Route Fantasy Map (using existing infrastructure)

[Alargule]

OK guys, here goes nothing.

 

Inspired by the concept behind the map in this thread, I decided to make my own fantasy route map, using my own subway map as a base template:

 

 

I applied the following principles to the layout of the service pattern:

 

 

• Use only existing infrastructure (=no new construction required);
  
• All existing stations have to be served;
  
• Routes should be able to run as segregated from other routes as possible; routes branching off of trunk lines should only be applied when there is no other option. Routes, belonging to different trunk lines, sharing the same tracks are especially discouraged;
  
• Service patterns should be as straightforward as possible; the use of special rush hour services or off-peak terminal switching should be avoided.

 

 

Of course, I couldn't apply those rules everywhere in the network. A few decisions I had to make:

 

 

• In the Bronx, I decided to keep the and running along the same tracks. As an alternative, I could have extended the to Eastchester instead of the . However, that would have meant giving up the 148 St terminal and the intermediate 145 St station;
  
• I eliminated service along the express tracks between 168 St/Washington Heights and 145 St. Instead, the intermediate stations are served by the . What way, I could keep the running an entirely segregated route in Manhattan: the continues alongside the to Jamaica Center;
  
• On the Queens Boulevard Line, I switched the to the local tracks. Replacing it by the on the express part would lead to lower train frequencies, so I decided to add the to increase service;
  
• The (Mx) returns to its original route, but always terminates at Broad St;
  
• Major service changes in Brooklyn: all express trains coming off the Lex () are routed to New Lots Av. Service along the express track portion between Franklin Av and Utica Av is eliminated. All express trains coming off the Seventh Av line () run to Flatbush Av.
  This is actually the only part in the system that would require some (re)construction: track switches between the local and express tracks west of Nostrand Av (lower and upper level) are required to segregate the routes to Flatbush Av and New Lots Av, respectively;
  
• The complex weaving of routes in the DeKalb Av area has been simplified: all trains coming off the Manhattan Bridge running on the north side (Sixth Av ( and ) are rerouted to the Brighton Beach line; the replaces the .
  The is the only remaining Broadway express route running over the Manhattan Bridge and providing service on the Sea Beach line.
  The Broadway local lines and are rerouted via the Montague tunnel; the replaces the along the West End line.
  All these routes still terminate at Coney Island;
  
• I eliminated the various single track rush hour express lines in the Bronx. Although that will lead to longer commuting times for some, others will see train frequencies at their departure stations improved. So it's a you win some, you lose some-kinda situation :cool:

 

 

With this route configuration I've managed to keep most trunk routes segregated from each other. Any comments are welcome, of course

[Gorgor]

The problem with that is that it makes certain lines completely uneeded.

 

The ( goes with the the whole time, which isn't needed. Same with the .

 

And sorry, but the to Queens is a terrible idea. Eighth avenue needs a local the whole way, and having to switch for the isn't a good idea. Would the be making local stops north of 42nd street?

[CenSin]

You should've made the same decision to keep the as you did with the and in the Bronx. I would tolerate just a bit a more merging (maximum of 2 shared segments per line).

 

The should be cut back since it doesn't cover anything not covered already along Queens Boulevard.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Why do so many people on this board want to run the with the as much as possible and put the back in the Montague Tunnel? Do you all miss the 90s service patterns that much? By running the to Astoria, it will have the same problem it had before 1987, which was that it had no direct yard access. Honestly, I think keeping the same routes from each trunk line with each other as much as possible is bad. Interlining (at least in the outer boroughs) is a good thing. It offers riders more choices. You don't see this in most other cities because their lines are completely self-contained (like the and the ). But ours aren't and they shouldn't be. Basically you have a lot of routes unnecessarily duplicating each other in Brooklyn and Queens.

[Alargule]

The reason I chose for those unnecessary (?) routes running alongside each other is that this way, at least the current pattern of express services in Brooklyn can be kept intact. The 2 and 3 run alongside each other for the whole time so that service to 148 St wouldn't have to be eliminated.

Whether this is a well-funded proposal that could see the light of day one time? Probably not: I primarily considered it an exercise to see how far I could go in disentangling the current routes without the need of new line construction or having to abandon stations while keeping service on most current stretches.

[mark1447]

The is needed for split.

 

Thats why today the and splitting Brooklyn so those on the Westside can have access to ether New Lots and Nostrand Service and same for people on the East side of Manhattan!

 

The ( as well to allow those passangers along Concourse, St Nich/CPW and 6th Ave to get an extra option for ether go down West End or Brighton.

 

 

I would of made even better to push the down to Kings Plaza and also push the via E. Gun Hill road to at LEAST Bay Plaza Shopping center so customers there can have subway service not just Bx12+SBS

 

BTW You have the crossing the incorrectly they both go up and down same for the WPR which goes accross a bit till hits Westchester/Southern Blvd and north.

 

Of course nice map!

[Alargule]

The is needed for split.

 

Thats why today the and splitting Brooklyn so those on the Westside can have access to ether New Lots and Nostrand Service and same for people on the East side of Manhattan!

 

The as well to allow those passangers along Concourse, St Nich/CPW and 6th Ave to get an extra option for ether go down West End or Brighton.

 

Well, it looks like that's where you touched the sore spot (or is it sour? ) with my plan (or any plan for that matter) that disentangles routes to the extreme: less boarding options for passengers, especially outside the core part of the network and more need for transfers. On the other hand, it would allow for more flexibility in train scheduling (the scheduling of other routes does not have to be taken into account) and more reliable service - at least in theory.

 

BTW You have the crossing the incorrectly they both go up and down same for the WPR which goes accross a bit till hits Westchester/Southern Blvd and north.

 

I know; the map itself is really schematic, possibly a bit too much so in the Bronx B)

 

Of course nice map!

 

Thanks!

[Nova RTS 9147]

I like how the never gets any love, despite how needed it is.

[Caelestor]

As much as I think excessive interlining reduces frequencies, the trunk lines are too isolated here. There still should be some junctions to reduce the number of awkward transfers riders have to make.

 

Another thing to consider: lines on the same tracks should have headways that synchronize (i.e. 4 minutes/4 minutes or 4 minutes/8 minutes) to simplify operations.

[Alargule]

I believe the greatest advantage of segregated routes would be the ability to apply to each route its own train scheduling without having to take into account any other routes - except for the ones that use the same trunk line. Since most trunk lines on my fantasy map can be operated independently from each other, train scheduling could more easily be adjusted according to demand.

Another advantage would be the ability to increase frequency and still maintain a high level of service reliability. I would believe the minimum headway in minutes per route during rush hours shouldn't go below 8 (=15 trains per 2 hours). Combined routes should then be able to offer shorter headways of 2 or 3 minutes.