SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic

[Via Garibaldi 8]

2 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

I ride the somewhat regularly and from personal observation, yes a lot of people on the transfer at Broadway Junction to other lines, especially coming to and from Queens. The has high turnover at Broadway Junction.

 

SRO trains are common over the bridge during the week, happens from time to time on weekends too.

 

Lots of people get off at Marcy Ave on the coming from Manhattan.

 

 

And Midtown is more popular than Lower Manhattan *south of Canal street*. This is why many people were happy the train got rerouted there! The eastern Div is setup perfectly now with one service serving Lower Manhattan and the other serving Midtown.

 

 

Nassau street is beneficial, it may not be as busy as the or lines but it has its purpose.

The Marcy Av stop has been a big one for many years now, in part spired by gentrification, and we're going back almost 20 years ago. I have friends that moved there right out of college, and the transformation has been noticeable. Same situation with the.

Nassau St isn't packed, but it definitely sees riders for sure. I've used it over the years. 

[jon2305]

4 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

I just hope that today those extra R160s are again on the . It’s too cold to bike to work this morning

Even if they are, you'd still have to be considered a lucky duck to anticipate one just showing up at the exact timing of you waiting for one.

Considering that the R46's are "allegedly" crapping out, there's still alot of them out on the road.

[Jacob]

11 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

I ride the somewhat regularly and from personal observation, yes a lot of people on the transfer at Broadway Junction to other lines, especially coming to and from Queens. The has high turnover at Broadway Junction.

 

SRO trains are common over the bridge during the week, happens from time to time on weekends too.

 

Lots of people get off at Marcy Ave on the coming from Manhattan.

 

 

And Midtown is more popular than Lower Manhattan *south of Canal street*. This is why many people were happy the train got rerouted there! The eastern Div is setup perfectly now with one service serving Lower Manhattan and the other serving Midtown.

 

 

Nassau street is beneficial, it may not be as busy as the or lines but it has its purpose.

Since I've rode the Nassau Street Line throughout my childhood and been there since rush hours/weekend service.

 

To me. The  isn't packed. Like EXTREMELY Packed to say. It did have a consistent amount of riders during rush hours when arriving at 75th Street Or Norwood. It technically gets packed when reaching Broadway Junction or Myrtle Avenue. And then the rider gets off at a range of stops thru Essex's - Chambers. and it gets empty once leaving Chambers and the rest leaves at Fulton. (J/Z To Broad Street perspective) The  just keeps on with their riders. Until (Somehow Essexs) approaching broadway junction or 14th Street.

 

Mostly  and  going uptown they can get a shitton of people during PM Rush but no in normal rush hours. AM Rush Hours  and  trains going to Jamaica/Broadway Jct/Myrtle Avenue their trains look dead. less than 13 people in my experience. (It grows faster once schools dismissal is involved). It somehow gets a little packed once reaching Marcy Avenue (Technically for J/Z trains due to the Peak Rush Hour Express that they serve)  trains remain neutral in ridership towards this. 

 

Jamaica Bound  Tends to get even packed on rush hours when reaching places like Broadway Junction. And then tends to low once heading to either 85th Street.

 

I personally view Nassau as a counterpart to the 14th street line on the  since it connects to major transfer points 

 

14th Street - Union Sq  Trains + M14 SBS

6th Avenue - 14th Street + M14 SBS

8th Avenue - 14th Street  + M14D SBS (Idk if they merged or split once reaching 8th Avenue. I didn't took the M14 SBS services above 14th Street - Union Sq lmao.)

 

As in Nassau

 

Delancey Street - Essexs Street  + M14A SBS

Canal Street

Chambers Street 

Fulton Street  +

It's what I call a Twin to 14th Street /shrug.

Eh. This is just too much information but lol. idk. gg

[Calvin]

Looking at the Metropolitan Av-Lorimer St side of the : the end of the platform to Church Av with the front to Court Sq, some sides with stairs are closed as they are making elevators for accessibility. It may be early to tell if other Crosstown stations will receive elevators. I probably think that in the future, there will be additional signs for passengers to know which stairs to use for the  to stop like Bedford-Nostrand Avs as example. 

Edited November 25, 2021 by Calvin

[darkstar8983]

29 minutes ago, Calvin said:

Looking at the Metropolitan Av-Lorimer St side of the : the end of the platform to Church Av with the front to Court Sq, some sides with stairs are closed as they are making elevators for accessibility. It may be early to tell if other Crosstown stations will receive elevators. I probably think that in the future, there will be additional signs for passengers to know which stairs to use for the  to stop like Bedford-Nostrand Avs as example. 

There will be many elevator installations across the system over the next decade. I think the original plan was for passengers to not be more than two stations away from an ADA accessible station. 

[shiznit1987]

In regards to the  how many people do you think backtrack from 104/111/121 sts to Jamaica Center for the ? A significant amount of riders? 

[trainfan22]

1 hour ago, shiznit1987 said:

In regards to the  how many people do you think backtrack from 104/111/121 sts to Jamaica Center for the ? A significant amount of riders? 

Yea, this is a VERY popular ridership trend on the  . I assume these are mainly people employed in Midtown.

 

 

At Suphin Blvd during the PM Rush you see all the people doing down from the (E) line level to the (J) line level to transfer.

[R32 3838]

15 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

I just hope that today those extra R160s are again on the . It’s too cold to bike to work this morning

I hope those R160's went back to Jamaica where they belong lmao. it's not that serious.

[Around the Horn]

2 hours ago, Calvin said:

Looking at the Metropolitan Av-Lorimer St side of the : the end of the platform to Church Av with the front to Court Sq, some sides with stairs are closed as they are making elevators for accessibility. It may be early to tell if other Crosstown stations will receive elevators. I probably think that in the future, there will be additional signs for passengers to know which stairs to use for the  to stop like Bedford-Nostrand Avs as example. 

IIRC its 7th, Hoyt, Classon and Metropolitan on the under the recent capital program

[Bx41 boi]

why are they changing the fleet on so many lines?

[Railfanner Mario]

7 hours ago, Bx41 boi said:

why are they changing the fleet on so many lines?

Because most lines like the Recent  and  lines need new train equipment (The R160s) to Run CBTC on. But due to the fact Coney Islands R46s are literally crying for help rn some R160s from Jamaica Yard get temporary transferred to Say the  lines to fill in gaps (I explained it the best I can lol if u didn’t understand apologies in advance) 

[LGA Link N Train]

12 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

There will be many elevator installations across the system over the next decade. I think the original plan was for passengers to not be more than two stations away from an ADA accessible station. 

Pretty Sure thats still the plan. By any chance, do you or anyone else here know which stations are set to become ADA Accessible within the next year?

[Bx41 boi]

2 hours ago, Railfanner Mario said:

Because most lines like the Recent  and  lines need new train equipment (The R160s) to Run CBTC on. But due to the fact Coney Islands R46s are literally crying for help rn some R160s from Jamaica Yard get temporary transferred to Say the  lines to fill in gaps (I explained it the best I can lol if u didn’t understand apologies in advance) 

oh okay

[NewFlyer 230]

22 hours ago, shiznit1987 said:

In regards to the  how many people do you think backtrack from 104/111/121 sts to Jamaica Center for the ? A significant amount of riders? 

There are some who take the Q10 and Q37 buses to Queens Blvd for the  and . That’s probably the more popular opinion than taking the  to the  unless you are one who is looking for a seat. The  gets crowded real fast. 

[darkstar8983]

On 11/24/2021 at 11:31 PM, R32 3838 said:

I hope those R160's went back to Jamaica where they belong lmao. it's not that serious.

Thumbs down 👎🏻 

[Siemenslover]

Why can’t the signals be set up so the  merges at 57? (Merges northbound right above 57 the way it does at 34 northbound now and merges right below 57 southbound the way it does at 42). Tbh 23rd st seems to need 3 locals more than 49th if anything (not saying it should happen). Almost all time saved being express is lost held at the station, skipping 49 would help a little and push the delays upward, for those getting off at 42/49th. It would also give another chance to transfer if it passes by a local at 49th.

Edited November 27, 2021 by Siemenslover

[Vulturious]

1 hour ago, Siemenslover said:

Why can’t the signals be set up so the  merges at 57? (Merges northbound right above 57 the way it does at 34 northbound now and merges right below 57 southbound the way it does at 42). Tbh 23rd st seems to need 3 locals more than 49th if anything (not saying it should happen). Almost all time saved being express is lost held at the station, skipping 49 would help a little and push the delays upward, for those getting off at 42/49th. It would also give another chance to transfer if it passes by a local at 49th.

I think it would be better to de-interline the mess rather than moving it up. Regardless of whether you keep the merge between Herald Square and Times Square or at 57 St-7 Av, you'd still end up with delays on all sides because of it.

There is technically one other way of running express service to and from 60 St tunnel and that would be using the provisions north of 57 St and creating a new connection to CPW. This isn't the best solution and a costly one at that, but it'll help in the long run by providing direct Broadway connection to the CPW as well as creating more alternatives for 6 Av express service trying to get into South Brooklyn without having to be rerouted via Culver.

The connection would be built just before the express to local switch north of the station. This would get rid of the express to local interference with the  staying express all the way to 57 St-7 Av and whatever local train to CPW.

The only issue that would create is how to run the service. One benefit is having alternatives for 6 Av, but with people still wanting that Broadway/QBL connection, it would be hard to do so. This doesn't really help fix the mess, just creates more issues because of a new branching. 6 Av might have to lose one of it's services if a Broadway/CPW connection were to become a thing while would result in the resurrection of the Yellow B or a rerouted  with an extension to Bay Ridge. The  might as well cut back to Whitehall or City Hall to run more reliably since the  would be a better candidate in a way. 

It's a whole complicating process, but an idea that can be worth while for all parties. 

[Siemenslover]

QBL going ~12 MPH today

[mrsman]

On 11/27/2021 at 2:55 AM, Vulturious said:

I think it would be better to de-interline the mess rather than moving it up. Regardless of whether you keep the merge between Herald Square and Times Square or at 57 St-7 Av, you'd still end up with delays on all sides because of it.

There is technically one other way of running express service to and from 60 St tunnel and that would be using the provisions north of 57 St and creating a new connection to CPW. This isn't the best solution and a costly one at that, but it'll help in the long run by providing direct Broadway connection to the CPW as well as creating more alternatives for 6 Av express service trying to get into South Brooklyn without having to be rerouted via Culver.

The connection would be built just before the express to local switch north of the station. This would get rid of the express to local interference with the  staying express all the way to 57 St-7 Av and whatever local train to CPW.

The only issue that would create is how to run the service. One benefit is having alternatives for 6 Av, but with people still wanting that Broadway/QBL connection, it would be hard to do so. This doesn't really help fix the mess, just creates more issues because of a new branching. 6 Av might have to lose one of it's services if a Broadway/CPW connection were to become a thing while would result in the resurrection of the Yellow B or a rerouted  with an extension to Bay Ridge. The  might as well cut back to Whitehall or City Hall to run more reliably since the  would be a better candidate in a way. 

It's a whole complicating process, but an idea that can be worth while for all parties. 

I am sure that others have mentioned it, but a key reason for the problem of merging with the N has to do with the introduction of SAS service.

Pre-SAS, Q terminated at 57 St.  The signals were set up so that downtown N trains can come off the 60th street tunnel and merge into the express tracks.  If an N were coming, the Q would hold in place in the relaying and wait for the N to pass through.  As such, from the passenger perspective anyway, the movements were seemless, since all of the delays fell on the brunt of the out of service Q trains that were relaying.  As Q's have been extended to 96th, that is no longer the case, and the movement of N between local and express tracks is severely delay prone.

So it is true that this movement will cause delays whether done at 57th or whether done at 34th.  As stated above, the solution to all of this is a deinterlining of the Broadway BMT line.  Even if no other change is made, a deinterlining of Broadway would be extremely helpful.

Twitter user LGA_A320 made the following chart of subway capacity druing the morning rush hour:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Y-5FFDDOcrCR1YRK8wI3HEFK7bsc06_K/view

One immediate reaction to seeing this is to look at how many black lines there are, even in the CBD.  This represents unused capacity.  With all of the entanglements, we are not fully utilizing the already built resources of subway tracks.

Now look at the utilization of SB trains along the Broadway line.  You can use Canal St or 57 St for this purpose. Basically:

10 tph Q

9 tph N

7 tph W

10 tph R

Obviously, this is well below the theoretical maximum of 30 tph locals and 30 tph expresses.  While there are many real world constraints, the biggest one is the interlining.

[Doing some addition and looking at the chart, this amounts to 11 tph from 96th, 15 tph from Astoria, 10 tph from QBL local, 25 tph from 60th st tunnel.  19 tph along the SB express south of 34th and continuing onto the bridge.  17 tph on the SB local south of 34th, with 7 terminating at Astoria, and 10 continuing down Montague.]

If N went to 96th St instead of Astoria, and you reallocated some of the above allocation to provide additional W's to adequately service Astoria, you can eliminate this bottleneck in a revenue-neutral way, with minimal loss of train service along the Broadway branches.  Of course, eliminating the bottleneck would also allow MTA to run even more trains overall through this section [and they should], but that will cost $ to pay for operators and train sets.

Let's say we take 3 train sets away from R, 2 away from Q, and 1 away from N and reassigned them to W.  Run all N's to/from 96th and we'd now have:

8 tph Q

8 tph N

13 tph W

7 tph R

[Doing some addition , this amounts to 16 tph from 96th, 13 tph from Astoria, 7 tph from QBL local, 20 tph from 60th st tunnel.  16 tph along the SB express south of 34th and continuing onto the bridge.  20 tph on the SB local south of 34th, with 7 terminating at Astoria, and 13 continuing down Montague.  With the increase in service to the W, it would seem to make sense to terminate R at Whitehall and continue W to Brooklyn, or to terminate 7 W's at Whithall and have 7 R's and 6 W's continue to Brooklyn.]

[ActiveCity]

This is possibly the best transit plan for northeast Queens I can come up with. To start off, I plan to have a new 79th St crosstown line with a connection to the local tracks at 46th St on the IND Queens Blvd line. I call it the  line. Northern terminus: Amsterdam Av-72nd St . Southern terminus: Rockaway Park-Beach 116th St . In addition, I plan to replace all  train service with  train service on Queens Blvd permanently and I will explain why. Once the  train is taken of Queens Blvd, this is where a new line arises. I call this line the BMT Horace Harding Expressway line or the BMT Northeast Queens line. This two track subway would run under the streets of 21st St, Ditmars Blvd, Astoria Blvd, 112th St, and the Horace Harding Expressway. 

[paulrivera]

When did the Grand Central announcement on the / change to the 's version?

[Calvin]

1 hour ago, paulrivera said:

When did the Grand Central announcement on the / change to the 's version?

Happened last month on the first October week. Same with Times Square  with  's version. Using one voice to save memory for future announcements

Edited November 29, 2021 by Calvin

[Lex]

59 minutes ago, Calvin said:

Happened last month on the first October week. Same with Times Square  with  's version. Using one voice to save memory for future announcements

You'd think they would upgrade the trains' computer systems in order to future-proof them enough to avoid running out of space after so few changes in less than 25 years (to say nothing of radical expansion that should at least be considered), but that probably requires far more competence than the MTA has shown in this regard.

[Siemenslover]

On 11/28/2021 at 9:58 AM, mrsman said:

I am sure that others have mentioned it, but a key reason for the problem of merging with the N has to do with the introduction of SAS service.

Pre-SAS, Q terminated at 57 St.  The signals were set up so that downtown N trains can come off the 60th street tunnel and merge into the express tracks.  If an N were coming, the Q would hold in place in the relaying and wait for the N to pass through.  As such, from the passenger perspective anyway, the movements were seemless, since all of the delays fell on the brunt of the out of service Q trains that were relaying.  As Q's have been extended to 96th, that is no longer the case, and the movement of N between local and express tracks is severely delay prone.

So it is true that this movement will cause delays whether done at 57th or whether done at 34th.  As stated above, the solution to all of this is a deinterlining of the Broadway BMT line.  Even if no other change is made, a deinterlining of Broadway would be extremely helpful.

Twitter user LGA_A320 made the following chart of subway capacity druing the morning rush hour:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Y-5FFDDOcrCR1YRK8wI3HEFK7bsc06_K/view

One immediate reaction to seeing this is to look at how many black lines there are, even in the CBD.  This represents unused capacity.  With all of the entanglements, we are not fully utilizing the already built resources of subway tracks.

Now look at the utilization of SB trains along the Broadway line.  You can use Canal St or 57 St for this purpose. Basically:

10 tph Q

9 tph N

7 tph W

10 tph R

Obviously, this is well below the theoretical maximum of 30 tph locals and 30 tph expresses.  While there are many real world constraints, the biggest one is the interlining.

[Doing some addition and looking at the chart, this amounts to 11 tph from 96th, 15 tph from Astoria, 10 tph from QBL local, 25 tph from 60th st tunnel.  19 tph along the SB express south of 34th and continuing onto the bridge.  17 tph on the SB local south of 34th, with 7 terminating at Astoria, and 10 continuing down Montague.]

If N went to 96th St instead of Astoria, and you reallocated some of the above allocation to provide additional W's to adequately service Astoria, you can eliminate this bottleneck in a revenue-neutral way, with minimal loss of train service along the Broadway branches.  Of course, eliminating the bottleneck would also allow MTA to run even more trains overall through this section [and they should], but that will cost $ to pay for operators and train sets.

Let's say we take 3 train sets away from R, 2 away from Q, and 1 away from N and reassigned them to W.  Run all N's to/from 96th and we'd now have:

8 tph Q

8 tph N

13 tph W

7 tph R

[Doing some addition , this amounts to 16 tph from 96th, 13 tph from Astoria, 7 tph from QBL local, 20 tph from 60th st tunnel.  16 tph along the SB express south of 34th and continuing onto the bridge.  20 tph on the SB local south of 34th, with 7 terminating at Astoria, and 13 continuing down Montague.  With the increase in service to the W, it would seem to make sense to terminate R at Whitehall and continue W to Brooklyn, or to terminate 7 W's at Whithall and have 7 R's and 6 W's continue to Brooklyn.]

I know the QBL-Broadway is unpopular here but it’s needed and should definitely be more than 7 TPH. If anything, shift some N/Q to the B/D

[RockawayLcl]

From your many experiences, what can you say is one of the fastest corridors within the system? Examples I'd include would be Queens Blvd with the E and F, i forgot how fast those trains Zoom pass the local stations. Another one i used to love but doesn't feel the same sometimes would be the 7th Ave Exp between 96th St and Chambers