Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.


Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

37 Excellent

About shiznit1987

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Speaking of a 50th St Crosstown: The should be relocated to a two-level two track/island platform tunnel under 50th st which would give it 4 tracks. The line would turn up 1st Ave then cross the river @ 59th st. The north side of QBP will be rebuilt and two express tracks will be build on top of the existing el. After 111st, the line will follow the current Corona Yard approaches and stop at a new Willets Pt station overtop the current Shea LIRR. The line then follows the LIRR into Flushing with a two level terminus overtop the Flushing LIRR stop. The current alignment through LIC and 42nd st will be given to the Astoria line to become it's own self contained line called the (8).
  2. The most immediate solutions would be a Q66 SBS that goes into Manhattan along 5th/Madison Aves along with making the PW branch cost the same as a subway ride w/ Metrocard access. Other solutions in the near term involve bus redesign such as combining the Q33 into the Q32 and making it SBS as well as extending the Q60 deeper into Manhattan to draw Sunnyside riders. What gets me is your quote: NOT more subway proposals To me, that sounds like we as a city have given up on the idea of ever expanding the subway system. If that's the case, then we're just putting band aids on bullet holes because NY will just keep growing and the subway will just keep breaking down.
  3. I think you can get away with having the be the QB Express if you build the connection between 63/Lex and 59/Lex. That allows the to be the QB Local and the to run 30tph to Astoria as the sole Broadway Local ( sent to SAS) should become full time CPW express to 207th with non-weekday service going to Prospect Park. are the CPW/8th locals from 168th.
  4. Astoria Blvd is already perfectly set up as a turnaround point. For one, it means everyone except Ditmars gets full service, including 30th Ave. Ditmars is the huge capacity limiter on the line, it barley is able to turn what stops there now, nevermind any service increase.
  5. Real missed opportunity not putting in switches to allow trains to terminate at Astoria Blvd. It's like the MTA is trying to not improve the functionality of the underlying system.
  6. One idea would be to route a SI subway through the Bayonne waterfront, up I-78 and either tying it into the PATH network or making it an extension of the
  7. I'd rather see light rail up Woodhaven-63rd Drive-Junction Blvd between Rockaway Park and LGA than a subway down RRB. But, if we insist on it, here's food for thought: Astoria-Whitehall via Broadway Local Current Route Current Route runs from Coney Island to Rockaway Park via Sea Beach -> Man Bridge -> Broadway Exp -> 63st -> QB Bypass -> RRB This doesn't mess up QB and also uses the excess capacity of 63rd st.
  8. Just to throw my two cents in here: I *do* actually buy into the idea of racking the power and comm cables. My biggest issue is with the structural integrity of the concrete. One thought is could they wrap the bench walls in steel plating to basically secure the crumbing concrete from actually falling into the trackway and becoming a danger? Just curious. I don't trust the idea of the MTA actively monitoring the concrete. In fact, speaking of climate change and waterproofing, is there some kind of epoxy that underwater tunnels can be coated with to create a barrier between any saltwater intrusion and the concrete lining of the tunnels? Maybe a plastic polymer/PVC to coat the inside so at least when the next sandy comes the structure of the tunnel won't be affected?
  9. As the article itself says: this is all brand new. In 40 years when virtually all of it needs to be replaced we'll see what the political/public dynamics are. I also suspect that the transit worker unions are more agreeable out there, any new funding the MTA gets will most assuredly go towards pensions and healthcare. Thirdly, there's so much political pandering in NY's culture that any new subway line will face years of lawsuits and delays over birds nests, noise, political grandstanding, etc. Look at the L shutdown.
  10. One potential middle ground would be to put vestibule sheathing ala LIRR between the gangways and remove the end doors.
  11. Someone sadly died on the Q up on 2nd Ave walking between cars. The unfortunate reality is people are going to do what they want to do when it comes to things like that. If it gets any worse then locked cars here we come...
  12. It's usually better Manhattan bound than Queens bound which makes no sense considering you have to watch for merging s. Sometimes the has to wait for the mid-station signal to clear, which is insane.
  13. Exactly. Even going Manhattan bound if a and reach the junction at the same time you've created a delay. At least the way things are now you have zero chance of an issue Manhattan-Bound. $$$ Any plan that hinges upon either passenger or MTA Operations discipline is doomed to fail. It's not that your planning is bad, it's that the human factor will make sure everything catches fire. Even lets say the MTA somehow pulled off the / combo @ Roosevelt, passengers will wait for the behind said along with the passengers that will surely bail. That will become un-boardable and the spill over effect will reek havoc on QB. Even with a best case scenario of passengers switching for trains you still lose that local/express passenger balance. Yes. Sending locals through 63rd st means anyone wanting the East Side is forced onto the which is the last thing needed.
  14. We will agree to disagree on 36st. Don't get me wrong, it's it the worst switch in the system? Not even close. But I ride the almost every working day Queens-Bound and we almost *never* fail to wait for an coming up the ramp (And the behind him never fails to have to wait for the behind us). In a perfect world, a basic merge procedure like what you're talking about would be a non-issue, but I have lost most confidence in the ability of MTA Ops to not let this become a breakpoint. When you've had a train stop for "train traffic ahead" at 15 min headways you don't take anything for granted. As for sending QB Locals down 63rd st, here's something to consider: Getting on at 65th St in the morning, the is standing room only 80-85% of the time. The , while not nearly as crowded, has a healthy amount of people on it too. These are folks who rode from as far as 67th Ave who are choosing to stay local rather than blast the at Roosevelt. If you make the QB Local more inconvenient for them, they'll bail for the and it'll be like the 2001 service changes never happened (This is why I compared it to bringing back the ) The most definitely pulls it's weight in keeping the from becoming slammed. In your scenario, there's zero incentive to stay on the local since the is just a local and the will be downright pointless for most. Roosevelt will become downright dangerous during rush hours (As an aside, Woodhaven needs to be made an express stop). I understand where you and LGA are coming from. If we're going to simplify service patterns, then for QB we need to keep loading habits in mind. It's not like the Upper Manhattan IND where people are just looking for the express no matter what ave it's going down.

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.