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.

shiznit1987

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

26 Excellent

About shiznit1987

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. shiznit1987

    Rockaway Beach Branch

    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.
  2. shiznit1987

    Full Shutdown of L Train to Be Halted by Cuomo

    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?
  3. 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.
  4. shiznit1987

    R211 Discussion Thread

    One potential middle ground would be to put vestibule sheathing ala LIRR between the gangways and remove the end doors.
  5. shiznit1987

    SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

    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...
  6. shiznit1987

    Why Your Subway Train Might Start Moving Faster

    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.
  7. shiznit1987

    Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

    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.
  8. shiznit1987

    Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

    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.
  9. shiznit1987

    Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

    With regards to Washington Heights, anyone riding above 125st will most certainly be bailing for the Trains. If for anything, this is a big boon for Upper Manhattan as 6th Ave > 8th Ave. CPW riders between 125th and 59th get a dedicated line that doesn't go to Brooklyn, reducing delays and making service more consistent. As far as the issue with Queens Blvd is concerned, can we survive without the ? Yes. But there has to be some kind of payoff to make it worth it. Splitting 6th/63st and 8th/53st into express and local still keeps the 36st merge as an issue (times 2, since now you have merges onto express and local) plus whatever QB Local that goes into 63st will be a ridership hole, causing the to be even more crowded. The thing with the is that people between 71st and Roosevelt are willing to ride it all the way into Manhattan for the benefit of the transfer or for being on Broadway. Take those benefits away and you'll have even more people bailing at Roosevelt, which is already dangerously crowded. To me, if we're going to lose the , then at minimum the connection between 63rd and 59th needs to be built. Have Expresses go down 63rd and Locals down 53rd. There's no way any QB Local should be going down 63rd street. That's only a half-step above bringing back the (which granted, I would like back on weekends)
  10. shiznit1987

    1991 Service Plan + 63rd Street Service Plan

    Just to help everyone out: On the first link the subway related stuff starts @ page 419 on the PDF
  11. shiznit1987

    Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

    Just to piggyback on this: If for anything, ESA should've gone whole hog and moved all LIRR operations to Grand Central. The new terminal should've then continued down Park as two tracks and then take over the existing tunnels 3 & 4 under the east river, thus giving the LIRR a WTC-esque loop under the east side of Manhattan. The freed up space @ Penn coupled with two new Hudson tubes would have given NJT all the space it'd need for expansion for 100 years.
  12. shiznit1987

    Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

    People (Including myself) aren't going to be too pleased about losing service on Queens Blvd. It's actually IMHO tied with the for being the second favorite on QB after the . No one will ride a local that goes through 63rd st. Also, this doesn't really solve the 36st issue. It's a nice thought though. If we're going to go for De-interlining Queens, then we need to simply bite the bullet a build an underground transfer from 63rd/Lex to 59th/Lex so everything flows like this: 63 st/QB Express 53 st/QB Local -> 8th Ave Express/Brooklyn 168 st to WTC 8th Ave Local 207st to Brighton Beach via CPW/6th Ave Exp Current route To SAS via Broadway Express + Bridge Astoria/Broadway Local WIth the exception of the and joining at 145st, the entire B divison is completely merge-less going Bronx/Queens Bound.
  13. I'm with RR503 on this one. The ridership argument just doesn't hold water. NYC was far more Manhattan-centric and crowded in the 1940s-1960s with a similar population yet none of the nonsense you see today. Actually, as a Queens Blvd rider, I think the trains are far less crowded than I remember them being in the 2000s. I've been able to get on Queens Bound trains from Queens Plaza during the peak of the rush at times. I think what's happened is the frequency has gone way down (since 2010) and the huge capital overhauls of the 1980s/1990s that rescued the system are now reaching the end of their life cycle.
  14. shiznit1987

    Second Avenue Subway Discussion

    Between 5th and 3rd Aves though.

×

Important Information

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