Solution to train delays

[S78 via Hylan]

I don't think there is another thread about this, so I gonna ask you guys to throw some ideas out there.

 

What are the best solutions to overcrowded trains? There is no right or wrong answer! I don't want this thread to get locked!

[rr4567]

Send all of them express to the 7th layer of hell

 

naw naw

 

For Lexington service: run more trains on the 4 and 5. This will lower wait times and there will be less people per train

[Y2Julio]

[LRG]

 

LOL!

[NX Express]

Send all of them express to the 7th layer of hell

 

naw naw

 

For Lexington service: run more trains on the 4 and 5. This will lower wait times and there will be less people per train

 

If they could, they would. It's already at capacity.

[nel070]

There is not a solution for overcrowding, unfortuanately the subway system wasn't built to handle the many passengers the system has now. The only solution may be expansion and thats takes a long time and is expensive.

[rr4567]

If they could, they would. It's already at capacity.

 

20 more trains won't hurt

 

5 more wont hurt.

[Forest Glen]

Encourage more people to ride express buses and commuter railroads. This would relieve overcrowding (especially during rush hour).

[engineerboy6561]

I feel that NX Express is right; as it is right now, neither the Queens Blvd express nor the Lex Av Express can handle more trains. Our options thus begin to narrow down somewhat. If we want to pack more trains onto the same stretches of trackage we can do this two ways. THe first is through switching and signaling improvements (e.g. high-speed switches capable of being used at speeds of 30+ MPH, removal and corridor-wide implementation of CBTC that will allow trains to run closer together at the same or higher speeds than right now). The other, cheaper option is simpley to timer the $&!* out of both stretches. I vehemently object to this proposal, though, because I have used trains on both stretches and they are already slow. I say this because I take the from Bedford Park to Boro Hall twice a week going opposite rush and even opposite rush there are issues. The few times I have taken it with rush it has crawled from Union Sq to 125 St. QBL is even worse; I caught an at Forest Hills at 6:15 PM and arrived at 7 Av-53 St at 6:53 (for those who aren't aware the only makes 5-6 stops along that entire stretch).

The other, more viable option if you would like to talk long-term, would be expansion, particularly into southern and Eastern Queens. Such expansion could initially include addition of new trackage along existing ROWs, such as using the old LIRR tracks by QBL to operate a super-express via QBL super-express and Hillside Av express, extend the to 8-car trains and run it all times via QBL local to Forest Hills, and have the split the express runs with the to Forest Hills, where the would both run local. The would then provide Hillside Av local service to 179 St. Other, largely simple expansion plans would involve the Flushing line. The line should probably be four-tracked to Times Sq and three-tracked to 14 St/West St, with the local being given a separate desgnation and run local from Flushing to TSQ all times except late nights. THe express would then run express in both directions from Flushing to TSQ before continuing on to run local via Northern Bl through southern Bayside in Queens and from TSQ via 42 St and then 12 Av/West St local to 14 St. This simple move would allow total Flushing TPH to jump 50-85% without drastically slowing service.

On the Lex, this would not be feasible. However, it would be possible to make the IND Concourse line four-track to Bedford Pk Blvd and then three-track to Co-op City via Gun Hill Rd. Also, the 161 St station would be converted to an express stop to satisfy Yankee fans. This move would allow Concourse headways to stay high on an near-24 hour basis. This expansion would allow the ( to run as Concourse local to Bedford Pk Blvd all times except late nights and the to run as Concourse express/Gun Hill Rd local. In a single stroke this would pull a number of people off the in the Bronx because it would make the comparably fast and thus lessen the crush loads there. It would likely also mean no more having to let Bx28s go by because you cannot possibly fit on them.

However, to truly fix the crowding problem on the , the 2 Av subway needs not only to get built, but to be four-track with four distinct lines at least to 125 St. From there, I would advocate for a local/express combo into Queens to serve Astoria, LGA, College Pt, and the northern end of Bayside. Run the first part of the stretch four-track from 125 to LGA for combined local/express service and the run from LGA to Ft Totten three-track to accommodate in case the area needs rush-hour peak direction express service out to College Point or Bayside. The other two branches should enter the Bronx. One should run near the very western edge of the Bronx (Sedgwick Av from 167 St to Ft Independence St, then turning west on Ft. Independence/238 St and going under Manhattan College Pkwy to 239 and along HHP/Riverdale Av to 261 St), while the other should run under Southern Bl to the New York Botanical Garden, then under Webster to Gun Hill Rd for connections to the new as well as the trains.

This should only be the beginning. For guaranteed service without excessive timering or crowding and easing of the strain on the bus system, the four lines of the SAS should split up south of Whitehall. One local should run via 4 Av/Sea Beach local as far as Bay Pkwy so that the can run express from 59 St to Bay Pkwy all times except late nights. This train would then run crosstown on Av N to Flatbush Av and then down to Kings Plz. One of the expresses should run via 4 Av to 77 St, with a new express stop at 77 St, then curve out around the VA and tunnel under the strait between Brooklyn and SI. I would then have it serve Gannon Av/Victory Bl/SI Mall/Eltingville Transit Ctr. Finally, I would four-track the SIR and run a tunnel from Whitehall to St. George to provide direct local/express service from SI to Manhattan all times except late nights, when the local would run as a Bx-only shuttle and the express would run local.

With this taken care of, I would then move to other extensions such as four-tracking the to Kings and having an setup where the would run via new tracks connected from the center tracks at 2 Av, stopping at new lower levels of Delancey and Jay Sts. From there, the would run as the Culver express via McDonald to Kings and then local to Coney. The would take over local service from Kings to 2 Av and the would help out starting at Bergen. In the same vein, I would widen the area on the 8 Av lines just south of Spring to allow for two new express tracks to connect to the tracks and go under the current structure. These tracks would skip Canal, stop at new lower levels at Chambers, Bway-Nassau, and Jay, and then connect to the two center tracks at Hoyt. The outermost tracks at Hoyt would then be connected to the existing trackage.

With service bottlenecks largely cleaned up on Lexington, QBL, and 8 Av, and TPH increased without burdening the new system by implementing this plan, then would be a good time to talk about ideas such as South 4th and Archer Av. Expansions such as the ones above would hopefully grant the subway system some 40-50 years before it would need a new wave of expansion. As to Forest Glen's comment, I am not trying to deprecate either you or your preferred modes of transportation when I say this, but first of all price barriers on both the commuter rail and particularly the express bus would place a limit on the amount of commuter shuffling that would actually occur. Second, if you idea succeeded it would simply shift the overcrowding problem (which in some cases is already significant on commuter rail) onto another agency and they would find themselves having to modify their methods of operation to compensate.

[NX Express]

I feel that NX Express is right; as it is right now, neither the Queens Blvd express nor the Lex Av Express can handle more trains. Our options thus begin to narrow down somewhat. If we want to pack more trains onto the same stretches of trackage we can do this two ways. THe first is through switching and signaling improvements (e.g. high-speed switches capable of being used at speeds of 30+ MPH, removal and corridor-wide implementation of CBTC that will allow trains to run closer together at the same or higher speeds than right now). The other, cheaper option is simpley to timer the $&!* out of both stretches. I vehemently object to this proposal, though, because I have used trains on both stretches and they are already slow. I say this because I take the from Bedford Park to Boro Hall twice a week going opposite rush and even opposite rush there are issues. The few times I have taken it with rush it has crawled from Union Sq to 125 St. QBL is even worse; I caught an at Forest Hills at 6:15 PM and arrived at 7 Av-53 St at 6:53 (for those who aren't aware the only makes 5-6 stops along that entire stretch).

The other, more viable option if you would like to talk long-term, would be expansion, particularly into southern and Eastern Queens. Such expansion could initially include addition of new trackage along existing ROWs, such as using the old LIRR tracks by QBL to operate a super-express via QBL super-express and Hillside Av express, extend the to 8-car trains and run it all times via QBL local to Forest Hills, and have the split the express runs with the to Forest Hills, where the would both run local. The would then provide Hillside Av local service to 179 St. Other, largely simple expansion plans would involve the Flushing line. The line should probably be four-tracked to Times Sq and three-tracked to 14 St/West St, with the local being given a separate desgnation and run local from Flushing to TSQ all times except late nights. THe express would then run express in both directions from Flushing to TSQ before continuing on to run local via Northern Bl through southern Bayside in Queens and from TSQ via 42 St and then 12 Av/West St local to 14 St. This simple move would allow total Flushing TPH to jump 50-85% without drastically slowing service.

On the Lex, this would not be feasible. However, it would be possible to make the IND Concourse line four-track to Bedford Pk Blvd and then three-track to Co-op City via Gun Hill Rd. Also, the 161 St station would be converted to an express stop to satisfy Yankee fans. This move would allow Concourse headways to stay high on an near-24 hour basis. This expansion would allow the ( to run as Concourse local to Bedford Pk Blvd all times except late nights and the to run as Concourse express/Gun Hill Rd local. In a single stroke this would pull a number of people off the in the Bronx because it would make the comparably fast and thus lessen the crush loads there. It would likely also mean no more having to let Bx28s go by because you cannot possibly fit on them.

However, to truly fix the crowding problem on the , the 2 Av subway needs not only to get built, but to be four-track with four distinct lines at least to 125 St. From there, I would advocate for a local/express combo into Queens to serve Astoria, LGA, College Pt, and the northern end of Bayside. Run the first part of the stretch four-track from 125 to LGA for combined local/express service and the run from LGA to Ft Totten three-track to accommodate in case the area needs rush-hour peak direction express service out to College Point or Bayside. The other two branches should enter the Bronx. One should run near the very western edge of the Bronx (Sedgwick Av from 167 St to Ft Independence St, then turning west on Ft. Independence/238 St and going under Manhattan College Pkwy to 239 and along HHP/Riverdale Av to 261 St), while the other should run under Southern Bl to the New York Botanical Garden, then under Webster to Gun Hill Rd for connections to the new as well as the trains.

This should only be the beginning. For guaranteed service without excessive timering or crowding and easing of the strain on the bus system, the four lines of the SAS should split up south of Whitehall. One local should run via 4 Av/Sea Beach local as far as Bay Pkwy so that the can run express from 59 St to Bay Pkwy all times except late nights. This train would then run crosstown on Av N to Flatbush Av and then down to Kings Plz. One of the expresses should run via 4 Av to 77 St, with a new express stop at 77 St, then curve out around the VA and tunnel under the strait between Brooklyn and SI. I would then have it serve Gannon Av/Victory Bl/SI Mall/Eltingville Transit Ctr. Finally, I would four-track the SIR and run a tunnel from Whitehall to St. George to provide direct local/express service from SI to Manhattan all times except late nights, when the local would run as a Bx-only shuttle and the express would run local.

With this taken care of, I would then move to other extensions such as four-tracking the to Kings and having an setup where the would run via new tracks connected from the center tracks at 2 Av, stopping at new lower levels of Delancey and Jay Sts. From there, the would run as the Culver express via McDonald to Kings and then local to Coney. The would take over local service from Kings to 2 Av and the would help out starting at Bergen. In the same vein, I would widen the area on the 8 Av lines just south of Spring to allow for two new express tracks to connect to the tracks and go under the current structure. These tracks would skip Canal, stop at new lower levels at Chambers, Bway-Nassau, and Jay, and then connect to the two center tracks at Hoyt. The outermost tracks at Hoyt would then be connected to the existing trackage.

With service bottlenecks largely cleaned up on Lexington, QBL, and 8 Av, and TPH increased without burdening the new system by implementing this plan, then would be a good time to talk about ideas such as South 4th and Archer Av. Expansions such as the ones above would hopefully grant the subway system some 40-50 years before it would need a new wave of expansion. As to Forest Glen's comment, I am not trying to deprecate either you or your preferred modes of transportation when I say this, but first of all price barriers on both the commuter rail and particularly the express bus would place a limit on the amount of commuter shuffling that would actually occur. Second, if you idea succeeded it would simply shift the overcrowding problem (which in some cases is already significant on commuter rail) onto another agency and they would find themselves having to modify their methods of operation to compensate.

You should make a fantasy map with all that.

 

Anyway, that would cost quite a lot of dough.

[engineerboy6561]

Thank you for that. It would probably run a $&!*load of money to build, but it would allow them to cut back on several bus lines, particularly the Bx28, the B9, the M15, the Q12/13, the S62/92, the S53/79/93, and several express buses. At the same time, TPH could probably actually be lowered somewhat on some lines such as the and because some of the crowds could be shunted onto other lines.

[NX Express]

If it didn't cost so much, it would be reasonable. Your idea is like the IND Third, Fourth, and Fifth Systems all put together.

[CenSin]

Build parallel lines. By doing that, you automatically split the ridership in half.

[Urbanfortitude]

Send all of them express to the 7th layer of hell

 

naw naw

 

For Lexington service: run more trains on the 4 and 5. This will lower wait times and there will be less people per train

 

.... ;;

 

 

 

._.;; "Uhm...maybe we should take a cab instead"

[airindia78780]

 

At least people try to push them into the cars. In Bombay they simply allow people to hang from the cars during rush hour.

 

As for solutions to delays, the subway is quite old and was not designed to handle these loads of passengers. Any efforts to improve, such as the ideas mentioned above by NX Express, would be expensive and would take forever.

 

The London Tube is much older than the subway and experiences similar delays.

 

Incidentally, the Tube website is similar in design to the MTA website with a feed in front indicating delays/construction/closures.

[error46146]

they need to have these guys on the QB line i swear lol morons do not know to GET THE **** OUTTA MY WAY

 

the new MTA chairman used to be the London chairman and the new MTA website was one of the things he wanted changed to his way so i would expect some similarities with the MTA and the london subway.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Thank you for that. It would probably run a $&!*load of money to build, but it would allow them to cut back on several bus lines, particularly the Bx28, the B9, the M15, the Q12/13, the S62/92, the S53/79/93, and several express buses. At the same time, TPH could probably actually be lowered somewhat on some lines such as the and because some of the crowds could be shunted onto other lines.

I, too, would like to see your proposals on a fantasy map. Out of all of them, the one that is the most feasible is the Queens Super Express, because that can be built mostly alongside the LIRR line through Sunnyside, Woodside and Rego Park. The LIRR is four tracks there, but is wide enough for six because the Rockaway Line used to run through there and turned south in Rego Park. I'd run the on the Super Express, like you suggest. But may I suggest leaving the and as is, run the express on the QBL tracks with the and run the local to Continental with the . In order to run the express you'd have to completely rebuild the junction south of Queens Plaza, because the connects to the local tracks only.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

At least people try to push them into the cars. In Bombay they simply allow people to hang from the cars during rush hour.

 

As for solutions to delays, the subway is quite old and was not designed to handle these loads of passengers. Any efforts to improve, such as the ideas mentioned above by NX Express, would be expensive and would take forever.

 

The London Tube is much older than the subway and experiences similar delays.

 

Incidentally, the Tube website is similar in design to the MTA website with a feed in front indicating delays/construction/closures.

The Tube line trains in London are also smaller than NYC's IRT trains, which means they're really small, so they must really be prone to delays. The Sub-Surface lines are roughly the same size as our BMT/IND lines.

[St Louis Car 09]

Simple.Stand clear of the closing doors and don`t 12-9 yourself.:tup:

[rr4567]

.... ;;

 

 

I can do the same thing too ;;;;;;;;:::::'''':;';';';';'-';'-;;'.-;'.-';';';-.'

 

but that's not helping, is it?

 

________________________________________________________________________________

 

There is a simple answer. Nothing can be done. The subway can not handle all those people in Manhattan. The lines are running to capacity, except the . Solution: Build more. Add lines.

[engineerboy6561]

Thank you guys for your support; I will see what I can do on the fantasy map front. T to Dyre, thanks for the suggestion; I didn't realize that the only connects to the local. I suggested it because the already does Bay Ridge to 71 Av local and I didn't want to make the runs any longer. However, come to think of it, local from Kings to 71 Av would be worse. Are there any other ideas about system expansion that anyone would like to put forth?

[GarbageTruckJuice]

The glass doors the JFK Airtrain has might help preventing some delays.

 

 

On second thought that might be a bad idea. You know someone is bound to lose a finger, arm, leg, nose, whatever from trying to hold those suckers open and then there would be more delays because then they'd have to stop everything to clean up the mess.

[Eric B]

 

I, too, would like to see your proposals on a fantasy map.

If any new tracks are to be built under a line, it should be on the Lexington. Then, they can even pick up the Dual Contracts section above 42nd. The Contract 1 line could then be turned back into an E/W crosstown, if a new line is also built under upper Broadway to connect to the 7th Av.

[Forest Glen]

At least people try to push them into the cars. In Bombay they simply allow people to hang from the cars during rush hour.

 

As for solutions to delays, the subway is quite old and was not designed to handle these loads of passengers. Any efforts to improve, such as the ideas mentioned above by NX Express, would be expensive and would take forever.

 

The London Tube is much older than the subway and experiences similar delays.

 

Incidentally, the Tube website is similar in design to the MTA website with a feed in front indicating delays/construction/closures.

 

Comparing the Tubes to the NYC subway is like comparing the Lakers to the Knicks.