CenSin

Which side of the border did you have in mind?

What article? It’s a Reddit thread, same as any other chain of posts here on NYC Transit Forums.

You don’t mean the other way around? Or you mean to put an sticker on all the R188s? Those R143s and R160s aren’t going under the East River to Queens without brand new tunnels.

Didn’t they do a shutdown to renovate the entire branch not too long ago?

Subway history: https://nycsubway.org/wiki/The_Dual_System_of_Rapid_Transit_(1912) There are a lot of provisions in the form of station shells and bellmouthes all along the Eastern Parkway line. Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevins_Street_station Have a look at the area marked 46c (source):

Fixed.

I’m surprised that even happened. I frequent that area, and you can leave personal property unattended at the gyms, cafes, and restaurants and still expect to find it where you left it. But then again, it’s in the train, and I’ll bet the assailant wasn’t someone who strolled into the train to commit robbery after hopping the turnstile at Bedford Avenue.

Great! Customer service focused actions. It depends on which customers you are talking about. The that gets held at both 36 Street and 59 Street for the same ? How many people from the 2 local stations are benefiting from the time saved and at the cost of how many who are already on the train? Often, I also see an pulling out of 59 Street as the approaches, and it waits for the right behind—as if those 2 minutes filled up the next with a lot of people heading to Sea Beach stations. lol

If that were the case, I’d weep for those who rely on it during rush hour.

I doubt we’ll get a good answer. Sometimes there are a lot of technical reasons something cannot be done but most of the time the reasons will never see the light of day. As a software developer and computer hardware geek, I find that getting the client to understand that technical limitations or design choices impose limitations on what’s possible or how fast other features get implemented is a herculean task. Sometimes I get suggestions how to do my job by people who have no idea how to do my job. I am not saying this is one of those cases, but people very privy to the implementation details might have gotten this and lament that their explanations just make laypeople go “but what if you ….” So they don’t bother engaging anymore. But of course, this is the MTA we are talking about with a reputation for dragging feet and burning cash. There’s plenty of justification to question how they could be more efficient.

The pols both matter and don't matter—depending on whether the idea is favored. : for the pols! An elevated line (e.g., Myrtle, Third, etc.): f*** the pols! Methinks it’s really about keeping Wally happy. 🙂

A train () that can get you to the nearest transfer station is better than none () at all. 🙂

As opposed to separate threads about CBTC for every segment of track

I imagine an alternate reality where the MTA follows through with building a connector between Queensboro Plaza and Queens Plaza. Then the trains just go to Queensboro Plaza, people could go downstairs to continue their trip, and none of the trains’ frequencies would be constrained by three different routes having to share a pair of tracks. Astoria would certainly be happy to have twice the frequency from the reroute of trains.

1. The and regardless will cross over each other. All you would do is change which direction the overlapping happens. Hmm… You’re actually right. While the - terminal swap would reduce the number of track intersections, the functional result is still the blockage of trains both entering and leaving the middle track. There is a quick fix for it via the addition of one slip switch east of the station and another switch west of the station, but the result is suboptimal from a passenger’s perspective, and that same effort could be put towards making Marcy Avenue a viable terminal instead.

I don’t know if the structure of the tunnels would allow shoehorning another diverging tunnel from the curve coming out of 72 Street, but it already exists and gets trains halfway to 3 Avenue. But while the transfers would be very convenient from 60 Street down to 14 Street, the trains do need a way to get back to 2 Avenue for the transfers at Houston Street () and Grand Street (). The block between 36 and 37 Streets appears to be the least developed area with just a parking facility, a lot of road, and a low-rise building on the northwest corner. But it could also very well continue down 3 Avenue and Bowery, connecting to 2 Avenue () via a slightly longer passageway and Bowery () before continuing along its original planned R.O.W. along St. James Place, Pearl Street, and Water Street. This would definitely rule out a track connection with the Manhattan Bridge, but doesn’t prevent an indirect transfer to the and via the Bowery platforms if such a connection were to be built. EDIT: Actually, one could be built if the vestiges of the bridge tunnels were to be reused as follows: The Manhattan-bound Broadway track and Brooklyn-bound 6 Avenue track are connected to the Bowery R.O.W. Where the ridiculously large mezzanine would have been would instead host the bridge tracks and platform. The lower level would be reserved for a future extension down to Chatham Square and beyond. Obviously, the tracks would be on the “wrong side” for the direction of traffic they’d be serving. North of the Grand Street station, the trackways would have to cross à la 59 Street Columbus Circle.

Do they really have to though? The could go to Hewes Street while the terminated on the middle track. Now there is one less possible train movement that blocks another.

Oh, and what sort of gull are you?

Pretty soon, if you couldn’t dance on a moving subway car, you wouldn’t be fit enough to hop the turnstiles.

A continent is just a very big island. 😉 The Bronx? It’s surrounded by water on three sides.

Skimmed the discussions and I find it interesting that there is talk of making Utica Avenue built to B Division clearances for an eventual connection to one of the numerous B Division lines up north. There is a lot stacked against something like that from happening: All of the B Division stations in the potential path of a Utica Avenue extension are through stations. That isn’t true of the Eastern Parkway line which has one pair of tracks dead-ending just east of Utica Avenue. (And of course, because there were always plans to make such a branch.) So, a tie-in to any of the B Division lines would immediately siphon service from all the stations west of Utica Avenue on that line. All of the B Division lines except for the are served by multiple routes sharing a double-tracked tunnel or bridge across the East River. Capacity would be an issue. Speaking of capacity: a connection to the Williamsburg Bridge via Myrtle Avenue–Broadway would probably be a no-go. It caps train lengths to 8 cars, and there is no capacity to send more trains to Manhattan’s prime destinations (in midtown). The fabled Second System to dodge all of the above limitations would be expensive enough to be inconceivable as a serious proposal. There’s an entire 5 miles of tunneling between 2 Avenue–East Houston Street and Myrtle Avenue–Broadway and a river. The Amtrak tunnel under the Hudson River is projected to cost $7 billion. Doing this would also assume there is a trunk line with spare capacity to connect it to.

Finally they will use them. I’m pretty sure those installed in the tunnel were there more than a year ago, but the kept using the ones outdoor. The tunnel ones seem to have much better track geometry for high speed switching than the subpar ones they replaced—ironically added by the same IND which had championed high-speed track geometry.

That is a much smaller market, isn’t it? And it’s what the locals are for.

Interesting… which tracks got knocked out that crippled both and service this way?

72 Street to 138 Street with no stops in between sounds nicer though. People will finally have a compelling reason to ditch the even if all the stops below 72 Street are local.