Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[MysteriousBtrain]

I doubt it, even if they fixed it, you're just moving the merge from 34th to 57th and not actually fixing any of the problems about the merge.

Plus 49 St is a busy Station so no point of the move.

[Jemorie]

Plus 49 St is a busy Station so no point of the move.

 

I doubt. They really need to do something about the switches north of 57th, if they are really old to need replacing and relatively faster speed approaching, as well as a punch box at the southbound 5th Ave-59th St platform (unless that tstation already has countdown clocks working and allow the control center to know which train is coming into 57th from the 60th tubes. I looked at the printed timetables for the and trains and both lines combined run every 3 minutes during rush hours, similar to other lines like the and , and I believe that's enough to handle the crowds at 49th Street.

Edited July 26, 2017 by Jemorie

[CenSin]

Plus 49 St is a busy Station so no point of the move.

Under proposal 2, the going to 125 Street would necessitate all the express trains skipping 49 Street.

[danielhg121]

Ok, so going by one of his proposals the runs up Second Avenue and not to mention that the has been serving Astoria for quite some time. You’ll have 2 services run from terminal to terminal but via different routes and both of these are Broadway Express, how do you think it will look on paper? Astoria gets screwed by new Second Ave Subway, riders forced onto local. Also handles Lower Manhattan as it is but sending every other train to 9th Avenue is a waste of resources because it’s in the middle of nowhere and who would ride to Brooklyn via Lower Manhattan when they could go via Bridge quicker, and possibly creating a traffic jam at 36th Street if a and pull in at the same time. 9th Avenue is only used if you have nowhere to place a train.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[danielhg121]

With your second proposal, the and are gonna drive people insane with the two switching tracks south of 57th st.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[RR503]

Ok, so going by one of his proposals the runs up Second Avenue and not to mention that the has been serving Astoria for quite some time. You’ll have 2 services run from terminal to terminal but via different routes and both of these are Broadway Express, how do you think it will look on paper? Astoria gets screwed by new Second Ave Subway, riders forced onto local. Also handles Lower Manhattan as it is but sending every other train to 9th Avenue is a waste of resources because it’s in the middle of nowhere and who would ride to Brooklyn via Lower Manhattan when they could go via Bridge quicker, and possibly creating a traffic jam at 36th Street if a and pull in at the same time. 9th Avenue is only used if you have nowhere to place a train.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

Well then send it to some other South Brooklyn terminal. It's not like we don't have options... And in fact, if you sent it somewhere on the Sea Beach, you could replace the on evenings and weekends with the , simplifying things. Finally, fourth ave has been begging for service ever since the brown went away -- here's an opportunity to give it to them. 

 

Astoria riders may be pissed they don't get express service, but that makes a what, four stop difference over current?  It also gives them more service to lower manhattan/downtown brooklyn, two growing jobs centers. The fact is that broadway is currently limited by a stone age service pattern that has trains switching from local to express mid-corridor. In an age where everyone is gasping for more subway capacity, letting this opportunity to optimize pass us by seems irresponsible. Right now the corridor runs about 30 trains per hour, and really can't add many more. With these service changes, we will get closer to forty five. 

[bobtehpanda]

I feel like the conversation about Broadway services is, at best, tangential to SAS...

 

Has there been any additional news about Phase II?

[Lance]

Nope. It didn't even come up as a part of Phase II of Lhota's presser yesterday.

[Around the Horn]

Residents along Second Avenue in Harlem are getting postcards from the MTA in the mail about soil testing, but other than that nothing much.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

There has been no mention of how to run the at 19 TPH after the opening of phase 2. Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue was subject to jams from Sheepshead Bay even before the opening of phase 1. The conga line of trains during rush hours is not going to get better without improvements to terminal capacity at the southern end.

 

My guess is that the or will have to be drafted as a secondary 2 Avenue service at the expense of Astoria. Whatever route left would pick up the slack. Track layout would dictate that the Broadway local serves Astoria and the Broadway express serves 2 Avenue, but the sole Astoria route must be full-time and the secondary 2 Avenue route should be part-time. This is quite different than the current setup where the can be retired on the weekends without much adjustment to its compadres—the , , and .

 

Proposal 1

125 Street / Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue via 2 Avenue, Broadway express, Manhattan Bridge, 4 Avenue express, Sea Beach

Astoria–Ditmars Boulevard / Whitehall Street–South Ferry or 9 Avenue via Broadway local, Montague Street tunnel, 4 Avenue local, West End

 

Proposal 2 (contingent on connecting the Broadway local tracks to 63 Street)

Astoria–Ditmars Boulevard / Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue via Broadway express, Manhattan Bridge, 4 Avenue express, Sea Beach

125 Street / Whitehall Street–South Ferry via 2 Avenue, Broadway local, Montague Street tunnel, 4 Avenue local, West End (no evening or weekend service)

 

I don’t see any way we could boot the B off the Brighton Line without affecting the C, E, F, and M.

I prefer Proposal 1 because it will eliminate the switching from local to express at 34th St. More trains per hour can then be run. Proposal 2 would probably result in fewer trains being able to run because the and would have to switch in front of each other (even with a connection from the 63rd St tracks to the Broadway Local tracks) to make it work. Better to have all locals go to the 60th St Tunnel and all expresses go to 2nd Ave (or at least via the 63rd St tracks).

 

However, I do have some questions about Proposal 1. Does the become a part-time line under this scenario? If so, then what train will run on the Sea Beach Line when the N is not running during off hours? Because you've got the terminating at either Whitehall or 9th Ave, which works for weekdays when both N and W are in service, but overnights and weekends leaves Sea Beach with no service at all. Or would both N and W run 24/7? Would the MTA be willing to run all four Broadway services on weekends?

 

What about running alternating W's to Stillwell Ave via the Sea Beach Line (with the rest turning at Whitehall) and have the weekday-only function as the secondary line there as well as on 2nd Avenue? Between the N and every other W, that should be sufficient weekday service on the Sea Beach Line. And this way, Sea Beach Line riders would still have an express service (just not on weekends) and they'd still have a 24/7 service to Manhattan. And the MTA can continue to run just three Broadway services, the , and , which leaves them in a position to do weekend maintenance work and still run those three lines on acceptable headways.

 

Why would you need to do this at all? There is extra space just west of Brighton, so I'd just send some Q trains to Brighton at rush hour. That and increase the number of dispatchers and operators on the field so they can fumigate/turn back quickly enough so as not to interfere with B service.

But not enough for a service running 19 tph, which is nearly double what the Q runs now. And there's already enough difficulty turning the current number of Q's at Stillwell. You'd have no choice but to boot the off the Brighton Line. Or reroute the Q to the Sea Beach or West End lines and have either the or replace the Q as the Brighton Local service. Edited July 26, 2017 by T to Dyre Avenue

[CenSin]

Ok, so going by one of his proposals the runs up Second Avenue and not to mention that the has been serving Astoria for quite some time. You’ll have 2 services run from terminal to terminal but via different routes and both of these are Broadway Express, how do you think it will look on paper? Astoria gets screwed by new Second Ave Subway, riders forced onto local. Also handles Lower Manhattan as it is but sending every other train to 9th Avenue is a waste of resources because it’s in the middle of nowhere and who would ride to Brooklyn via Lower Manhattan when they could go via Bridge quicker, and possibly creating a traffic jam at 36th Street if a and pull in at the same time. 9th Avenue is only used if you have nowhere to place a train.

This pretty much sums up the current situation:

 

 

The fact is that broadway is currently limited by a stone age service pattern that has trains switching from local to express mid-corridor. In an age where everyone is gasping for more subway capacity, letting this opportunity to optimize pass us by seems irresponsible. Right now the corridor runs about 30 trains per hour, and really can't add many more. With these service changes, we will get closer to forty five.

If the current service pattern is allowed to remain, Astoria gets worse service anyway. The demands of 2 Avenue is projected to require 19 train per hour at the completion of phase 2. 2 Avenue tracks currently funnel directly into the Broadway express tracks. Guess what service has to be reduced to accommodate the extra trains? Guess what service gets boosted to fill in for the reduced one? Yup. More trains, and less trains. Now the trains need a second southern terminal to turn back the extra trains which could only be 9 Avenue. Brooklyn service sucks due to the decrease, and the Brighton Line can’t turn back trains fast enough to ensure smooth service (not to mention that it is 100% overserved).

 

The other option is to pull trains from Queens Boulevard or trains from Central Park West, but then you introduce a merge instead of removing it. And you cannot increase or service to cover for the deficit along those corridors without running into capacity problems along 8 Avenue and 60 Street respectively.

 

It’s most logical that the Broadway expresses run to 125 Street and all locals run via 60 Street. Broadway local and 4 Avenue local actually has capacity to serve all of Astoria’s needs.

 

With your second proposal, the and are gonna drive people insane with the two switching tracks south of 57th st.

Please read again (and carefully):

Proposal 2 (contingent on connecting the Broadway local tracks to 63 Street)

Do you still have any issues to raise with this?

[bstar1]

How come they don't have operate normally on Weekends? And Express between 34 St until Canal St on Weekends?

[Wallyhorse]

There has been no mention of how to run the at 19 TPH after the opening of phase 2. Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue was subject to jams from Sheepshead Bay even before the opening of phase 1. The conga line of trains during rush hours is not going to get better without improvements to terminal capacity at the southern end.

 

Proposal 1

125 Street / Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue via 2 Avenue, Broadway express, Manhattan Bridge, 4 Avenue express, Sea Beach

Astoria–Ditmars Boulevard / Whitehall Street–South Ferry or 9 Avenue via Broadway local, Montague Street tunnel, 4 Avenue local, West End

 

Proposal 2 (contingent on connecting the Broadway local tracks to 63 Street)

Astoria–Ditmars Boulevard / Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue via Broadway express, Manhattan Bridge, 4 Avenue express, Sea Beach

125 Street / Whitehall Street–South Ferry via 2 Avenue, Broadway local, Montague Street tunnel, 4 Avenue local, West End (no evening or weekend service)

I would do a modified Proposal 1 as follows:

 

as suggested in Proposal 1 from Coney Island-125th Street via Sea Beach, the Manhattan Bridge, Broadway Express and 2nd Avenue (half the current service moved from Astoria).  This runs 24/7 in this format.

 

as is now

 

as is now EXCEPT it now runs 24/7 to at least Queens Plaza (if not the full route to 71-Continental 24/7)

 

New "Yellow " from Coney Island to Astoria via Sea Beach, 4th Avenue Local, the Montague Tunnel and Broadway Local (other half of the current service).  This "Yellow " also runs 24/7 in this format.

 

becomes a 24/7 line from Coney Island to Astoria via the West End, 4th Avenue Local, The Montague Tunnel and Broadway Local.  Late nights runs from Whitehall Street or 9th Avenue-Astoria.

 

To recap, in the version, the is split into and with both portions running 24/7 while the and also run 24/7 in Manhattan.

[CenSin]

I would do a modified Proposal 1 as follows:

 

as suggested in Proposal 1 from Coney Island-125th Street via Sea Beach, the Manhattan Bridge, Broadway Express and 2nd Avenue (half the current service moved from Astoria).  This runs 24/7 in this format.

 

as is now

 

as is now EXCEPT it now runs 24/7 to at least Queens Plaza (if not the full route to 71-Continental 24/7)

 

New "Yellow " from Coney Island to Astoria via Sea Beach, 4th Avenue Local, the Montague Tunnel and Broadway Local (other half of the current service).  This "Yellow " also runs 24/7 in this format.

 

becomes a 24/7 line from Coney Island to Astoria via the West End, 4th Avenue Local, The Montague Tunnel and Broadway Local.  Late nights runs from Whitehall Street or 9th Avenue-Astoria.

 

To recap, in the version, the is split into and with both portions running 24/7 while the and also run 24/7 in Manhattan.

Except I deliberately wrote the proposal to make it one that the MTA could economically sustain. Running everything all hours of the day would be an obvious solution. But any realistic solution must also work within projected socio-economic constraints.

 

1. If you’re still sending Broadway express trains to Astoria, then you are mixing traffic from different tracks and you decrease capacity—which 2 Avenue demands lots of.
2. The does not factor into the shuffle.
3. There are three Astoria/Coney Island routes…?

[Bosco]

How come they don't have operate normally on Weekends? And Express between 34 St until Canal St on Weekends?

 

While I agree that the should run on weekends, even if not until the R211s come in, the was designed as a part-time route and, like the , all the track work would prevent the extra service from being added anyway.  The runs local to accommodate the heavily-used local stops; although, of course, running the on weekends would allow the to be express on weekends also.

 

As for the proposals for alternatives, none of them would truly get rid of the problem with 60 Street and the merges, but rather move them.  IMO, I'd rather see more money be focused on expediting the rollout of CBTC, as that would help the capacity issue and possibly alleviate the need to reconfigure Broadway.  While I'm not a fan of some of the MTA's outdated service patterns, we have to remember that 1. changing service patterns, even for long-term construction, is a years-long process, and 2. the number one problem affecting service capacity right now is the infrastructure.

[CTK246]

Where’s Wallyhorse when you need him?

[Jemorie]

How come they don't have operate normally on Weekends? And Express between 34 St until Canal St on Weekends?

 

The wants each and every two-track line and four-track line in the whole system to be an average of 18 trains an hour or below total throughout Saturday and Sunday because of the endless track/signal maintenance. Hence the slower speed orders between stations on Saturday and Sunday. It's more than just a general order where a line is shut down and/or rerouted. That's why the was eliminated from the Queens Boulevard Line on weekends in 2010, and also why the in Brooklyn (when the Clark Street Tubes are open) and the entire & lines never run on weekends either.

Edited July 27, 2017 by Jemorie

[Wallyhorse]

 

Except I deliberately wrote the proposal to make it one that the MTA could economically sustain. Running everything all hours of the day would be an obvious solution. But any realistic solution must also work within projected socio-economic constraints.

 

1. If you’re still sending Broadway express trains to Astoria, then you are mixing traffic from different tracks and you decrease capacity—which 2 Avenue demands lots of.
2. The does not factor into the shuffle.
3. There are three Astoria/Coney Island routes…?

 

Actually, one and a half between Coney Island and Astoria (the "Yellow " would be half of the current trains, with Sea Beach riders having half the trains (on the ) going to Astoria and the other half (the to 125th Street).  Sea Beach riders would also have a 50/50 split of local and express service along 4th Avenue in Brooklyn.

 

The in this would be the expendable line late nights (running say 5:30 AM-11:30 PM Mon-Fri, 7:00 AM-11:00 PM Sat and 8:00 AM-10:00 PM Sun instead) if you can't run everything 24/7.  The in this version becomes full-time as noted as late nights (when the is not running) it would be the only line to Astoria.  Late nights, I have this line shortened to Whitehall or 9th Avenue coming from Astoria, and if from Whitehall it means the can't terminate there unless you can get away with have two lines going opposite directions terminating late nights on the center track at Whitehall.  Hence, having the go to at least Queens Plaza late nights, however, you can also eliminate the entirely late nights by having the run the old  route of 95th-Astoria late nights (which is really the natural route of that line even though there is no yard at either end).  With that in mind, my revised proposal:

 

as noted originally (half of the current trains), Coney Island-125th via Sea Beach, 4th Av Express, Manhattan Bridge, Broadway Express, 63rd and SAS.

 

as it is now, except obviously running to 125th via Brighton Local, Manhattan Bridge, Broadway Express, 63rd and SAS.

 

cut back to a 18/7 line between 95th Street and 71st-Continental, running as it does now otherwise.

 

(other half of the current trains) from Coney-Island to Astoria via Sea Beach, 4th Avenue Local, Montague Tunnel, Broadway Local, 60th Street and Astoria El.

 

becoming a 24/7 line as follows:

From Coney Island to Astoria from 5:30 AM-11:30 PM Monday-Saturday and 7:00 AM-11:30 PM Sundays via West End, 4th Avenue Local, Montague Tunnel, Broadway Local, 60th Street and Astoria El.  

 

From 11:30 PM-5:30 AM late Sunday-early Saturday and 11:30 PM-7:00 AM late Saturday-early Sunday, replaces the between 95th and 36th Street and runs the old route of 95th-Bay Ridge to Astoria. 

 

That to me is the compromise.

[Lance]

@Wally: There's no kill like overkill, is there?

 

 

Except I deliberately wrote the proposal to make it one that the MTA could economically sustain. Running everything all hours of the day would be an obvious solution. But any realistic solution must also work within projected socio-economic constraints.

 

1. If you’re still sending Broadway express trains to Astoria, then you are mixing traffic from different tracks and you decrease capacity—which 2 Avenue demands lots of.
2. The does not factor into the shuffle.
3. There are three Astoria/Coney Island routes…?

 

Not to mention, is the ridership even there for this clusterf*** of a rearrangement? I understand the increased number of passengers on Broadway and 2nd Avenue, but is it enough to justify four or five services on Broadway at all times? I think not. Even if it is, you could bet your right arm that other riders would be clamoring for similar services which would not be a sustainable practice in the long run. For what it's worth, I like your first idea better. If there is to be another line sent up 2nd Avenue, it should be the as a Broadway Express. Running the as a continued Broadway Local would just become another merging disaster. It's too bad there's little room for a 6th Avenue express - 4th Avenue Local route from 2nd Avenue. There is room for another 6th Avenue express. It would just be a matter of justifying the additional 6th Ave service through the mess that is DeKalb Junction.

[BreeddekalbL]

When i was playing with the JPwright program i proposed having a 4th line running along the 2nd ave which would be the U as a suppliment to the T and eventual utica ave subway running below the 4 train

which means i would have 3 lines north of 63rd the Q T AND U

and 3 lines south of 63rd to 23rd street  which would be the T U AND V

if the 2nd ave subway were to be fully built as is would it be able to support the 4th service?

Edited July 28, 2017 by BreeddekalbL

[Wallyhorse]

@Wally: There's no kill like overkill, is there?

 

Not to mention, is the ridership even there for this clusterf*** of a rearrangement? I understand the increased number of passengers on Broadway and 2nd Avenue, but is it enough to justify four or five services on Broadway at all times? I think not. Even if it is, you could bet your right arm that other riders would be clamoring for similar services which would not be a sustainable practice in the long run. For what it's worth, I like your first idea better. If there is to be another line sent up 2nd Avenue, it should be the as a Broadway Express. Running the as a continued Broadway Local would just become another merging disaster. It's too bad there's little room for a 6th Avenue express - 4th Avenue Local route from 2nd Avenue. There is room for another 6th Avenue express. It would just be a matter of justifying the additional 6th Ave service through the mess that is DeKalb Junction.

This actually would be the same number of trains per hour it is now, with the West End (except late nights when the would replace the in Bay Ridge) getting a second service and all four major Brooklyn arteries that serve DeKalb getting at least one full Broadway service (the / as noted would actually be a split of the current with half being a local to Astoria and the other half an express to 125).  Half of the Sea Beach trains would still be Broadway/4th Avenue Express.

 

Main thing this does is eliminate merges in Manhattan since while you would still have three lines going via 60th, it really would only be two and a half since one of them would be half of the current .  

[CenSin]

Half of the Sea Beach trains would still be Broadway/4th Avenue Express.

Way to give the residents something they don’t want. If I wake up in the morning and miss my 4 Avenue/Broadway express train, then I’m going to have to wait twice as long for the next one? No thanks.

 

“I’m going to get on at 8 Avenue and get off at 53 Street.” —said nobody ever

Edited July 28, 2017 by CenSin

[Wallyhorse]

Way to give the residents something they don’t want. If I wake up in the morning and miss my 4 Avenue/Broadway express train, then I’m going to have to wait twice as long for the next one? No thanks.

 

“I’m going to get on at 8 Avenue and get off at 53 Street.” —said nobody ever

in this case would be yellow and run via 60th to Astoria.

 

The idea is to keep crossovers to a minimum as you said.  The real problem has always been the Bay Ridge line's natural route is 95th-Astoria, but the problem is there is no yard on either end of that route which is why the and switched Jamaica terminals in the first place. 

[CenSin]

in this case would be yellow and run via 60th to Astoria.

 

The idea is to keep crossovers to a minimum as you said.  The real problem has always been the Bay Ridge line's natural route is 95th-Astoria, but the problem is there is no yard on either end of that route which is why the and switched Jamaica terminals in the first place. 

If crossovers need to be kept to a minimum, wouldn’t proposal 1 suffice?

 

 

Proposal 1

125 Street / Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue via 2 Avenue, Broadway express, Manhattan Bridge, 4 Avenue express, Sea Beach

Astoria–Ditmars Boulevard / Whitehall Street–South Ferry or 9 Avenue via Broadway local, Montague Street tunnel, 4 Avenue local, West End

The and has a merge/diverge point at the foot of the Manhattan Bridge in Brooklyn.

The and has a merge/diverge point at the mouth of the 60 Street tunnel in Queens and another (for half the trains) at 36 Street (which also touches the ).

 

That’s 1 or 2 merges for each route in comparison to the current configuration’s complex system of merges and dual-terminals ().

Broadway express traffic does not touch Broadway local traffic for the entire length of the Broadway Line.

 

4 Avenue express traffic does not touch 4 Avenue local traffic from 36 Street to DeKalb Avenue.

I think that’s a simple recipe for overall better service.

[Wallyhorse]

If crossovers need to be kept to a minimum, wouldn’t proposal 1 suffice?

 

 

The and has a merge/diverge point at the foot of the Manhattan Bridge in Brooklyn.

The and has a merge/diverge point at the mouth of the 60 Street tunnel in Queens and another (for half the trains) at 36 Street (which also touches the ).

 

That’s 1 or 2 merges for each route in comparison to the current configuration’s complex system of merges and dual-terminals ( ).

Broadway express traffic does not touch Broadway local traffic for the entire length of the Broadway Line.

 

4 Avenue express traffic does not touch 4 Avenue local traffic from 36 Street to DeKalb Avenue.

I think that’s a simple recipe for overall better service.

I was thinking Manhattan more than anything with my format.  You would have the (again, half of the current ) merging with the at 59th Street along with the merging with both at 36th (except late nights when the would be running 95th-Astoria).

 

As for Sea Beach, that would be a trade-off of this in order to better streamline Manhattan with the same number of trains per hour currently in play on Broadway.