Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
CenSin

Second Avenue Subway Discussion

Recommended Posts

Interesting thing: Obviously the (Q) is slated to go up to 125/96, and run thru express from 57-Canal and over the bridge. The (N) may or may not still be in Astoria (leaning toward the affirmative), and it may or may not continue to be the local in Manhattan. It may or may not continue to go over the bridge during the day (leaning toward the bridge). It may also run express from 57, or from 34 as it does now. There may be a (W) running with it to Astoria or there may not. Funny thing is, there's no punch at 5Av to designate express or local lineup before 57, or N/W/R/Q or whatever is on 60th St then. Its probably why the express starts at 34 like it does now from trains coming from 60th St. There is no way for City Hall to know the order of trains coming up from the tube except by gap sheets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope this doesn't turn into another one of those "why the (W) should be brought back" then somehow turns into one of those "the (V) should come back" blah blah blah threads...

I hope someone doesn't start with the "If I were king of the MTA, I would do this and that to the routes and build another tunnel to connect here and there. And then there should be a <letter> using the abandoned tracks there (trust me, those school kids really need that service). To fill those extra rusting tracks with trains, I'd bring back the (H), (K), (V), (W), and (JFK) (don't worry I'll figure out a way to shoehorn an elevated connection to the airport somewhere). (long wall of text littered with subway bullets)"

 

What's often thrown about is whether the (N) can handle Astoria by itself at current levels (answer is no, in rush hour anyways). No one seldom brings up whether the (Q) can handle 2Av by itself, I mean it will be the only trunk line that runs by itself N-S in Manhattan.

This might have consequences for all of the routes running on the Broadway line. If (Q) service is increased drastically, we might see one of these service changes:

 

  • (N) continue running as the Broadway local, because there is no room on the express track for the (Q) and (N)'s headway's combined. Instead, the (N)'s headway will be reduced for slightly more frequent service. The (Q) won't have to deal with the (N) except at DeKalb Avenue and Prince Street if the (N) continues using the Manhattan Bridge.

  • (N) will run express along Broadway, but with a longer headway (meaning less frequent service). The (W) will make up for that in Astoria and become the Broadway local. The increased number of routes on the Broadway line will cause more conflicts at 34 Street–Herald Square or 57 Street–7 Avenue (just like before the service cuts), but instead of letting the train scheduled to go first leave the station first, they might just opt to allow all express trains to go first to keep things moving for the (Q) or adopt a first-in-first-out policy; consequently, they'll stop holding trains for connections.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope someone doesn't start with "I would do this and that to the service and build another tunnel to connect here and there. And then there should be a <letter> using the abandoned tracks there (trust me, those school kids really need that service)."

 

 

This might have consequences for all of the routes running on the Broadway line. If (Q) service is increased drastically, we might see one of these service changes:

 

  • (N) continue running as the Broadway local, because there is no room on the express track for the (Q) and (N)'s headway's combined. Instead, the (N)'s headway will be reduced for slightly more frequent service. The (Q) won't have to deal with the (N) except at DeKalb Avenue and Prince Street if the (N) continues using the Manhattan Bridge.

  • (N) will run express along Broadway, but with a longer headway (meaning less frequent service). The (W) will make up for that in Astoria and become the Broadway local. The increased number of route on the Broadway line will definitely cause more conflicts at 34 Street–Herald Square or 57 Street–7 Avenue, but instead of letting the train scheduled to go first leave the station, they might just opt to allow all express trains to go first to keep things moving for the (Q) (just the way it's supposed to be).

 

 

Can't cut Sea Beach service. What you might see is this (similar to Mike Gerald's solution):

 

(Q) Coney Island to 96th/125th. Express 57-Canal and over the bridge.

(R) Forest Hills to Whitehall. Local Queens/Manhattan. No night service.

(W) Coney Island to 96/125th. Express 57-Canal and over the bridge. Nights shuttle to 36th.

(N) Astoria to Bay Ridge. Local. All times.

 

Remember, letters really dont mean anything, just placeholders. Of all the services, the (R) runs the least (since the (M) is in Queens too) and can be turned at Whitehall. The Bay Ridge service can then be boosted to provide adequate service to both Astoria and 4Av as the only local in Brooklyn and the only thing up at Astoria. I don't want to hear about "Oh Sea Beach want direct Manhattan service at night..." I operate the (N) often, there is NOBODY out there until I get to 8 Av. A handful at New Utretcht, and thats it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know, but how can the (MTA) route the (Q)/(T) to the Bronx NEC (Hell Gate Line)? Considering they have to create an U-Turn esque tunnel under Manhattan and route it under the river all the way to the Bronx and finding a spot to route the line to connect the NEC Line, plus having to stabilize the ground of the NEC Tracks to maintain that existing Amtrak service won't be affected. I understand the full tunnel option is pricey, but I don't see a route that could welcome the (Q)/(T) with At Grade/Depressed/Elevated in the South Bronx area.
No U-turn has to be made. There's a right-of-way along southern Bronx that goes straight across and connects with the northeast corridor. Check with the rail track maps or use Google Maps' satellite view. They call the option the "south Bronx bypass."

 

As for the fence, considering how slow construction is, the (MTA) might have to spend millions on a Fence instead of just at a low-cost of under $100,000 if done right!
Fair assumption, considering the fact that the MTA has established a track record for wasting money on the most trivial things. We don't know if a fence is required though. What we do know is that a direct track connection to a railroad would be forbidden.

 

A cost efficient way would be: Lowering the price of Metro-North Zones 1/3 to $5.50/equivalent to an Express Bus Fare and increase intra-city trains to gain more riders if they really want to expand rail service to the area of the NEC.*

 

Like what I stated above in response 2: Lowering the price of LIRR Zones 1/3 to $5.50/equivalent to an Express Bus Fare and increase intra-city trains to gain more riders if they really want a Super Express service parallel to Queens Blvd.*

True. Co-op city is high density, but not low income while Central Bronx (along 3 Avenue) is both high density and low income. They could use a subway more. I never argued for the use of the northeast corridor over Central Bronx's 3 Avenue though. However, an extension to Throggs Neck appears to be the second best use of the 2 Avenue extension into the Bronx since it's also high density and low income. Running a line via the Amtrak right-of-way until Longwood Avenue before tunneling or building an elevated line would be much cheaper than doing it from Central Bronx. (The streets don't exactly line up nicely for this purpose.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't call Throggs Neck low income, now (outside of the housing projects by the end of the Bx42). As was stated in other thread, the simplest thing to do is just tunnel it up to 159 and 3 Av, there's vacant land there for a portal, and have it piggyback the MNR ROW as structure up to Fordham. The MNR Harlem line stations below between Fordham and 125 can then be closed, as they're low ridership and often bypassed anyway. TA should owns all that land and airspace anyway, including that bus layover area in Fordham Plaza over which a terminal can be built. Then you're really seeing progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't cut Sea Beach service. What you might see is this (similar to Mike Gerald's solution):
True. Less service would suck a lot. I use it all the time over the (Q).

 

(Q) Coney Island to 96th/125th. Express 57-Canal and over the bridge.

(R) Forest Hills to Whitehall. Local Queens/Manhattan. No night service.

(W) Coney Island to 96/125th. Express 57-Canal and over the bridge. Nights shuttle to 36th.

(N) Astoria to Bay Ridge. Local. All times.

It's quite a drastic change, but appears to work, though you forget that people from 8 Avenue, Chinatown, and Flushing often make use of the Queensboro Plaza transfer. This forces an extra transfer or a transfer at Times Square (which is difficult to navigate).

 

Remember, letters really dont mean anything, just placeholders. Of all the services, the (R) runs the least (since the (M) is in Queens too) and can be turned at Whitehall. The Bay Ridge service can then be boosted to provide adequate service to both Astoria and 4Av as the only local in Brooklyn and the only thing up at Astoria. I don't want to hear about "Oh Sea Beach want direct Manhattan service at night..." I operate the (N) often, there is NOBODY out there until I get to 8 Av. A handful at New Utretcht, and thats it.
I use the (N) at night to Coney Island, but usually from Queens or Manhattan, and the (F) is the fastest route during the night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't call Throggs Neck low income, now (outside of the housing projects by the end of the Bx42).

I'm reading the RPA's 1998 report, and it does show large areas of low income between the Pelham line and Throggs Neck. Maybe not at the tip of Throggs Neck, but there are 4 islands of high density along the way within the low income area stretching from southeast Bronx to Throggs Neck. Maybe 14 years made a difference in the demographics. We'll have to locate new statistical figures to find out :\

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't cut Sea Beach service. What you might see is this (similar to Mike Gerald's solution):

 

(Q) Coney Island to 96th/125th. Express 57-Canal and over the bridge.

(R) Forest Hills to Whitehall. Local Queens/Manhattan. No night service.

(W) Coney Island to 96/125th. Express 57-Canal and over the bridge. Nights shuttle to 36th.

(N) Astoria to Bay Ridge. Local. All times.

 

Remember, letters really dont mean anything, just placeholders. Of all the services, the (R) runs the least (since the (M) is in Queens too) and can be turned at Whitehall. The Bay Ridge service can then be boosted to provide adequate service to both Astoria and 4Av as the only local in Brooklyn and the only thing up at Astoria. I don't want to hear about "Oh Sea Beach want direct Manhattan service at night..." I operate the (N) often, there is NOBODY out there until I get to 8 Av. A handful at New Utretcht, and thats it.

 

(W) via 2nd Avenue?

 

I would just have the (W) run local from Astoria to Whitehall, extended to 9th or Bay Parkway in place of the former brown (Mx) in South Brooklyn to help the (D)(R) out.

 

But I get what you mean. Even tho the passengers may not please these changes. For a short time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If your talking about the tracks running along the Bronx Shoreline, then that is freight railroad tracks, and again, no track connections can be made to existing trackage, also this alignment won't gain enough riders. I'd just let the MNR run over the Hell Gate either ways.
We are not talking about making connections to existing tracks, but using the extra space or airspace along the right-of-way. If you thought that were the case, why did you not assume the same about using the Amtrak's northeast corridor right-of-way? The right-of-way along the southern edge of Bronx is quite wide, by the way.

 

Yeah, and hopefully the FRA won't complain about that but from observation, all the non-FRA lines all have some sorta fence blocking access to one another.
Someone with expertise in the rules and regulations might want to step in a say something about this here.

 

As what TwoTimer said and my reply.
And you saw my reply, which you responded to, and my reply to that is at the very bottom of this post.

 

Replies in Teal.
Please take the effort to properly unquote your own passages. I can't quote those for reference; nested quotes don't seem to be enabled by default.

 

I personally don't feel that they are really low-incomed, maybe lower-middle income the minimal because the community's environment looks like it is somewhere in the range of lower-middle to upper-middle class depending on how you look it. Personally, 14 years may have made some difference, but IDK about the RPA's report.

The U.S. Census does not look at how nice the house looks. It looks at numbers. Either way, I'd trust the classification used in the publication; I'm sure they chose the correct thresholds for the "low-income" category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd align it like this:

(Despite the (M) running frequent in Queens, many opt for the (R) as what I observe almost daily).

 

-(R) Forest Hills <-> Bay Ridge/95th St via Lower Manhattan [DayTime - Local Queens/Manhattan/Brooklyn.] / [Late Nights - 36th St. to 95th St. Shuttle].

 

-(N) Astoria <-> Coney Island via Bridge, [All Times - Local Queens/Express Manhattan/Local Brooklyn].

 

-(Q) 125th St. [P2]/96th St. [P1] <-> Coney Island via Bridge, [All Times - Local 2nd Ave./Express Broadway/Local Brooklyn].

 

-(W) Astoria <-> Whitehall St. [Weekday DayTime - Local Queens/Local Manhattan].

I said in an earlier post that the (Q)'s frequency might be ramped up. In that situation, your service pattern (which I suggested already), TwoTimer says Sea Beach service would have to take a substantial cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't cut Sea Beach service. What you might see is this (similar to Mike Gerald's solution):

 

(Q) Coney Island to 96th/125th. Express 57-Canal and over the bridge.

(R) Forest Hills to Whitehall. Local Queens/Manhattan. No night service.

(W) Coney Island to 96/125th. Express 57-Canal and over the bridge. Nights shuttle to 36th.

(N) Astoria to Bay Ridge. Local. All times.

 

Remember, letters really dont mean anything, just placeholders. Of all the services, the (R) runs the least (since the (M) is in Queens too) and can be turned at Whitehall. The Bay Ridge service can then be boosted to provide adequate service to both Astoria and 4Av as the only local in Brooklyn and the only thing up at Astoria. I don't want to hear about "Oh Sea Beach want direct Manhattan service at night..." I operate the (N) often, there is NOBODY out there until I get to 8 Av. A handful at New Utretcht, and thats it.

Running the (N) between Astoria and Bay Ridge will cause the (N) to have the same issue that the (R) had when it ran between Astoria and Bay Ridge prior to May 1987. The issue was that the (R) lacked a yard anywhere along its route while (N) had two. You don't want that to be the case again. So how about this:

(N) - 96th & 2nd to Coney Island via Broadway Express, Manhattan Bridge and 4th Ave Express all times except nights. Nights shuttle between 36th & CI.

(Q) - 96th & 2nd to CI via Broadway Express, Bridge and Brighton Local. All times.

(R) - Same as now, except no night service. See below for substitute service.

(W) - Astoria to Whitehall via Broadway Local. All times. During rush hours, every other (W) would turn at Canal to avoid backups from (W)s turning at Whitehall's center track. The (W) would replace the (R) to Bay Ridge late nights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to throw a service bone to generate convo :P (as its what you likes LOVE to do). Just a few things to remember...

 

1. You don't want switching anywhere along the Broadway or 4Av corridor with the increased service (just like you see on Lex, 7Av and 6Av). What starts on a certain track must stay there. The switching at 34th like it has been will be gone, it will cause tieups up and down the line.

 

2. Whitehall is a one pocket terminal with no relay position and trains have to leave via the same switch they came on in. It can't maintain a short headway. (W) was fine the way it used to be because the (N) was up there too, and there wasn't too many (W)'s. Still had backups going back to Cortlant back in those days.

 

3. You don't want to turn revenue service on yard leads, as the train would have to be cleaned out (which means the crew walk through the train to ensure no passengers are left). That's why only the last few ®'s got turned at Canal St, and even then it plugged the (N), so now they turn at Whitehall.

 

4. Letter designations do not matter. The (N)(R)(Q)(W) all have spent time at Astoria, for those who are hung up on maintaining letter designations at the terminals they serve. It wasn't an either or situation like over on the Myrtle Av line.

 

5. There is no punch box at 5 Av, which is the big dilemna. If there was, service could just be what it is now with switching done seamlessly north of 57 ((N) goes back to express). Right now, there is no way for City Hall to know which train is which at 5 Av to do any kind of joining up or separating. Adding a punch box is expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hows about the (Q) does the same thing the (A) does in Southern Queens and splits into 2 different terminals? I heard the (Q) was supposed to double service anyway, so I think that would be a good idea.

 

though since its the (MTA) (and its been said a thousand times already), the best to do is to wait and see. You never know, the (MTA) might be dumb and eliminate (Q) service to Astoria alltogether, or they could do something crazy such as put a 6 Av line up 2 Av. Who knows, just see what hapens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's often thrown about is whether the (N) can handle Astoria by itself at current levels (answer is no, in rush hour anyways). No one seldom brings up whether the (Q) can handle 2Av by itself, I mean it will be the only trunk line that runs by itself N-S in Manhattan.

 

True, but there are a few factors to consider. The other N-S lines are through lines, the trains on those lines are usually passing through into other boroughs. They have to handle Local and Through Passengers.

 

The 2nd Ave line will end at 96/125th. And will mostly be "local "passengers in that vicinity. When it first opens it will only go to 72nd street right? The Astoria Line doesn't have another subway line paralleling it, the 2nd Ave line will have the Lex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does anyone actually look at schedules instead of just a map? most Q trains terminate at 57th with service to astoria basically rush hours. the Q is going up second ave to 96h st when it opens. the W was only because they had the money to run the extra service and when it got cut, they "partially" extended the Q to shut people up the same way they renamed the V to an orange M.

 

in response to the OP, the Q is only really peak supplemental service to astoria. regardless of what it does now, the plan is to send it up second ave when it opens. phase 3 will implement the T. if money is available and the demand for a change in original planned service, it will be made then accordingly.

 

btw, when sas opens, it will be up to 96th st, not just 72nd, and im sure the Q alone can handle 3 stops. cause when it first opens, thats all the Q will handle by itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think they should increase the (N) service anymore than another train or two, because the 'slow switch' north of Canal is just not gonna let the (R) run smoothly which it ain't already, I'd rather see the old (W) come back as a Weekday service running to Whitehall St. from Astoria. Don't think Peak Hour would do, maybe start the service later and end the service earlier than the typical Weekday service lines [e.g. (M) - to Manhattan/Queens].
I would think that if they increased both the (N) and (R) a bit, then not only would there be enough service for Astoria, but there also would be enough service for the Bway Local, so the (N) could be express again. (And not have to use the switch, weekdays).

I'm surprised they didn;t think of this. Perhaps they went with basically replacing the (W) with the (N), and the (N) with the (Q), for fear Astoria riders would react.

 

When Second Ave. opens up, they might want to consider that, instead of starting up a new short line (W) again, which would probably ultimately require more crews, and thus be more expensive to run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Fault Line has nothing to do with this curve in the line, the only affect the Fault Line did to ANY (MTA) property is the 125th St. (1) Viaduct, that's all! Also, you don't need the Second Ave. Subway Elevated, there is no way people will like an elevated line poking thru 125th St. when you already have two elevated line intersecting the Street - Metro-North on Park and the IRT (1) Line on Broadway.

 

The reason the (1) is elevated at 125th is the same reason north of Dyckman it's elevated: The topography of Manhattan and how it drastically changes in those areas.

 

125th and Broadway is in an extremely deep valley, which was why the (1) went elevated over the stretch it does in order to avoid having to go deeply downhill and uphill in order to keep the line level. Any SAS extension across 125th would likely have to end on an elevated platform at Broadway-12th Avenues for this reason, not to mention the fact that there IS a fault line there while also would make most, if not all of such an extension across 125th street have to be elevated. The reason I can see this happening is because of the massive expansion of Columbia University that is currently taking place and will continue to over the next 10-12 years. By the time such a line reached Broadway-12th Avenue, Columbia would likely be in a position to greatly benefit from such an SAS extension, which is why if I were at Columbia I'd be looking to partially pay for such an extension across 125.

 

Dyckman street is a similar issue, as the (1) comes out of a tunnel directly onto a platform that very quickly becomes more elevated within that station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.