Jump to content

Create a route/Your version of the NYC Subway


NX Express

Recommended Posts


Sorry, I meant (F).

Quite frankly why not? Two more stops would bring you to 14th where you can hitch on the expresses. I live on the (F) and I have to get on the (4) almost everyday. It's a PITA, but c'est la vie. How else could you manage it? Like you said, you can't send two expresses down on 53rd. And if you decide to switch at B'way Laff for the (M), that's not going to save you much time either. Best bet is to switch to the uptown (6) when the thing opens next year (hopefully). And nobody wants to walk from 63rd to even 60th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What need happen is (R) be express and (E) be local on Queens Blvd. What do you think.

 

That's actually a good idea. Of course the E would have to be cut back to Forest Hills while the R is extended to Jamaica, but this would solve several problems:

 

The (R) is an all-local route that runs in 3 boroughs, wheras the (E) runs in 2 boroughs and is express in one of them, so it makes more sense to have the R run express.

 

The (R) offers easier access to the Lexington Avenue Line (all you have to do is go up or down a flight of stairs for the local or express). The (E) only offers access to the local and it is a longer passageway.

 

The (R) offers direct access to Broadway, which has more attractions than 8th Avenue.

 

The only thing is that the tracks from the 60th Street tunnel connect directly to the QB local tracks and that would require the (E) to switch to the local track and the (R) to switch to the express track, getting in front of each other. (See: http://images.nycsubway.org/trackmap/bigqueens1.png) I don't know if the 59th Street platform would become overcrowded from being the only direct Lexington Avenue Express-Queens Boulevard Express connection. The saving factor would be that it doesn't have 2 QB express services on the same platform, but that is something to consider, especially with the Astoria Line sharing the same platform.

 

The irony would be that, 53rd Street used to have 2 expresses, and it would be reduced to 2 locals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What need happen is (R) be express and (E) be local on Queens Blvd. What do you think.

On face value, it looks great. But I am afraid that if that happens there will be more repercussions:

-as mentioned the 53rd Street tracks line up perfectly with the expresses and the 60th tunnel was designed to run local via QBL. Sure, the (R) could run through 63rd with the (F) and then express, but folks at 60th/Lex would lose an important transfer.

-also, if the (R) goes express, there will be serious crowding at 59th

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's actually a good idea. Of course the E would have to be cut back to Forest Hills while the R is extended to Jamaica, but this would solve several problems:

 

The (R) is an all-local route that runs in 3 boroughs, wheras the (E) runs in 2 boroughs and is express in one of them, so it makes more sense to have the R run express.

 

The (R) offers easier access to the Lexington Avenue Line (all you have to do is go up or down a flight of stairs for the local or express). The (E) only offers access to the local and it is a longer passageway.

 

The (R) offers direct access to Broadway, which has more attractions than 8th Avenue.

 

The only thing is that the tracks from the 60th Street tunnel connect directly to the QB local tracks and that would require the (E) to switch to the local track and the (R) to switch to the express track, getting in front of each other. (See: http://images.nycsubway.org/trackmap/bigqueens1.png) I don't know if the 59th Street platform would become overcrowded from being the only direct Lexington Avenue Express-Queens Boulevard Express connection. The saving factor would be that it doesn't have 2 QB express services on the same platform, but that is something to consider, especially with the Astoria Line sharing the same platform.

 

The irony would be that, 53rd Street used to have 2 expresses, and it would be reduced to 2 locals.

 

(E) would go to Forest Hill 71 Av local

 

(R) would go to Jamiaca Center and would run express skip same stop that (E) skips in Queens and every other (R) run via 63rd Street Tunnel, just like Q15 and Q15A since we are on bus forum so people will not miss any transfer.

 

(F)(M) will stay the same

 

 

 

On face value, it looks great. But I am afraid that if that happens there will be more repercussions:

-as mentioned the 53rd Street tracks line up perfectly with the expresses and the 60th tunnel was designed to run local via QBL. Sure, the (R) could run through 63rd with the (F) and then express, but folks at 60th/Lex would lose an important transfer.

-also, if the (R) goes express, there will be serious crowding at 59th

Then every other (R) will go via 60th street and every other (R) via 63rd Street, this way no overcrowding on 63rd Street tunnel or on Lexington Av station

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you were in charge of the MTA, what would you do with the NYC Subway?

 

 

(A) - To Far Rockaway/Rockaway Pk All Times, R44 and R46

(:D - Same Route, R160/R68/A

(C) - To Lefferts Blvd, R44/R46/R160

(D) - Same Route, R160/R68

(E) - Same Route, R160

(F) - To Coney Island via Culver Express, All times, R160

(G) - To Kings Highway via Culver Local, All times, R46/R68/A

(J) - To Jamaica Center via Nassau Street Local All times, R143/R160

(L) - Same Route, R143, R160 shared with (J)(Z)

(M) - Eliminated

(N) - Same route, R160

(Q) - To Astoria Ditmars Blvd, R160/R68/A

(R) - Same Route, R46/R68

(S) - 42nd Street Shuttle - Same Route and Train

* Franklin Av Shuttle, Same Route and Train

* Rockaway Shuttle - Eliminated

(V) - To Forest Hills/Metropolitan Av, via Chrystie, 6 Av/53 St Local, Nassau Street Local, Queens Blvd Local - (R160 from M)

(W) - Eliminated

(Z) - To Jamaica Center/Bay Parkway All Times, via Nassau Street Express, via express between Marcy and Broadway Junction via 4 Av Local,West End Express (I mean using the middle track) R143/R160

(1) - Same Route, R62A/R142

(2) - Same Route, R142

(3) - Same Route, R62/A/R142A

(4) - Rush hour Peak Direction <4> via Jerome Av Express, other times regular route, R142/R62

(5) - Same Route, R62/R142

(6) - Same Route, R142/A

(7) - Same Route + Train

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sending (R) trains via 2 separate lines would cause too much confusion. People would have to pay very close attention to the announcements and you would see a lot of people leaving the train at Roosevelt Avenue and 57th Street when they find out where the (R) train is going.

Also, if half of the trains were to go via 63rd Street, that would be a missed opportunity for local passengers on the (E)/(M) to connect to the Broadway Line, so the 60th Street trains would end up being overcrowded anyway, since only half of the (R) trains would be able to take passengers coming from Roosevelt Avenue-Queens Plaza. Also, the 60th Street ®s would be even more crowded because people know that by the time they walk from the 63rd Street station to 59th Street, the 60th Street (R) will have already left them directly above the Lexington Avenue Line, so crowding wouldn't be evenly distibuted.

The (A)'s branches to Lefferts Blvd and the Rockaways are a different story, since they are at the end of the line, where there are fewer people to be confused. (Also, the signage is easier, since it says Lefferts Blvd or Far Rockaway) In Midtown Manhattan, there is the potential to affect a lot of people.

I think running all ®s via 60th Street would've been better, though that has its own problems.

 

Basically, I agree with the problems that you are trying to solve, but the solution would create even worse problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care what trainsets are put on them, I'm more concerned with the service(s) themselves....

 

anyway, when the Rockaway park project is completed, I wish they get rid of the rockaway park shuttle, and retain (A) service to rockaway park....

 

the (:D can benefit from more service to the Bronx...

 

eh, those two are only thing that comes to mind right now....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

anyway, when the Rockaway park project is completed, I wish they get rid of the rockaway park shuttle, and retain (A) service to rockaway park....

 

What's going on with Rockaway Park?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's going on with Rockaway Park?

 

I should've said the Rockaway park branch.... my fault on the ambiguity there...

 

anyway, they're completely renovating the stations along that branch.... much like what they're doing along the brighton.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway as for the Rockaway Park S, other than the 5 rush hour A trains, I don't see the need for anything more than the S since middays the trains are hardly packed and a 4-car train* can handle all the riders heading to Rockaway Park. Far Rockaway can use all the trains it can get. I don't want the extra Rock Park service to be at the expense of the Lefferts segment.

 

*Summers being a different story with 8-car Shuttles to handle the beach going crowds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem if the threads were merged.

 

Anyway as for the Rockaway Park S, other than the 5 rush hour A trains, I don't see the need for anything more than the S since middays the trains are hardly packed and a 4-car train* can handle all the riders heading to Rockaway Park. Far Rockaway can use all the trains it can get. I don't want the extra Rock Park service to be at the expense of the Lefferts segment.

 

*Summers being a different story with 8-car Shuttles to handle the beach going crowds.

 

 

Which is exactly why you don't need the Rockaway Park (S).... riders have grown accustomed to that q53 ride (to/from Rockaway Blvd) anyway.... I say take the strain off the bus, and add those riders onto an (A) leaving Rockaway Park....

 

What I'm bringing up, won't be at the expense of Lefferts... it would be at the expense of Far Rockaway, to a certain extent...

 

While I do agree that there should be more service to Far Rockaway (compared to Rockaway Pk.), I disagree with the notion that Far Rockaway can use all the trains it can get....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well true, but I just don't think the Rock Park S needs anything more than the 3 shuttle trains that currently runs on it. Maybe a 4th train, would be nice. But other than the waiting times, it isn't packed to the gills and there's still empty seats on the train. - Again based on riding it during the middays like 1-3pm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sending some ®s via the 63rd St tunnel will mean more people will jam onto the (E) and (M) to transfer to the (6) at Lexington. Leave the (R) as is.

63rd is not practical as it is 4 blocks away from 59th St. Plus the (R) transfer to the Lex lines is very good at 59th. Why would people want to give that up?

 

If there are two branch on (5) then this could work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(E) would go to Forest Hill 71 Av local

 

(R) would go to Jamiaca Center and would run express skip same stop that (E) skips in Queens and every other (R) run via 63rd Street Tunnel, just like Q15 and Q15A since we are on bus forum so people will not miss any transfer.

 

(F)(M) will stay the same

 

Then every other (R) will go via 60th street and every other (R) via 63rd Street, this way no overcrowding on 63rd Street tunnel or on Lexington Av station

I'm sorry, but I would keep the status quo on this. This will cause too much confusion, especially for the guy at the tower at 57th/7. Not only would it cause problems for the guy at the tower, it would cause headaches for those on the platform. How are they going to expect which (R) would arrive? Also, for the (R) to go onto the 63rd tracks, it must be at the express tracks at 57/7, thus some deal of switching must be done in order to accomodate this.

 

By sending the (R) to Jamaica, you will be making it unnecessarily wrong. Sure, it would be on the express tracks this time, but still: the (E) would be much shortened if it's sent to Forest Hills and longer routes tend to be prone to delays.

 

The system is inflexible, however, to rectify this, flying junctions would have to be built according to scenario. How much money can we use to spend on this when the money can be used somewhere else? Be pragmatic.

 

Furthermore, the (R) would be the ONLY express at Queens Plaza and yet half the line could serve there. This is not optimal during rush hours when people do want the express trains.

The (A)'s branches to Lefferts Blvd and the Rockaways are a different story, since they are at the end of the line, where there are fewer people to be confused.

That's why I want to rename the trains that are heading to the Rockaways as the (H) and the ones that are going to Lefferts as the (A).

If there are two branch on (5) then this could work

But that's at the end of the line besides it's very discernible to figure which trains are going where because of the signs and everything. Most (5) trains go to Dyre, except during rush hours when some trains go to Nereid. But your thing is different: all (R) trains go to JAM, but they get split mid-route and rejoin somewhere else. How does that make sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that they should run (A) under two names. Keep (A) to Far Rockaway and remake (H) to replace (A) to Lefferts, following the same schedule timing, and service pattern. For less confusion, and handaches.

That's what I said: http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=284737&postcount=2 (second post on this thread)

I want to have the FR trains to be called the (H) and the Lefferts the (A). However, I want the (H) to end at 168th because the Far Rock line itself is pretty long, so I don't want to strain the crews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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