Caelestor

On 8/18/2020 at 9:15 PM, Lil 57 said:

Just a random thought, why is St Albans served so infrequently on weekends and have no overnight service  (Babylon Branch trains pass by 24/7). Hourly weekday service is fine but how about adding overnight service and increasing weekend frequencies to Hourly. It would cost nothing and would help gain ridership.

In North America, transit operators are obsessed with faster running times on trains, but in reality, all off-peak trains should be running local wherever possible. Off-peak trains won't be able to compete against cars based on travel times, especially during a pandemic, so might as well ramp up the frequency as much as possible.

For instance, all Babylon Branch trains should be stopping at Lynbrook, but they should skip Valley Stream because of the track configuration. Likewise, all Far Rockaway and Long Beach trains should be running local to provide high-frequency service, especially for the Queens stops.

2 hours ago, shiznit1987 said:

Here's my idea for 50th St Crosstown (8) train to Flushing: 

Start at Hudson Yards (new station built under 10th Ave/34th St), then have stops at: 50th St/7th Ave (Transfer to ), 50th St/5th Ave, 50th St/Lex (transfer to ), tunnel comes into Queens at 45th Ave and stops at Court Sq (Transfer to , Train then runs under LIRR to Woodside (Transfer to ), then follows PW Branch with stops at Broadway/Elmhurst Ave (Transfer to ) and Junction Blvd and finally terminates under the Main St-Flushing LIRR station.  service would be discontinued. 

The first advantage would be Flushing, Woodside, Elmhurst and Corona getting bi-directional all-day express service.  The next big advantage is due to the connection at Elmhurst Ave,  the  trains as well as the Roosevelt Ave station itself would see significant crowding relief. 

I think the 50 St Crosstown should stay on 50 St, terminating at a transfer with a  extension up 10 Ave. So the stops in Manhattan would be Hells Kitchen - 10 Ave , 8 Ave-Broadway  (with potential transfer to Broadway 49 St), 6 Ave - Rockefeller Center , and Lexington - 3 Aves .

I also think that the (8) shouldn't be duplicating LIRR service. Either build an entirely new line under Northern Blvd, or have it takeover the PW branch completely. In the latter case, the stops would be all existing LIRR stops + new stops at Queens Blvd (future Triboro RX), Broadway/Elmhurst QBL, Junction Blvd, 108 St, and Bayview Ave. Great Neck would be significantly reconstructed to allow most trains to terminate there.

From a capacity perspective for the MTA as a whole, the Park Ave Line (125 St - 42 St GCT - 14 ST USQ - Fulton St - Downtown Brooklyn - Atlantic Ave / Barclays and onwards) is the best relief line that can be built for the entire Lexington Ave Line. It would also allow for the entire Atlantic Ave terminal plus half of GCT to be repurposed for other purposes.

The question is, is this more important than building Gateway, lower SAS, or the Northern Blvd / 50 St crosstown line?

I think both the 50 St and 57 St crosstown lines need to be built, and it comes down to what is more important - offering a large catchment to 50 St, or offering better transfers to  downtown and uptown express lines, namely the  since the  don't stop at either 50 or 59 St. I personally favor the former (YMMV), and the missing transfers aren't as a big deal to me, because all the uptown/downtown lines have platforms that touch 50 St, compared to Columbus Circle and Lexington Ave / 59 St. As a bonus 50 St has the better alignment through the growing business district in LIC, and if connected to a brand-new Northern Blvd line, the line could be built with 21st century-standard full automation and platform screen doors.

The  shouldn't be running into Midtown; any East River tunnel into Queens is better off continuing east towards the seriously underserved parts of the borough. In a fantasy world, the current terminal at Court Sq would be closed and the  would run up 21 St, stopping at 44 Dr and 41 Ave in a Phase 1 extension. In Phase 2, it'd stop at 36 Ave, Broadway, Astoria Blvd, and Ditmars Blvd. Lastly in Phase 3, it would turn west towards Randall's Island and become the 125 St Crosstown in Manhattan for those uptown connections.

The  should be extended up 10 Ave to 41 St for the  connection. In the past, I've argued that it should continue further up to 72 St  but it may be better to send it east along 57 St. The MTA would have its hands tied by a 50 St - Northern Blvd line, and the along 57 St would certainly allow for phased construction. It probably makes sense for the  to become the QBL bypass and allow it to take over the eastern QBL local stations full-time so that it won't conflict with the  in the future. 

The best transfers connect multiple-service lines that are perpendicular with each other. The 7 Ave  transfer to 57 St -7 Ave  is like Lexington Ave - 63 St  but with 4 track pairs instead of 2, plus the added flexibility of connecting 8 Ave with SAS / Astoria. Similarly, the Columbus Circle  transfer to 57 St - 7 Ave effectively is another orthogonal transfer because the CPW riders can access the 60 / 63 St lines heading east. A superstation complex in northwest Midtown would be a nice complement to the gigantic Times Sq / PABT complex, which is being connected further to Bryant Park via the TSQ - GCT .

Lexington Ave / 59 St - 63 St can be another superstation in northeast Midtown, and if a 3 Ave line is ever built, building a 60-63 Sts stop would neatly connect the two complexes together.

On 8/4/2020 at 7:50 PM, R10 2952 said:

With the Sixth Avenue Line, it would've been interesting to see how things turned out if the Second System tunnel from 2nd-Houston to South 4th had been constructed and tied in somewhere to the Crosstown or Franklin Avenue Line; I feel such a thing could've brought many benefits.  A Culver local service to Manhattan, or relief for the Dekalb Junction and Manhattan Bridge- perhaps this is something that the MTA ought to plan for in the long term.  Moving trains off the Manhattan Bridge before it starts disintegrating again would spare us another 20-year headache of "temporary" reroute gymnastics.

If the northern tracks of the Manhattan Bridge had to be shut down again for a very extended period of time, it might be worth doing a Chrystie St Redux to connect the Williamsburg Bridge tracks with the 6 Ave express tracks and redirect the Manhattan Bridge north tracks up 2 Ave. The  combined with the current  would allow for greater  service along the Rutgers St tunnel.

The Astoria-Bay Ridge line is compromised by

• The Astoria terminal can only turn 15 tph
  • Solution: Extend the line to LGA, or turn some trains at Astoria Blvd or Queensboro Plaza
• The Bay Ridge terminal can "supposedly" only turn 10 tph, but I believe it's much higher than that
  • Solution: Fix the terminal or extend the line to Staten Island
• The City Hall curve can only support 20 tph
  • Solution: Better signaling is required

I think 20 tph between Bay Ridge and Astoria is probably adequate, in conjunction with improvements such as open gangways.

3 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Here's an interesting idea: a two-track, more aggressively spaced stop spacing Jamaica Line (think IND or SAS style stop spacing:)

Really great proposal - continues the Jamaica Line down Fulton St for a better walkshed before merging back with the original Jamaica Ave tracks. I think it's okay to keep the existing stops between Myrtle Ave and Broadway Junction, Cleveland St, and Forest Parkway, but turning the  more like the  is pretty good.

17 hours ago, shiznit1987 said:

How possible do you think it is that we'll simply see massive frequency decreases instead of any widespread structural changes? I'm thinking that on the subway side of things, stuff like 15-20 minute off peak headways and more bus routes going to half-hourly/hourly service?

Second, some investment in technological change is needed as well. MoW on both the subway and the railroads needs to be massively overhauled. There has got to be some level of automation that can be achieved in terms of track replacement, signal replacement, power upgrades, etc. 

 

Shutting down entire trunk lines for longer than a weekend will only happen if Fastrak-style maintenance occurs. Service on parallel lines would need to be increased accordingly.

That said, the subway is going to see frequency decreases, the question is how much. Off-peak weekday headways shouldn't be slashed because the peak workers should have trains to operate. Weekend and late night (if/when it returns) service are going to see the brunt of the cuts.

Also, the NYC Subway has too many stations which can be costly in terms of upkeep and the number of crews needed to maintain frequent service on lines that stop too much.  Stations should be located once every 1000 meters so about half a mile, or even more if stations are double-ended. Temporary station closures were done at the height of the coronavirus peak and they can be effective in conserving resources. Candidates for temporary closure, based on distance to nearby stations and ridership, would be

• : 18 St, Franklin St
•  Van Siclen Ave
• : 104 St
• : 103 St
• : 75 Ave
• : Ave I, 
•  Cortelyou Rd, Ave H (since Triboro RX doesn't exist), Neck Road
•  President St, Intervale Ave, Burke Ave, 219 or 225 St (these stations should be replaced by an accessible 222 St stop in the future), maybe Nereid Ave (but probably not because it's the  terminal)

7 hours ago, Armandito said:

Heard quite often that the is unreliable because of its sheer route length and slow speed, especially for commuters living in southwest Brooklyn. Would seem like a good idea to split the into two separate routes, but how could that plan be designed?

 Astoria - Bay Ridge +  Forest Hills - Whitehall St or  Forest Hills - WTC.

Regarding the BMT Jamaica Line, one course of action would be to

1. Build an accessible Union Ave stop with a free transfer to the  and close Hewes and Lorimer Streets.
2. Build a flying junction at Myrtle Ave for the .
3. Run all trains local between Marcy Ave and Broadway Junction to increase ridership along this gentrifying part of Brooklyn.
4. Chrystie St reconfiguration - Connect the Williamsburg Bridge to the 6 Ave express tracks and send the Manhattan Bridge north tracks up 2 Ave.

I haven't thought of a good solution for the eastern Jamaica Line yet because the walkshed there is so bad. Maybe split the line into two: a new elevated express section between Cypress Hills and Broadway Junction for the to Jamaica, while the Fulton St segment is extended down Rockaway Blvd towards the . Alternatively, the subway could take over the LIRR Atlantic Branch / BMT Archer Ave Line, build some intermediate stops along the LIRR ROW, and abandon most of the Jamaica Ave segment. In any case, the eastern Jamaica Ave has an outdated route for modern NYC and it's hard to do much with it at the moment.

The Northern Blvd / Midtown crosstown line, which I'll tentatively call the (8), is probably the second most-important trunk line that should be built, after lower SAS. It would divert not only  riders with better stop spacing under Northern Blvd itself, but also QBL local riders who currently transfer to the  at Jackson Heights. Specifically, the line could take an express route under Sunnyside Yards such that it would only stop at Vernon Blvd and Court Square between Lexington / 3rd Aves and Broadway / Northern to minimize station construction costs. The (8) would naturally be deinterlined from other lines and could be "future-proofed" with improvements such as open gangways and full automation. As for 34 St, it is a great corridor for subway service but I think 50 St is better because the latter's walkshed covers most of the Midtown CBD and could divert a lot of the normal  to  riders.

OPTO, no overtime, and overhauling the labor requirements for weekend/overnight maintenance have to be the primary way forward. Labor requirements have to be the bulk of the MTA's costs, and this is a great opportunity to bring the agency in line with late 20th-century standards.

As for service cuts: Do them well if it comes down to that. Keep the off-peak service and hit the rush hour trains and peak-hour only extensions, reflecting how all office jobs are WFH these days and to reduce the expensive labor requirement associated with them. Also, no express service should be cut because that's just effectively halving the trunk lines capacity where ridership is expected to be the heaviest.

As for the : it's basically just a short-turn , and its New Lots Ave segment can easily be taken over by the  during all service hours. If we're reducing the  to a full-time shuttle, might as well just axe it and the relatively low-ridership 148 St branch completely and run more trains to Nereid Ave. Such a move wouldn't be completely negative because in the long run:

• No  removes the flat junction north of 135 St from normal operations and associated delays
• The Bronx will get more train service overall to Harlem and the West Side. Increasing  service will reduce  service, but  service can be increased in response.
  • In a deinterlined IRT, the  would serve both the upper White Plains and Dyre Ave lines, the  would handle Jerome and Lexington Aves, and the  and  would just be replaced by increased service on the . The only thing stopping this from happening is the admittedly awkward transfer at 149 St - Grand Concourse.

Otherwise, I don't see any full weekday services being cut. During the last service reductions, the  wasn't really cut, only the  in lower Manhattan and its not cost-effective peak hour extension along the West End. The  was only cut because the  could be extended to Astoria, but that's not an option since SAS is open. I see the  being cut to 145 St, but removing it entirely should only be done if there is no economic activity going on. Granted this could happen if a second wave happens, but let's hope that doesn't happen because in that case the  are gone as well.

And the , not the , should be running to Brooklyn. The  serves the busy Broadway corridor and the  makes 6 stops in Manhattan.

I still think the best non-pandemic option is to just build SAS Phase 2 as a single four-station extension into the Bronx along 3 Ave, stopping at 106, 116, 138, and 149 Aves. The latter two stops get you transfers to the  and , which will free up capacity on both IRT trunks. The 125 St line is nice, but I've always seen it as part of the Triboro RX, with 116 St being the transfer to the SAS.

I'm ambivalent on a temporary terminal at 116 St. That stop is only a mile away from the existing 96 St station by bus, though admittedly the choice isn't between terminating Phase 2 at 116 St vs 125 St  or 149 St , it's a short extension or no construction at all.

Island platforms are preferred because you only need one set of stairs, escalators, elevators, etc. to handle traffic uptown and downtown. Get rid of the mezzanine and just have exits at each end of the station to maximize coverage.

That said, given the current economic reality, I would delay SAS Phase 2 indefinitely until a new crowding baseline on the  is established, or until ridership/revenue recovers, probably in ~2 years. If/when stimulus comes in by a transit-friendly federal government, Gateway has to be the priority because the existing tunnels are falling apart, though that project needs to be reevaluated to not have a giant money-consuming cavern at Penn South.

I'll just quote what I posted last week. My ranking for cost-cutting measures would be OPTO, then peak service cuts. If ridership doesn't rebound, only a train every 4 minutes is needed on the trunk lines - basically what the IRT runs during regular weekday hours.

FWIW I think ridership will plateau for the rest of the year and the service cuts are coming sooner than later.

On 7/15/2020 at 11:58 AM, Caelestor said:

I don't think short turns such as 137 St on the  and Myrtle-Wyckoff on the  are going away. In terms of fleet requirements, short turns are very efficient because fewer trains need to run empty to the ends of the lines, especially during peak hours when the labor requirement is the highest. For that reason, I think the  could actually be safe this time around and it would be the  (peak) headways that would get longer.

Following this logic, what would be cut is a combination of peak-only and express service, especially if more people are WFH, so that service is more uniform throughout the day. If I had to make some tough decisions:

• Eliminate  skip-stop service: this might be a service improvement for local riders.
• Cut the  to 145 St. I don't think the  can be removed from Brighton, 6 Ave, or even CPW without consequence but most Concourse riders prefer the  anyways. 
• Eliminate rush-hour  trains to Rockaway Park. The excess trains could be sent to Lefferts Blvd instead.
• Brooklyn IRT reconfiguration:
  • Extend the  to New Lots Ave full-time, running local east of Franklin Ave. Most  trains run express between Franklin and Utica Aves during rush hours to minimize congestion at Rogers Junction.
  • Make Flatbush Ave the usual terminal for the . Some  trains run local to New Lots Ave during peak hours.
  • Make Utica Ave the usual weekday terminal for the . During peak hours, some trains may be extended to New Lots Ave or shortened to Bowling Green to minimize congestion.
  • This "allows for" further cutbacks to the part-time  and  services if necessary.
• Death by a thousand cuts - Longer peak headways on the . 

That said, I would just switch to OPTO like every other metro in the world, and redirect the excess staff to managing crowds at busy stations. It's possible to reduce costs without actually impacting paying passengers.

I don't think short turns such as 137 St on the  and Myrtle-Wyckoff on the  are going away. In terms of fleet requirements, short turns are very efficient because fewer trains need to run empty to the ends of the lines, especially during peak hours when the labor requirement is the highest. For that reason, I think the  could actually be safe this time around and it would be the  (peak) headways that would get longer.

Following this logic, what would be cut is a combination of peak-only and express service, especially if more people are WFH, so that service is more uniform throughout the day. If I had to make some tough decisions:

• Eliminate  skip-stop service: this might be a service improvement for local riders.
• Cut the  to 145 St. I don't think the  can be removed from Brighton, 6 Ave, or even CPW without consequence but most Concourse riders prefer the  anyways. 
• Eliminate rush-hour  trains to Rockaway Park. The excess trains could be sent to Lefferts Blvd instead.
• Brooklyn IRT reconfiguration:
  • Extend the  to New Lots Ave full-time, running local east of Franklin Ave. Most  trains run express between Franklin and Utica Aves during rush hours to minimize congestion at Rogers Junction.
  • Make Flatbush Ave the usual terminal for the . Some  trains run local to New Lots Ave during peak hours.
  • Make Utica Ave the usual weekday terminal for the . During peak hours, some trains may be extended to New Lots Ave or shortened to Bowling Green to minimize congestion.
  • This "allows for" further cutbacks to the part-time  and  services if necessary.
• Death by a thousand cuts - Longer peak headways on the . 

That said, I would just switch to OPTO like every other metro in the world, and redirect the excess staff to managing crowds at busy stations. It's possible to reduce costs without actually impacting paying passengers.

12 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

But in Muni’s case, they will be ending service in the Market St subway on the J-Church, K-Ingleside and L-Taraval lines entirely. J riders will have to change for the through-routed M/T or the S-Shuttle services at Church and Market, while K and L riders will have to change for those services at West Portal. They will also be through-routing the K and L lines. I can foresee a lot of people being inconvenienced by this, especially L riders. I don’t know a lot about Muni riders’ habits, but given that the L is one of the routes still running (as a bus, as are the N-Judah and T-Third routes) and that it had an owl bus service, I think the new K/L service won’t be popular or convenient for riders. Though I have a feeling this will be temporary because once the Central Subway opens next year, the T-Third  line will be rerouted there and it won’t be able to through-route with the M-Ocean View line. Maybe some sort of long-term solution could be a crosstown light rail route or two that could allow J and/or K trains from southern SF to connect with the T and use the Central Subway instead of cramming into Market. My wife and I visited San Francisco in 2011 and I do remember trains stopping between stations a lot. 

Now, bringing this back home, at least the  swap won’t result in any shuttle routes like in San Francisco. It will do away two of the three merges in the Queens Plaza/36th St area that cause QBL service to get so messed up all the time. But it will result in a sharp service cut at 21st St-Queensbridge and Roosevelt Island, because  trains are limited to eight 60-foot cars and current run only 8-9 tph during rush. Either they run the  more frequently to make up for the shorter trains. Also you would now have all express service going via 53rd and potentially overwhelming Lex/53rd, which was the case in the past (pre-  train era). Though I do like the idea of doing away with the  merge at 36th and the  merge at Queens Plaza. Instead, there would be only an  merge at 5th Ave (aside from the  merge at Queens Plaza, which we’ve already got).

On the other hand, I’ve got to wonder if this swap will be scrapped entirely because Corona. I recall reading they were looking to start it in April, but with the ginormous Corona-related deficit staring the MTA in the face, I wonder if they’ll even bother now.

The J Church is probably gone from the subway forever because it runs only one car and doesn't serve half of the busy Market St / Twin Peaks Tunnel stations. Plus with the delays at Duboce Portal, transfering to the underground station at Church and Market isn't a huge time difference overall.

I can see the L Taraval returning to Market St when ridership rebounds because transfer volumes at West Portal may be too much. The K Ingleside, which runs only one car trains, really shouldn't be entering the subway but trains can't easily turn near West Portal; hence why the K and L will be interlined when really the J and K should be the ones combined.

The  swap is an interesting idea that I hadn't heard of, but it trades the problem of too many merges along Queens Blvd for a 40 percent capacity cut along the 63 St line, which really should be avoided. I think the only real solution is to take the  off QBL to add more trains through 53 St and 63 St. As for the , there's a deinterlined Astoria - Bay Ridge line (with QBL - Whitehall St short turns) just waiting to be used...

The trains are still running from 1 to 5am, so it's not as if the lack of late night service actually saves any money. The real issue is the homeless, but that should be fixed through another social program to get them off the trains.

The solution to construction woes is more FASTRAK-style complete shutdowns on select lines, whether it be weekday late nights or entire weekends. Othersise, lagging and poor practice will cause service to degrade to unacceptable levels. As for cleaner subway cars, better utilization of rolling stock would do wonders. Overnight train cars could be scheduled to run on an afternoon peak - late night - morning peak shift and be maintained at the yards during midday hours.

1 hour ago, EvilMonologue said:

Wouldn't it make more sense to connect the MNRR tracks at Grand Central to Atlantic Terminal? I get the point isn't that people will be riding the routes end to end, but I'd think more people would continue that journey past Grand Central taking MNRR than those who would do so taking LIRR. Also, LIRR riders would already be able to connect to Lower Manhattan and Downtown Brooklyn at Jamaica, something that MNRR would not be able to do until already in Midtown. 

Totally on board with rethinking commuter rail in NYC, though. It can be the super-express that some people have talked about on here or at least used to.

The ESA to Atlantic proposal is politically convenient because it preserves LIRR's "territory", but I have to agree that connecting MNR with LIRR will have bigger benefits for regionral rail riders. The line that really needs to be built is GCT to Atlantic; reconstructing and electrifying the West Side Line would also create a second line would be the Hudson Line to Jamaica via Penn. (Once MNR is extended downtown, it could even connect to SIR via a long underwater tunnel, but I rank that very low in priority given Staten Island's aversion to upzoning).

On the NJT side, through-routing the NEC line with the LIRR Port Washington Line and the MNR New Haven Line via Hells Gate should be done ASAP while the Gateway Tunnel to GCT via Penn is built. The Morris & Essex Lines should be connected to ESA via Union Square and Hoboken. Lastly if the Erie lines ever get electrified, they can be throughrouted with the Atlantic Ave LIRR via Downtown Manhattan, but that would require the aforementioned long NY harbor tunnel to be built so that the Harlem Line can be rerouted towards SI.

Out of all the proposals on the table, the only trunk line that could be 4 tracks is 2 Ave, mainly in order to accommodate the additional capacity that would come from the Jamaica Line / 6 Ave express, Manhattan Bridge North / 2 Ave Phase 3, and the Broadway Local / Fulton St local via a new East River tunnel, and Nassau St / Bay Ridge local via Montague St tunnel takeover.  Even then, it might be better just to build a parallel line under 3 Ave to not disrupt the , when/if ridership demands it. As a potential bonus, the 3 Ave line would have just as good or even better transfers at 14 St, 42 St, 53 St, and 60/63 Sts.

Also, the ideal stop spacing for all-stop metros is ~1 km (0.6 miles), because stations can and should have entrances / exits at both ends. In NYC, this would be ~10 blocks, as seen in the IND local stop spacing. Express stations should typically be every 3 km (2 miles), equivalent to 1 in every 3rd local stop. In NYC, this would be about every 40 blocks, as seen in the IRT express stop spacing. Outside of NYC, regional rail such as Paris RER, London Crossrail, the non-local Tokyo commuter lines, typically serve as the "express lines" since the metros typically cover an area equivalent to just the length of Manhattan and the regional rail system serves as a suburban / express overlay to relieve crowds on the older metros.

47 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Could this potentially lead to another similar 2010 budget cut? I could see the getting discontinued, again...

Unlike 2010, the  can't run to Astoria so the  will stay put for now. Night service will probably be cut; namely the  would all stop running earlier in the evening.

21 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

If that's the case, couldn't we do a Queens Bypass without adding SAS into the mix? The following arrangement with our current system would be the following:

All Service can be booted to the Queens Bypass and continue Local to 179th at 18 or 20 TPH. 

Service can be bumped to 63rd Street and serve QB Local from there at 8 TPH, this would enforce a merge between the and , but this should have Minimal Impact. 

Service can remain the same with 10 TPH, until a 57th Street Line or some new Queens-Manhattan Link is built. 

Service (assuming you de-interline CPW with the EXP-LCL Arrangement) can be doubled to run 30 TPH, becoming a pure Express Service with branches at Jamaica-179th (18 TPH) and Jamaica Center (12 TPH). I think this arrangement for the would better warrant a Hillside Extension to Queens Village.

As for Bypass Stops, I'd do it a little bit different from your arrangement, I'd personally choose Sunnyside to be my first stop as part of the plan that the City and Amtrak have planned, then Woodside for the connection with the . (I'm unsure on how there would even be space, or if space can even be made to accommodate a stop at Woodside). Rego Park (near Woodhaven Blvd). Last but not least, Forest Hills with a new lower level. I think that's 3 new stops total with 1 Station Expansion. 

So QBL bypass doesn't rely on SAS. I just think SAS should be built first, because it's guaranteed to be heavily ridden at all times of day. QBL bypass is mainly there to relieve peak-hour QBL crowds and it would have mediocre ridership during off-hours.

There shouldn't be any trains between 21 St - Queensbridge and 36 St; the purpose of the bypass is to deinterline everything and max the 53 St and 63 St tunnel capacity. So all 63 St trains run on the bypass to Forest Hills, and local to 179 St. All 53 St trains run QBL express between Queens Plaza and Jamaica Center or 179 St. The is re-extended to Forest Hills and the  can keep running via the 11 St cut, but the future of the QBL local is to run crosstown under 50 or 57 St.

I agree that the Sunnyside stop I suggested should be connected to Queens Plaza and the new LIRR station. Woodside should be an underground stop with an island platform, free transfer to the . There's a stop at 51 Ave for a future connection to the Triboro RX. Agreed on Woodhaven Blvd and Forest Hills.

18 hours ago, RR503 said:

It seems I'm fighting a losing battle here on convincing folks that interlining 36 St is a bad idea, but I'll make one last pass at it. 

As a data scientist, you've convinced me against interlining 36 St. I was surprised to see that officially, the  is only 3 minutes faster than the at rush hour, so increasing service and reducing delays along 8 Ave / 53 St should theoretically keep riders' total travel time unchanged.

That said, I think sending all express trains via 63 St won't really shift ridership from QBL express to local that much, since many riders will just stay on the 6 Ave / 63 St trains (and Broadway via the transfer at Lex Ave / 63 St) because the line is already in walking distance of the 8 Ave / 53 St trains. I could also see transfer volumes at Jackson Heights - Roosevelt Ave increasing even more as  riders switch over to the  for Court Sq and Lex Ave / 53 St, so Woodhaven Blvd should be converted to an express stop.

On that note, the only way to truly solve QBL's overcrowding is to build another line. The 63 St to QBL merge has always been very inefficient since it was never supposed to happen. The  needs to be taken off QBL and put on the bypass line. With less tunneling and fewer stations (Northern Blvd / Sunnyside, Woodside, 51 Ave,  Woodhaven Blvd, Forest Hills lower-level), the QBL bypass is the most cost-efficient subway expansion in Queens and should be built after modified SAS phase 3 is complete.

3 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I will agree 59th is a terrible merge, but I didn’t know the entire IND is scheduled backwards from it. 

Yes, if CPW were to be deinterlined, I would prefer for the locals to go to 8th Ave and the expresses to 6th. But if so, then I’d consider the possibility of an “8th Avenue flip.” This would call for the  to be the CPW/8th Ave Local between 168th and WTC (extended to 207th late nights) and the  and  to be the 8th Avenue Express trains to both Brooklyn and Queens (QBL). The  would keep the same route in Brooklyn, while the  would replace the  to the Rockaways and Lefferts. The  would replace the  as the express to/from 207 and the  would become a dual  /  service on Concourse during rush hours similar to the  /  and  /  operations.

See, I think you can get away with fully deinterlining CPW, because you don’t have a major transfer point with another subway line in the middle of the line and a diverging route before the final transfer point. This is in strong contrast to QBL, which has both (transfer to  in the middle of the line and the  diverging into the 63rd St Tunnel before Queens Plaza). With that in mind, that’s why I don’t really think you can get away with fully deinterlining QBL and why you’ll need both an 8th and a 6th service on the QB local. And unless the MTA are willing to make the investment in lengthening the original  line station platforms for 10-car trains (which certainly won’t be happening in the foreseeable future now), I don’t really think you can get away with running the  express on QBL to Jamaica Center or 179th.

I agree that the  should run local because the 63 St line doesn't stop at Queens Plaza like the  currently all do at 59 St. However, it's simpler to have only the  run on the local tracks between 207 St and WTC full-time, and move the to 53 St / 8 Ave express. Then all the B division trunk lines

• Concourse / CPW express / 6 Ave express
• 207 St / CPW local / 8 Ave local - 
• 53 St / 8 Ave express
• 63 St / 6 Ave local lines -
• Astoria / Broadway local  
• SAS / Broadway express  

can be deinterlined from each other in Manhattan. This also standardizes the headways at 4 minutes on the , 6 minutes on the , 8 minutes on the  so that continued interlining on QBL and at DeKalb Ave remain smooth.

2 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

Don't build phase 3. Extend the Harlem Line downtown with stops at Union Square and Fulton Street, and in a later phase extend it to SI.

The Harlem Line should be extended downtown, connecting with Atlantic Terminal. Then ESA should be connected with the Morris & Essex lines. Lastly, build the SI and Hoboken to Downtown tunnels, and send the Harlem Line towards SI, once the Erie lines are fully electrified. 

In the meantime, SAS Phase 3 should still be built because the demand is clearly there. Build it as an extension of the Manhattan bridge north tracks, not upper SAS however, to remove the reverse branching.

The  is cut back to E 180 St, so the net result in Manhattan is that 7 Ave loses an express train for the weekend. On the other hand, Brooklyn gets to keep the  (via Lex)  when normally it would just be the  running.

5 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

It does. The Nassau St Line was a product of its time when it was built over 100 years ago, back when Lower Manhattan was the City’s largest job center, a status it would lose a few decades later. At least with the Chrystie St connection, riders from the Jamaica and Myrtle els can get to Midtown without piling onto the  in Brooklyn or the  in Manhattan. But you’re left with the Manhattan portion of the line south of Essex. Making that a shuttle seems like it would be taking a step towards abandoning it. Maybe the downtown shuttle train you described can instead be a  train between Jamaica Center and Broad that runs peak express between Broadway Junction and Marcy, while either the  or  starts/ends at Broadway Jct, and the other 6th Ave service starts/ends at Metropolitan. 

I think you're right on splitting the Nassau Line long (medium?)-term. And 2nd Ave should definitely have a four-track alignment in Phases 3 and 4, or be designed to easily be upgraded from two to four tracks, so two of those tracks can go to Broad.

If the Franklin Ave  can remain in service until today, so can the Nassau St shuttle (call it the  for clarity) after Williamsburg Bridge services are connected to the 6 Ave express tracks. Anyways, the future of the Nassau St line is to head uptown after Canal St as the SAS express, stopping at Houston St, 14 St, 42 St, 55 St, 72 St, 116 St, and running into the Bronx as the Third Ave line.

As for 50 St / 8 Ave, the solution is pretty clear. Local trains should be stopping at the upper level, and express trains stopping at the lower level. Then the 6 Ave express tracks can fully take over the CPW express tracks, and simplify the Manhattan services into

•  207 St - WTC local, 24/7
•  145 St lower level / Bedford Park Blvd (rush hours) - 6 Ave express, weekdays
•  Norwood - 6 Ave express, 24/7
•  53 St - 8 Ave express - Fulton express, 24/7
•  53 St - 8 Ave express - Fulton local, 19/7

As for Queens Blvd, the lines should be

•  53 St - QB express
•  63 St - QB express
•  53 St - QB local
•  63 St - QB local

which does keep reverse branching on QBL but at least the problematic 53 St / 6 Ave and 60 St / QBL merges disappear. If the  is cut off from Williamsburg Bridge, then it can be retired and the entire 63 St / 6 Ave / Culver line can be rebranded the  lines.

Then on Broadway, the  can take over the entire Astoria / Broadway / 4 Ave local tracks, with short-turn trains between Queensboro Plaza and Whitehall St, and the  can take over the entire SAS / Broadway express tracks. In a full-deinterlining scheme for the Manhattan bridge, the  would run via West End and the  would run via Brighton, but I'm not certain that's entirely necessary yet if the rest of B Division is fixed. If the 6 Ave express tracks are connected to the Williamsburg bridge and the Manhattan bridge north tracks run up 2 Ave, then the  would take over Brighton.