Can SAS Phase 1 do the job?

[Gorgor]

If the is sent up Second Avenue then the MTA will need to triple (or at least double) the amount of trains because 10 minute headways will lead to the same amount of crowding that exists on Lexington Avenue, assuming that enough people are even willing to risk waiting 10 minutes for a train instead of sticking with the .

 

Another thing that surprises me is how they didn't put a 79th Street station because 77th Street is the most used station on the train, and the most used local station in the whole system. But if they have an entrance to the 72nd Street station from 74th Street or 75th Street it'll still be closer than 77th and Lexington Avenue for residents east of 2nd Avenue.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

That's one reason why they should send both the and up Second Avenue. More frequent service that way.

 

I think there will be entrances to the 72nd Street station in the vicinity of 74th-75th Streets, if I'm not mistaken.

[Kamen Rider]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Gorgor]

we are on something that's still five years away. Must we obsess over the every last detail of something none of us have any control over?

 

Five years away... LOL u funny. I say at least another 10+ years, if they even complete it at all.

[checkmatechamp13]

One track alone can't handle 12-15 trains per hour effectively. It would be best to have half the rush-hour (W)'s (six to eight trains per hour) continue past Whitehall in service to Brooklyn.

 

I know. That's why I said trains would have to continue to Brooklyn.

 

If the is sent up Second Avenue then the MTA will need to triple (or at least double) the amount of trains because 10 minute headways will lead to the same amount of crowding that exists on Lexington Avenue, assuming that enough people are even willing to risk waiting 10 minutes for a train instead of sticking with the .

 

Another thing that surprises me is how they didn't put a 79th Street station because 77th Street is the most used station on the train, and the most used local station in the whole system. But if they have an entrance to the 72nd Street station from 74th Street or 75th Street it'll still be closer than 77th and Lexington Avenue for residents east of 2nd Avenue.

 

The problem is that there isn't demand for double the service further down the line. You would need to short-turn those extra trains somewhere, which is why a seperate thread has been created speculating on whether it will cause the to return in some form.

[Kamen Rider]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[MikeGerald]

In the other thread that is now closed there was the following suggestion:

 

N and Q trains travel up the Second Avenue line as the express route along Broadway all of the way to Brooklyn, no need to switch trains or change the line up until the DeKalb Avenue station.

 

W trains to serve as the full-time local to/from Astoria, or at least the weekday locals - however some details to be worked out. The suggestion was that W trains would be turned at the Whitehall Street station or head to Brooklyn. I suggest that in order to provide the 12 trains per hour to the Astoria segment, at 5 minutes apart - that whatever trains that can not be turned at Whitehall Street, instead dis-embark riders at the Canal Street station, and relay at City Hall for the return trip to Queens. This would keep W train service to Manhattan, and to not suffer any delays from any trips to/from Brooklyn.

 

Currently a few late night R-trains do the same thing, dis-embark riders at Canal Street, and relay at City Hall for a return trip to Queens. The old EE train also did the same thing.

 

R trains would continue to run as they do now, maybe with more rush hour service, since only W and R trains would be using the 60th Street tunnel.

 

Just my thoughts.

[Gorgor]

you just want your stupid bus back...

 

No, I'm being very pessimistic because back in 2007 or whenever they started construction up again they said it would be completed in 2012, and now it's being moved back to 2017, and I'm just sick of them constantly moving the date further and further back as well as the constant construction and noise coming from Second Avenue.

[Grand Concourse]

In the other thread that is now closed there was the following suggestion:

 

N and Q trains travel up the Second Avenue line as the express route along Broadway all of the way to Brooklyn, no need to switch trains or change the line up until the DeKalb Avenue station.

 

W trains to serve as the full-time local to/from Astoria, or at least the weekday locals - however some details to be worked out. The suggestion was that W trains would be turned at the Whitehall Street station or head to Brooklyn. I suggest that in order to provide the 12 trains per hour to the Astoria segment, at 5 minutes apart - that whatever trains that can not be turned at Whitehall Street, instead dis-embark riders at the Canal Street station, and relay at City Hall for the return trip to Queens. This would keep W train service to Manhattan, and to not suffer any delays from any trips to/from Brooklyn.

 

Currently a few late night R-trains do the same thing, dis-embark riders at Canal Street, and relay at City Hall for a return trip to Queens. The old EE train also did the same thing.

 

R trains would continue to run as they do now, maybe with more rush hour service, since only W and R trains would be using the 60th Street tunnel.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

As much as I could care less about Astoria and how it seems nothing satisfies them [don't want the LGA subway extension, didn't like the express back in 2001 because it skipped their stops, etc], I would highly doubt just giving them the while the and going up 2nd Av would go over very well. And as much as the SAS could use that kind of service, I think just one of them would be enough.

[Kamen Rider]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[TwoTimer]

The now goes to Whitehall instead of Canal.

[Wallyhorse]

That's one reason why they should send both the and up Second Avenue. More frequent service that way.

 

I think there will be entrances to the 72nd Street station in the vicinity of 74th-75th Streets, if I'm not mistaken.

 

The other entrance I believe will be at 69th Street for the 72nd Street station.

 

I would personally have added a 79th Street station with an entrance at 76th Street myself OR build a cutoff that would initially run to a short-turn terminal at 79th Street/York-1st Avenue to serve one of the most densely populated areas in the country with provisions to later extend that into a new Queens tunnel with a stop on the north end of Roosevelt Island that could eventually serve as a super express, terminating on the never-used upper level of Roosevelt Avenue.

[Roadcruiser1]

But why would people want to kill the idea of the going to South Brooklyn. We lost subway service on the 6/28/2010 cuts with the (Mx), and we deserve to get it back at least during rush hours.

[dman1455]

But why would people want to kill the idea of the going to South Brooklyn. We lost subway service on the 6/28/2010 cuts with the (Mx), and we deserve to get it back at least during rush hours.

 

Why have 3 broadway lines on the same branch (4th avenue) that's why the became the on the west end! People wanted 6th Avenue Service!

[Roadcruiser1]

But we still deserve service especially during the AM rush when the West End Line receives heavy ridership.

[Tokkemon]

Notice how you said "deserve".

[Guest lance25]

But we still deserve service especially during the AM rush when the West End Line receives heavy ridership.

 

If ridership was so high when the (Mx) was running to Bay Pkwy, why were those trains so damn empty?

 

Maybe it's me, but I keep getting the feeling that the (Mx) extension to Bay Pkwy was kept after the Manhattan Bridge construction ended because the line was serving south Brooklyn (either Brighton or 4th Ave/West End) since the '70s. I could be wrong though...

[Kamen Rider]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[peacemak3r]

Back in the day when it was the ( on West End, ridership on weekday rush hours was not as bad as the rush hour ridership on the on Brighton. I don't see how that has changed now-a-days, I still think the Brighton line gets way more ridership during rush-hours then the West-End.

[Wallyhorse]

Main point of my last post was concerning 79th Street in Manhattan. I would either add a station at 79th Street on the SAS (with an exit at 76th) or build where trains can leave the line after 72nd to serve a station at 79th Street/York-1st Avenue that can be a short-turn terminal, with the idea of a FUTURE expansion to Queens. Roosevelt Avenue upper was simply one place where I thought that could be done, but if not, there could be others.

 

I would see about adding a station at 79th/2nd first since that is the easiest, especially since my main priority beyond that with the SAS for Phase 2 would be to extend that all the way west on 125th to a terminal at Broadway-12th Avenue since by the time that would be complete, Columbia University would well on its way in a major expansion. There really should have been a station put there since we are talking about one of the most densely populated areas of the country.

[MikeGerald]

The powers that be, as well as plenty of transit fans were convinced that the south Brooklyn rush hours only M-train had very little ridership. Now that the northern-Brooklyn M-train has been re-routed to the Queens Blvd line, and offering direct mid-town service (something that was/is very useful to plenty of riders) it is going to be difficult to convince those in charge to re-establish a version of the southern-Brooklyn M-train. In a sea of transit cuts - the re-routing of the northern-Brooklyn M-train was one of the few bright spots for the MTA.

 

Since the southern-Brooklyn rush hours only M-train was "rush hours only" folks who would promote such a service would have to show (as in well document) the riders who need such a service, and have a difficult time getting to their destination without it. That is not as easy as it seems, since the R-train makes similar stops in lower Manhattan, and will soon have similar transfer options.

 

For example, now that there is a transfer to the A and C trains and the R-train at Jay Street-MetroTech - one rationale for the southern-Brooklyn rush hours only M-train - its transfer connection at Fulton Street is gone. The Metro-Tech transfer is not only during the rush hours - making it very useful, compared to the rush hours only M-train.

 

Most folks rarely ride from one end of a line to the other end (there are a couple of exceptions - but not the case for long distance routes) leading to the "few riders charges". Plus currently it is doubtful that during the am rush hours current D-trains are leaving people on the platforms along the West End line. I doubt that R-trains are leaving folks on the platforms for the 4th Avenue local stations that the rush hours M-train used to serve. If all of the people on the platforms can fit on the trains provided, it's going to be difficult to say that extra service is needed, even extra D-train service. Unless one can document that the provided trains are "sardine cans - stuffed to the gills" throughout the rush hours period - it will be a very difficult task to show that a version of the old M-train is needed.

 

Once a transit line has been removed over a certain segment of tracks - it is not that easy to get it restored. Look at how long it took to restore something that in part resembled the old K or KK service.

 

Just my thoughts.

Mike

[Gorgor]

Main point of my last post was concerning 79th Street in Manhattan. I would either add a station at 79th Street on the SAS (with an exit at 76th) or build where trains can leave the line after 72nd to serve a station at 79th Street/York-1st Avenue that can be a short-turn terminal, with the idea of a FUTURE expansion to Queens. Roosevelt Avenue upper was simply one place where I thought that could be done, but if not, there could be others.

 

I would see about adding a station at 79th/2nd first since that is the easiest, especially since my main priority beyond that with the SAS for Phase 2 would be to extend that all the way west on 125th to a terminal at Broadway-12th Avenue since by the time that would be complete, Columbia University would well on its way in a major expansion. There really should have been a station put there since we are talking about one of the most densely populated areas of the country.

 

No. Suggesting adding a station at 79th Street and York or 1st would cause all hell to break loose. NIMBYism would stop any plan like that dead in its tracks, and I would have to completely agree with them. All of the main streets (72nd, 79th, 86th) south of 1st Avenue are completely residential, quiet, and peaceful, and adding a subway station there would completely ruin it.

[Roadcruiser1]

Why does the Second Avenue Subway even need a 77th Street, or 79th Street Station? The Lexington Avenue Line already has a station nearby.

[Roadcruiser1]

But South Brooklyn still does have overcrowding, and the Fourth Avenue Line lost a lot when they lost the (Mx) especially the stations between 36th Street, and Pacific Street. Now you have to wait a long damn time before a slow moving train comes into the damn station to pick you up, and then slowly move you to it's destination. At least run this new to Bay Ridge-95th Street during rush hours to supplement the slow moving trains. All I am asking is to improve service along the Fourth Avenue Line even at best.

[Gorgor]

Why does the Second Avenue Subway even need a 77th Street, or 79th Street Station? The Lexington Avenue Line already has a station nearby.

 

*Insert face palm image here*

 

In that case why should there even be a Second Avenue Subway when there's Lexington Avenue nearby?