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.

T to Dyre Avenue

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


T to Dyre Avenue last won the day on July 5

T to Dyre Avenue had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

957 Excellent

About T to Dyre Avenue

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Whitestone, Queens

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It’s not even limited to the City; this “reinventing the wheel” seems to go on all across the country. It really is too much.
  2. That is a good way to run a West End express. But then you’d have to have all that extra transferring at Atlantic and DeKalb.
  3. I can see more West End Riders clamoring for a express if this service is a success. Though the seems to be having some teething troubles that need to get worked out. Let’s see if they can.
  4. Didn’t realize there was that much available capacity on QBL. As long as there’s as little merging as possible, that should really be looked into. Would be great if they had that diagram at stations. Then it would make it easier to know when the trains come.
  5. Sorry I was talking about the M coming off the Williamsburg Bridge. I meant to say current reverse-branches between Essex and Broadway-Lafayette. An 8th Ave M would still have that, but with a new connection to the 8th Avenue Line (probably in the Bowery/Spring St area). So yes, I’m assuming there would be two 8th Ave local services, with the still going to WTC. As for RBB splitting off from QB Local, I certainly think it can still be done with a deinterlined QBL. It just rules out the or any other Broadway service. That seems to make a case for an RBB line extended off QBL. Either that, or the RBB service turns onto the LIRR Main Line in Rego Park, then turns off of it into a new tunnel somewhere in Jackson Heights, where it can connect into the unused upper level platforms at Roosevelt Avenue. That’s an interesting option too. I’m trying to visualize it on a map. I’m assuming all service would then go to Lefferts.
  6. RBB restoration was always a topic I posted in favor of in the past, as I mentioned in my last post. Since about a year ago, I’ve become much less in favor of it, though. Part of it is that, yes, how well would RBB function as a Queens crosstown service? Maybe if we ever do see a study from the MTA, we might have a better idea. Even though there is so much traffic on parallel Cross Bay/Woodhaven Blvd, it’s difficult to determine exactly where all that traffic is going once it leaves Woodhaven. Proponents of restoring the branch vary wildly as to where they think it should ultimately go or what kind of rail (or even bus) service it should be. This too is part of the problem. For the longest time, I advocated extending the or via the turnouts between 67th Ave and 63rd Drive. But as I’ve already mentioned in my previous post, doing that would force the QBL to stay in its current messy, reverse-branched setup. Not to mention it would subject the or into being longer routes with even more merges than they already have. And neither would be a much faster option than the for getting to most destinations in Midtown, especially if those grade timers can be ironed out.
  7. It’s true that the current and services are underutilized compared to the and and that we could have significantly more trains per hour without a Queens Bypass if we detangle the current QBL and Broadway BMT service patterns. Detangling Broadway might be easier, save for some QB riders who like having a direct train to Carnegie Hall or Times Sq (even with an or station nearby). But the harder sell is going to be running all QB locals via 53rd and all expresses via 63rd. The biggest problems with 63rd are its “out-of-the-way” location and widely spaced stations with lack of in-system transfers (other than the ). That’s probably due to the MTA’s original intention in 1968 to make it the Manhattan point of entry for the Queens Super Express. And I feel that rerouting all QB express service into 63rd is just not going to go well with QB express riders, especially those who transfer to the Lex. A 59-63 passageway is key to getting this to work, because the current OOS transfer is not going to cut it. People will just bail on the locals at Roosevelt. Or gripe heavily about how long it takes to get to Lex. This is my biggest concern with a fully deinterlined QBL. Personally, I like that @LaGuardia Link N Tra‘s plan has QB local trains running via 63rd and 6th and QB express trains via 53rd and 8th, because the express is the more popular service. I say, give it the more popular crosstown corridor that has more transfers. Forcing New York subway riders onto local trains has failed so many times because for better or worse, New Yorkers have been brainwashed into thinking that taking a local train is no better than taking a bus. I've already seem some pushback on here about how a via QB would be essentially like having an 8th Ave train There would still be a reverse branch of the if it moved over to 8th Avenue, like you proposed in the past. Though it would still be better than splitting the back into the separate and services, because of how popular the connection to Midtown has become. As for the bypass, if you want more express trains between Jamaica/Hillside (and possibly points east) and Midtown, it’s either a bypass or a totally separate line parallel to QB or the . You don’t have to drop it entirely. As for Rockaway Beach Branch, I can see why you would. There seem to be too many things working against restoring RBB and no clear agreement as to what would be the best way to run it (subway, LIRR, light rail, DMU, even busway). I looked back on some of my older posts and recall how much I argued in favor of restoring RBB as either an extension of the or . But then we’d be forcing the or into having even more merging than we already have. But more importantly, we’d be locking the QBL into the current reverse-branched mess by extending the onto the RBB. Yes, something like this. A (relatively) easy way to have more express trains between Queens and Midtown, though not a whole lot more, because the ( V ) would still have to share 2nd Ave with the from Midtown to points south. But it’s still better than having just the maxed-out and .
  8. Definitely would like to see what you come up with. Though the bypass through Woodside will probably require tunneling as there is very little space in that area for two extra tracks, let alone a platform for them to stop there for a transfer to the and LIRR. I still think a bypass line is needed, but as a relief line as opposed to the super express proposed by the MTA half a century ago.
  9. Even if the stops on two new outer tracks, like @LaGuardia Link N Tra proposed up thread? Wouldn’t that make pretty much any QBL de-interlining plan that doesn’t have QB locals via 53rd a non-starter?
  10. Back in 1968, it might have made more sense for the MTA to propose the Queens bypass tracks as a nonstop super express. Back then, Manhattan held a greater share of 9-to-5 jobs, that the newly-formed MTA seemed to believe they needed to cater to. But today, we have more intra-borough commutes than we did before and we really should try to capitalize on that as best we can. And I think we can do that here. We also shouldn’t underestimate just how busy some of the QB local stations can get. But as long as you build only a few strategically placed stations on the bypass, it will still be a faster ride from Southeast Queens. Agreed. I myself have come around on the idea that the QB bypass should function more as relief line for the QBL as a whole, rather than just for the express services. As a former or rider (whichever came first in the morning), I’d be on local trains packed to the gills until Roosevelt Avenue. Given how many busy bus routes connect only to the local trains in between 71st-Continental and Roosevelt, it’s not hard to see how. A relief service would relieve not only those busy QB local stations, but also help keep the and get “less slammed” at Roosevelt. Though I do believe the relief service should have fewer stops than the existing QB locals do, so that it can still be faster than taking a bus to the local, then slamming the express at Roosevelt. So, basically, a 2nd Avenue V service that branches off Queens Blvd at 71st-Continental, surfaces onto the LIRR r-o-w, makes a few stops on the r-o-w before stopping in LIC and heading into Manhattan. I think 63rd Drive, Woodhaven Blvd and Grand Avenue would be good locations on the r-o-w.
  11. Anytime someone proposes a Queens Super Express, I’m all ears. Because let’s be honest - it’s badly needed. Queens Blvd CBTC alone won’t solve all the of the line’s capacity issues. You don’t really need a connection with the at Lexington-53rd, because the V will already have connections with the at Union Turnpike, 71st Ave and Queens Plaza, and with the at those last two. As for uptown-bound riders, they should be able to transfer to the , which would parallel the . There may not be sufficient space for a V stop at Woodside, but there appears to be sufficient space for stops in Rego Park and at Woodhaven Blvd. Maybe have stops there to relieve the QBL locals at 63rd Drive and Woodhaven. Possibly Grand Avenue too.
  12. Maybe Cuomo (and his “donors”) though it was going to be the only G.O., 😆!
  13. The original Archer plan definitely didn’t make sense, especially given that connecting riders were already traveling substantial distances on the bus. Requiring them to transfer from the to the for express service would have been creating another Roosevelt Avenue at Union Turnpike. It was much better that they rerouted the to Archer and have one less transfer needed. Though it really would have been better if they could have built even just one more stop at Merrick Blvd to connect with the many bus routes that run through there.
  14. Wrong...it goes to Cuomo, because said donors (if they even exist!) are not the ones who actually control the MTA and make the decisions whether or not to close tunnels full time. Sorry, but the rest of your post is completely ridiculous.
  15. And I, for one, don’t blame the MTA for not wanting to save the AirPods.

  • Create New...

Important Information

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