The R44s were screwed the moment when they were assigned to run exclusive to the A train and exposed to sea air. The smart idea would’ve been to to have the R46s be assigned to A train instead while the R44s go to queens blvd instead they would’ve been perfect since the R train short turns during late Nights and it would have been even better for the V train since that was a weekday only route think of the rest time those R44s could’ve have during Weekends and Late Nights or maybe even keep a few more R30’s on property and in service in the early 90’s to stop the R44 body rot from working . By 2009/2010 they were on their deathbeds and the R32’s who were probably built the best out of all the B division SMEE equipment was still on property and able to fill in the R44 voids As for fleet shortages the B division had been in one sort of fleet shortage since the MTA made the incredibly stupid decision to get rid of every R30’s 1993, when the R160’s arrived that situation was almost rectified but then once again MTA got scrap happy with the 1960s fleet not paying attention to how awful the R44 structural issues were getting. The R40s R40Ms and R42s bodies were also slowly dying just look how bad they had rotted The R38s weren’t that bad some parts do need to be replaced but they could still run for another decade so in my opinion only the half the R32s that were too problematic to continue operating and the R38’s that are in the absolute worst condition should still retire while the rest of R38s should’ve been retained to easily run in mixed sets with the remaining half of R32’s. But the MTA would’ve done better keeping anything even a small stockpile of R40’s and R42’s because once the R44’s were gone and the R179’s were almost a decade away there was most definitely a fleet shortage felt the hardest on the Eastern Division of the BMT.as for the G the MTA total screwed that over especially with the way G ridership was increasing you could’ve easily increased service and the amount of cars on the G if the MTA didn’t get SMEE Scrap happy. If anything the MTA would’ve been smart to keep 324 R32’s to be fairly split on the A/C G and J/Z trains and 116 R38’s to mainly operate on the G train but maybe sometimes on the A/C line in the early 2010’s if the MTA hadn’t been as rigid with fleet assignments on the M the ENY Yard fleets could’ve been more fluid, and if the 50 R42’s were still needed even with an influx of 38’s than let it be.