Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[Around the Horn]

Yeah, but I want to make the and 2 seperate lines and there are multiple ways you can do that

Uh, no you can't... In the employee timetable, they are all trains. During rush hours, "J" trips designate the A skip stop pattern and "Z" trips designate the B skip stop pattern.

 

And again there are only 12 trips a day, which most of them switching from to or vice versa at Broad Street.

[RR503]

It was someone new who likely saw the entire thread and saw the old response.

Anyway, as for a South Brooklyn line via Nassau, I stick by my prior proposal to have the and be split up with Chambers as the terminal for both (save for a few rush hour 's to Broad) with the becoming its own line running the old   route to 95th (basically the "Bankers Special" becoming a 24/7 route that would supplement the on 4th Avenue).

 

  

I say no.

...

3. It doesn't provide useful service. People these days want to go to midtown. ESPECIALLY given that the is literally pointing down the tubes and would give supplementary service without adding merges, I really can't see the argument for this.

*sigh*

[Wallyhorse]

That was specifically on Nassau.

Getting back on track, I still think the and as a couple of us have noted being express and serving the SAS while the and being local on Broadway with minimal to no merging is the way to go. 

[Around the Horn]

I don't think the   alone can handle Astoria Line ridership during rush hours. I think that it really needs a supplement. Also, this problem of little to no merging can be easily solved by including a new yard on ConEd land in Astoria. But IT always gets shot down by the local NIMBYS who don't realize that by extending the Astoria Line to LGA, they would get more flexible and faster service with no merging at all. 

 

Jesus H Christ! Do y'all read the previous posts or not? We covered that like five times already.

 

Any service on Astoria would have the same frequency as the current combined and .

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Pretty much any plan to bump up 2nd Ave service to 18-20 tph will require the addition of new subway cars. We just don't have the cars to do it right now and with only 40 of the 300 R179 cars being configured in 5-car sets, we still wouldn't have enough.

[R42N]

Pretty much any plan to bump up 2nd Ave service to 18-20 tph will require the addition of new subway cars. We just don't have the cars to do it right now and with only 40 of the 300 R179 cars being configured in 5-car sets, we still wouldn't have enough.

 

 

Exactly, the only way you would be able to do it before the R211’s is if you hold on to both the R32’s and the R42’s, but that’s getting increasingly harder with their age getting a little too high. 

 

If you did that, however, then you’d be able to send the R179’s to the , send the leftover R32/42 to the , and then send some R68 to the /  to cover the extra SAS service, but that’s a lot of fleet switching. And, again, the R32/42 are going to have to be retired soon. 

Edited August 18, 2017 by R42N

[2Line1291]

I don't post on here a lot but this was running through my mind. Under this new set up the would be Broadways supplemental express service via Sea Beach. After the comes into the picture where would happen to the now that the works as Astoria's sole service from Astoria to Whitehall St and Coney Island. I was thinking the running on Second Ave from 125th to Coney Island could work if it connects to the Bridge.

[R42N]

I don't post on here a lot but this was running through my mind. Under this new set up the would be Broadways supplemental express service via Sea Beach. After the comes into the picture where would happen to the now that the works as Astoria's sole service from Astoria to Whitehall St and Coney Island. I was thinking the running on Second Ave from 125th to Coney Island could work if it connects to the Bridge.

 

 

I still firmly believe that the designation will be the sole Astoria service while the will be the supplemental, but, after Phase 3 kicks in (could be 25+ years) then I’d assume the current service pattern will return with two Astoria services, but that’s 25+ years in the future, when the R160’s will be the oldest train’s in the fleet.

 

Take a look at the map from 1992 and let me know if it’s similar to what you see in today’s map; so many things might happen that will change the complexion of the subway system we know today, so it’s impossible to predict that far ahead. 

[Mtatransit]

I still firmly believe that the designation will be the sole Astoria service while the will be the supplemental, but, after Phase 3 kicks in (could be 25+ years) then I’d assume the current service pattern will return with two Astoria services, but that’s 25+ years in the future, when the R160’s will be the oldest train’s in the fleet.

 

Take a look at the map from 1992 and let me know if it’s similar to what you see in today’s map; so many things might happen that will change the complexion of the subway system we know today, so it’s impossible to predict that far ahead.

 

It's pretty easy to plan ahead, I don't think the subway is gonna change extensively before 2100. We may see Phase II and MAYBE phase III. In the 1990 the only two major differences was probably switching of D/B,C Manhattan Br Project, 63 St Connector. Back then trains have different service patterns/terminals during different part of the day. Now that the trains are pretty uniform weekday/weekend only don't think the service pattern is gonna change much

[Wallyhorse]

IMO I think if the "(Q)" or the "(T)" were sent to the Bronx, either should use a new subway to replace the Third Av Elevated, and a new Dyre Av bypass along the Amtrak ROW, taking over the Dyre Av line.

"(Q)" runs along the Dyre Av bypass to Dyre Av, connecting with the "(D)" there once the latter is extended to Co-op-City. The "(5)", on the other hand, would be shifted to Wakefield-241 St.

"(T)" runs along a new subway under Third Av to Gun Hill Rd, replacing the original elevated.

A new SAS "(K)" runs from Manhattanville-125 St(where the "(1)" stops) to Hanover Sq with the "(T)"

While many don't really think the Dyre Av bypass is needed, I feel it's no different from the bypass to 71 Av along the LIRR ROW. The Third Av line is definitely needed, in order to cut down the number of commuters using the Bx15 and Bx41 SBS transferring at 3 Av-149 St. Finally, the Manhattanville extension IMO is something that is needed. As a commuter who normally takes the "(A)" "(B)" "©" and "(D)" trains, I find it really difficult to get from the West Side to East Side without going into the Bronx or transferrring at 34 St. And the 125 St Crosstown would easily solve this problem.

Definitely agree on a 3rd Avenue Line given all of my posts in the past on rebuilding the 3rd Avenue EL (the whole thing) and how in retrospect it was very short-sighted to tear down that line (that likely would have seen two rebuilds since it was actually torn down, one in the '60s and the other after 9/11 had it remained standing).  

 

The SAS you suggested is something I would actually have part of in place by extending Phase 2 to go all the way across 125th with transfers to ALL of the other lines that run across 125 with a connection to the 8th Avenue Line as well that would allow for easier yard moves, G.O.'s and possibly having an SAS in the future run via 8th Avenue or Concourse to 205th (Bronx) or 207th (Manhattan).  

[R42N]

It's pretty easy to plan ahead, I don't think the subway is gonna change extensively before 2100. We may see Phase II and MAYBE phase III. In the 1990 the only two major differences was probably switching of D/B,C Manhattan Br Project, 63 St Connector. Back then trains have different service patterns/terminals during different part of the day. Now that the trains are pretty uniform weekday/weekend only don't think the service pattern is gonna change much

 

 

Who’s to say the 60st Tunnel won’t need to be closed for 5 years? Or, what if there needs to be another Williamsburg/Manhattan Bridge rehabilitation? What if a massive economical crisis hits and subway service needs to be cut by 10%? 

 

So many things can happen, and probably will happen by 2040, let alone 2100. 

[RES2773]

I was advised to bring this conversation over here...

 

Phases three and four of SAS need a little work IMO. I know we probably won't even see phase two for another decade at least, but never too early to start prepping.

 

First, I feel like these phases should just be combined into one larger contract, or at least have funding for both at once. Progress is just too slow otherwise.

 

Second, I feel that stop placements are a little off, and so are connections. For example, East Village is basically skipped over, with two stops on the outskirts of the neighborhood. And, with having a stop on 14th street, why not connect to the L? It wouldn't be a bad thing to have riders from Brooklyn taking the second avenue line instead of further crowding Lexington first.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LGA Link N Train]

I was advised to bring this conversation over here...

 

Phases three and four of SAS need a little work IMO. I know we probably won't even see phase two for another decade at least, but never too early to start prepping.

 

First, I feel like these phases should just be combined into one larger contract, or at least have funding for both at once. Progress is just too slow otherwise.

 

Second, I feel that stop placements are a little off, and so are connections. For example, East Village is basically skipped over, with two stops on the outskirts of the neighborhood. And, with having a stop on 14th street, why not connect to the L? It wouldn't be a bad thing to have riders from Brooklyn taking the second avenue line instead of further crowding Lexington first.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, phase 3 already has a transfer to the at 14 Street. In my opinion, phase 3 should have 4 tracks instead of 2, a station at St. Marks Place, Tail tracks north of 55 Street and possibly a new line from Queens. As for Phase 4, the local and Express tracks should merge and the Chrystie Street connection plan from the 1970s should take in effect. After passing Cantham Square, it should run down Park Row and replace the Nassau Street subway at Fulton Street, causing Chambers Street to be a terminal Station. The platforms at Fulton and Broad Streets should be b expanded. After that the Dekalb Avenue Junction should be rebuilt (though I'm not sure how that'll go). As for phase 2, just add a third non-revenue track and have it go to the Bronx replacing the Dyre Avenue line

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

[RES2773]

Well, phase 3 already has a transfer to the at 14 Street. In my opinion, phase 3 should have 4 tracks instead of 2, a station at St. Marks Place, Tail tracks north of 55 Street and possibly a new line from Queens. As for Phase 4, the local and Express tracks should merge and the Chrystie Street connection plan from the 1970s should take in effect. After passing Cantham Square, it should run down Park Row and replace the Nassau Street subway at Fulton Street, causing Chambers Street to be a terminal Station. The platforms at Fulton and Broad Streets should be b expanded. After that the Dekalb Avenue Junction should be rebuilt (though I'm not sure how that'll go). As for phase 2, just add a third non-revenue track and have it go to the Bronx replacing the Dyre Avenue line

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

Really? On the map mta provides for full buildout doesn't show transfers at 14th.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LGA Link N Train]

Really? On the map mta provides for full buildout doesn't show transfers at 14th.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, the MTA said that there was going to be a transfer at 14 St

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

[MysteriousBtrain]

Really? On the map mta provides for full buildout doesn't show transfers at 14th.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It does on the map in this link:

http://web.mta.info/capital/sas_alt.html

[RES2773]

Does anyone agree it makes sense to try to on some level combine phases three and four?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CenSin]

In my opinion, phase 3 should have 4 tracks instead of 2, a station at St. Marks Place

…and not some half-assed design where some super long staircases/escalators to some street somehow means it’s served by a station when the distance traveled through these passageways is equivalent to 3 street blocks.

[LGA Link N Train]

…and not some half-assed design where some super long staircases/escalators to some street somehow means it’s served by a station when the distance traveled through these passageways is equivalent to 3 street blocks.

That's the proposed grand street right there

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

[Mysterious2train]

Really? On the map mta provides for full buildout doesn't show transfers at 14th.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The transfers to the , , and are listed as "under evaluation" in some documents, like the environmental impact statements, which is why they're not shown on every map. Ostensibly, the MTA will not build the transfers at 55th and/or 42nd St if costs get too out of control - Just like how 10th Avenue station was dropped from the line extension. This is somewhat disingenuous though since the ridership projections assume all the transfers are built. 

 

 

 

Anyway, I agree Phases 3 and 4 should be built at the same time. But Phase 3 alone is a lot longer than the other phases, so I definitely don't think it'll happen. 

Edited August 22, 2017 by Mysterious2train

[RES2773]

But Phase 3 alone is a lot longer than the other phases, so I definitely don't think it'll happen.

That's mainly the issue. Kind of like the silver line on Washington metro. They did it right. Part of the line was built, but they ended phase one at a station that wouldn't of really made sense to end at. That was a move to make sure the full line would be completed, cuz it didn't make sense to not continue. But phase three, it is mostly complete, so phase 4 could get put on the back burner.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rbrome]

Well, phase 3 already has a transfer to the at 14 Street. In my opinion, phase 3 should have 4 tracks instead of 2, a station at St. Marks Place, ...

 

 

I'd much rather see a station at Tompkins Square Park. This is our one chance to finally bring subway service to Alphabet City. Why isn't there more discussion of this idea? It should run down Avenue A, connecting with the L at the 1st Ave station. There are a few places (Stuyvesant Square, Stuyvesant Town, Houston St, among others) where you could put the necessary curves without too much trouble, I imagine. 

[LGA Link N Train]

I'd much rather see a station at Tompkins Square Park. This is our one chance to finally bring subway service to Alphabet City. Why isn't there more discussion of this idea? It should run down Avenue A, connecting with the L at the 1st Ave station. There are a few places (Stuyvesant Square, Stuyvesant Town, Houston St, among others) where you could put the necessary curves without too much trouble, I imagine.

That would make the project more expensive, your idea is great but I think that it should be a separate project in on itself

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

[Wallyhorse]

I'd much rather see a station at Tompkins Square Park. This is our one chance to finally bring subway service to Alphabet City. Why isn't there more discussion of this idea? It should run down Avenue A, connecting with the L at the 1st Ave station. There are a few places (Stuyvesant Square, Stuyvesant Town, Houston St, among others) where you could put the necessary curves without too much trouble, I imagine. 

I had before suggested having the SAS move to 1st Avenue south of 23rd (like the 2nd Avenue EL was) and have it run under 1st Avenue and then (South of Houston), Allen Street (which I believe is wider than Chrystie) to East Broadway (with the transfer at 1st Avenue and the transfer from the 1st Avenue/Allen Street side of 2nd Avenue) and then via East Broadway to Chatam Square.  This could allow for the SAS to have a Culver Line branch (perhaps with IT being the Culver Express) and possibly a Nassau Branch that could more easily come into Bowery via Allen Street as well as a connection to the Willamburg Bridge via Essex-Delancey.  To accommodate up to two additional SAS branches south of 63rd, 55th Street could be built as a four-track, two-platform station that can be used to terminate the additional SAS services from Culver and/or Nassau/Broadway-Brooklyn.

Edited August 22, 2017 by Wallyhorse

[T to Dyre Avenue]

The transfers to the , , and are listed as "under evaluation" in some documents, like the environmental impact statements, which is why they're not shown on every map. Ostensibly, the MTA will not build the transfers at 55th and/or 42nd St if costs get too out of control - Just like how 10th Avenue station was dropped from the line extension. This is somewhat disingenuous though since the ridership projections assume all the transfers are built.

 

Anyway, I agree Phases 3 and 4 should be built at the same time. But Phase 3 alone is a lot longer than the other phases, so I definitely don't think it'll happen.

This is why there should be a second 2nd Ave service from Queens via the 63rd St Tunnel. The current Phase 3 and 4 plans have just the train, which results in the entire line being "reverse-branched" (because we'd have the and north of 63rd). So not only would you have much less service south of 63rd, you wouldn't even have transfers to the existing, intersecting subway lines, which would result in lower ridership on the and less relief from overcrowding on the . Doesn't sound like much of a relief to me. But by having the V line to/from Queens, you'd be able to mitigate the lack of transfers to the other lines by having a line that goes near them - and preferably connects with them while still in Queens. Edited August 22, 2017 by T to Dyre Avenue