Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[LGA Link N Train]

I'm saying the is less compelling than the SAS on the Bypass, because most people will still be able to take the which also takes them to 6th Avenue. The SAS would be a unique desination not available to those people on Queens Blvd.

 

The Bypass would have to tunnel under Northern Blvd to get to the LIRR Main Line. As far as the whole "local bypass" thing goes, there are three points against that:

 

• It'd still be the longest interstations in the system, Rockaways not withstanding
• You really wouldn't save that much time, given that trains are capped at 55MPH and a stop takes a total of what, a minute, worst case?
• The whole question of politically tenable is quite silly, if only because the Bypass has not been a serious consideration for basically four decades at this point. Ask any person in Queens about the Bypass and there's like a 90% chance you'll get a blank stare. There is no expectation for it, and the entire idea of "super-express" was always half baked.

Lol I'm from Queens, but at least I'm that 10% that could give you an answer

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

[RailRunRob]

I'm saying the is less compelling than the SAS on the Bypass, because most people will still be able to take the which also takes them to 6th Avenue. The SAS would be a unique desination not available to those people on Queens Blvd.

 

The Bypass would have to tunnel under Northern Blvd to get to the LIRR Main Line. As far as the whole "local bypass" thing goes, there are three points against that:

 

• It'd still be the longest interstations in the system, Rockaways not withstanding
• You really wouldn't save that much time, given that trains are capped at 55MPH and a stop takes a total of what, a minute, worst case?
• The whole question of politically tenable is quite silly, if only because the Bypass has not been a serious consideration for basically four decades at this point. Ask any person in Queens about the Bypass and there's like a 90% chance you'll get a blank stare. There is no expectation for it, and the entire idea of "super-express" was always half baked.

. If speed is the issue what was the plan prior for the bypass?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[RR503]

 

I'm saying the is less compelling than the SAS on the Bypass, because most people will still be able to take the which also takes them to 6th Avenue. The SAS would be a unique desination not available to those people on Queens Blvd.

 

The Bypass would have to tunnel under Northern Blvd to get to the LIRR Main Line. As far as the whole "local bypass" thing goes, there are three points against that:

 

1. It'd still be the longest interstations in the system, Rockaways not withstanding
2. You really wouldn't save that much time, given that trains are capped at 55MPH and a stop takes a total of what, a minute, worst case?
3. The whole question of politically tenable is quite silly, if only because the Bypass has not been a serious consideration for basically four decades at this point. Ask any person in Queens about the Bypass and there's like a 90% chance you'll get a blank stare. There is no expectation for it, and the entire idea of "super-express" was always half baked.

 

 

The is local. So most of the riders that you say will flock to the will also flock to the because it's express and NYers love that. 

 

As for Northern, plans actually don't show it doing that. It is supposed to go under the Yard, and join up that way. http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=1412975 And you definitely can't put a station there, unless you want to spend untold billions working it between ESA, QBL, and the supports for the Astoria line. 

 

1. Sure, but it's all about perception. Think of how little temporal difference vs makes QP<-> Roosevelt, yet which one is chronically overcrowded? 

2. "    " 

3. And you expect that reality to continue if this is actually proposed/built? Infrastructure is ~90% politics. You have to remember that. 

Edited September 19, 2017 by RR503

[RR503]

There wouldn't be a stop at Northern. And if the local was really just as fast as the express, then riders wouldn't have bailed the  at Parsons, Union Tpke, or 71 Av before being cut back from 179 St.

 

Knock yourself out.

 

http://web.mta.info/nyct/service/pdf/tecur.pdf

http://web.mta.info/nyct/service/pdf/tmcur.pdf

 

QP to Roos via local: 10-11 mins

Via express: 7 to 8 mins (remember that this doesn't take into acount the merge with the )

 

Really unless the exp is across the platform, you're better off local.

[CenSin]

You really wouldn't save that much time, given that trains are capped at 55MPH and a stop takes a total of what, a minute, worst case?

There was a point when 80 mph was considered. What stops them from doing to on a brand new line? It’s all laws, regulations, rules, and paperwork.

[RailRunRob]

There was a point when 80 mph was considered. What stops them from doing to on a brand new line? It’s all laws, regulations, rules, and paperwork.

If I remember correctly Kawasaki cars are designed for speeds up to 70. The 142/A’s for sure. Wasn’t around for the R160’s still based off the same platform in part. Exceptions can always be made to rules.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

Edited September 20, 2017 by RailRunRob

[bobtehpanda]

There was a point when 80 mph was considered. What stops them from doing to on a brand new line? It’s all laws, regulations, rules, and paperwork.

 

Then you'd restrict QBL service to a single class of cars, which is (obviously) not ideal.

 

There are long stretches of track like the Rockaways where there wouldn't be much impediment to doing it, but we don't.

 

The is local. So most of the riders that you say will flock to the will also flock to the because it's express and NYers love that. 

 

As for Northern, plans actually don't show it doing that. It is supposed to go under the Yard, and join up that way. http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=1412975 And you definitely can't put a station there, unless you want to spend untold billions working it between ESA, QBL, and the supports for the Astoria line. 

 

1. Sure, but it's all about perception. Think of how little temporal difference vs makes QP<-> Roosevelt, yet which one is chronically overcrowded? 

2. "    " 

3. And you expect that reality to continue if this is actually proposed/built? Infrastructure is ~90% politics. You have to remember that. 

 

I wasn't aware that they actually issued contracts for that section during ESA, but let me reiterate my point.

 

The QBL Bypass has not been a real prospect for decades. Things that came out when the thing was finally killed in 1985 include the NES, Blockbuster, and Microsoft Windows 1.0. If you were to propose it today, people would not go, "Hey, remember that thing that people came up with before the Walkman was invented?" because it has been so irrelevant to the discussion at hand. It would be one thing if people had kept hearing about it, but no one knows what this is, so no one knows that there's a super express to compare it to.

 

If Western Queens has such high demand for transit anyways, what makes you think they wouldn't fight for two or three intermediate stops? Woodside and Rego Park, anyways, are the stations that make the most sense on the Bypass.

[RailRunRob]

Then you'd restrict QBL service to a single class of cars, which is (obviously) not ideal.

 

There are long stretches of track like the Rockaways where there wouldn't be much impediment to doing it, but we don't.

 

 

I wasn't aware that they actually issued contracts for that section during ESA, but let me reiterate my point.

 

The QBL Bypass has not been a real prospect for decades. Things that came out when the thing was finally killed in 1985 include the NES, Blockbuster, and Microsoft Windows 1.0. If you were to propose it today, people would not go, "Hey, remember that thing that people came up with before the Walkman was invented?" because it has been so irrelevant to the discussion at hand. It would be one thing if people had kept hearing about it, but no one knows what this is, so no one knows that there's a super express to compare it to.

 

If Western Queens has such high demand for transit anyways, what makes you think they wouldn't fight for two or three intermediate stops? Woodside and Rego Park, anyways, are the stations that make the most sense on the Bypass.

To your first point if the cars are capable of higher speeds which I believe they are for the most part there governed to some degree. Shouldn’t be too hard to unlock and make sure future cars are spec’d to these capabilities. CBTC should be able to handle The slower sections on the 90% of the existing subway. Even a wayside restriction solution could work. CPU could govern speed within two zones. Trains passes these points gears up or down on speed. Could work with a manual QBL as well. R46’s wouldn’t be a issue retired the R68s would maybe be the only car class restricted from that section.

 

I agree with your statements on your second point. People definitely gonna fight for new service.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Tonyboy515]

What if we could do this:

Canarsie: : Canarsie to Bedford/Lorimer

Orange or gray Canarsie to 96th-2nd via Canarsie, Bway Brooklyn, 6th, and 2nd Avenue lines (Rush, nights, weekends)

 

Bway/Brooklyn: Regular

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Only if they can't run much more than the current number of tph on the line between Myrtle-Broadway and Metro due to the flat junction at Myrtle. Otherwise, they should run the regular number of weekday trains between Metro and 71st-Continental and run five extra tph between Metro and 96th St/2nd Ave. Use an orange K or for the 2nd Ave-bound trains (I prefer V because then you can run any ENY-based cars on those trains, including R32s, which once ran on the old ).

[Trainmaster5]

To your first point if the cars are capable of higher speeds which I believe they are for the most part there governed to some degree. Shouldn’t be too hard to unlock and make sure future cars are spec’d to these capabilities. CBTC should be able to handle The slower sections on the 90% of the existing subway. Even a wayside restriction solution could work. CPU could govern speed within two zones. Trains passes these points gears up or down on speed. Could work with a manual QBL as well. R46’s wouldn’t be a issue retired the R68s would maybe be the only car class restricted from that section.

 

I agree with your statements on your second point. People definitely gonna fight for new service.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

The MAS ( Maximum Allowable Speed) on the LIRR is 80 mph or so IIRC and I think their equipment is more powerful than anything NYCT runs on a regular day. I'd guess that the only two stretches in the subway system that could possibly see anything approaching even 60 mph would be on the Rockaway flats and a fully repaired Sea Beach express track style. The signal system the subways run under wasn't designed for high speed operations in the first place. CBTC wouldn't really help either because of the relatively short distance between stations and the physical layout of most sections of the system. Remember that after the Union Square wreckage the federal government stepped in and found insufficient stopping distances between signals throughout the system. That's where the speed governing and timers came from. On the LIRR sections where trains approach MAS the station are far apart, for example KO-CI-Brentwood-Deer Park on the Ronkonkoma Branch those stations are about five miles apart yet the trains usually run about 60 mph or so. I'd guess the Hicksville to Jamaica run (non stop) is the only one I've traveled where the trains run close to 80 mph and I'm guessing the " Cannonball " between Speonk and the Hamptons is a high speed run where trains run at MAS. Perhaps a newly constructed Queens bypass running isolated stopping once between the east and western ends of the borough could approach 70-80 mph but otherwise anything else is a pipedream IMO. Carry on.

[R42N]

The MAS ( Maximum Allowable Speed) on the LIRR is 80 mph or so IIRC and I think their equipment is more powerful than anything NYCT runs on a regular day. I'd guess that the only two stretches in the subway system that could possibly see anything approaching even 60 mph would be on the Rockaway flats and a fully repaired Sea Beach express track style. The signal system the subways run under wasn't designed for high speed operations in the first place. CBTC wouldn't really help either because of the relatively short distance between stations and the physical layout of most sections of the system. Remember that after the Union Square wreckage the federal government stepped in and found insufficient stopping distances between signals throughout the system. That's where the speed governing and timers came from. On the LIRR sections where trains approach MAS the station are far apart, for example KO-CI-Brentwood-Deer Park on the Ronkonkoma Branch those stations are about five miles apart yet the trains usually run about 60 mph or so. I'd guess the Hicksville to Jamaica run (non stop) is the only one I've traveled where the trains run close to 80 mph and I'm guessing the " Cannonball " between Speonk and the Hamptons is a high speed run where trains run at MAS. Perhaps a newly constructed Queens bypass running isolated stopping once between the east and western ends of the borough could approach 70-80 mph but otherwise anything else is a pipedream IMO. Carry on.

 

 

While it’s probably not that fast, and off-topic, I used to love riding the R32 Train through the 60th Street tunnel 20-30 years ago. As a child, it felt like it was going 80-90, with the wind making the highest pitch sound imaginable through the railfan window (my ears are still bleeding), even though it was obviously slower. 

[RailRunRob]

The MAS ( Maximum Allowable Speed) on the LIRR is 80 mph or so IIRC and I think their equipment is more powerful than anything NYCT runs on a regular day. I'd guess that the only two stretches in the subway system that could possibly see anything approaching even 60 mph would be on the Rockaway flats and a fully repaired Sea Beach express track style. The signal system the subways run under wasn't designed for high speed operations in the first place. CBTC wouldn't really help either because of the relatively short distance between stations and the physical layout of most sections of the system. Remember that after the Union Square wreckage the federal government stepped in and found insufficient stopping distances between signals throughout the system. That's where the speed governing and timers came from. On the LIRR sections where trains approach MAS the station are far apart, for example KO-CI-Brentwood-Deer Park on the Ronkonkoma Branch those stations are about five miles apart yet the trains usually run about 60 mph or so. I'd guess the Hicksville to Jamaica run (non stop) is the only one I've traveled where the trains run close to 80 mph and I'm guessing the " Cannonball " between Speonk and the Hamptons is a high speed run where trains run at MAS. Perhaps a newly constructed Queens bypass running isolated stopping once between the east and western ends of the borough could approach 70-80 mph but otherwise anything else is a pipedream IMO. Carry on.

. Indeed on the money as always. I had the same stretches in mind the Flats and the LIRR Bypass. I was just referring to allowing rollingstock to open up abit more along these 3-3.5 mile stretches and maintain current speeds in all other areas. But your correct LIRR motors average about 250-260 hp for traction and are tested to up 100mph the third rail maximum definitely more powerful then standard subway rolling stock at about 150hp. The R142/a’s were designed with speeds up to 70mph not sure about the Bombardiers cars. R143 similar output heavier cars shouldn’t have an issue approaching 60-65 mph unregulated depending on weight with passenger capacity. The subway has seen 60 mph runs sometime in the past I remember hearing an old timer talk about Lo V’s hitting 60-65 on Eastside express runs. Technology might be able to restore some of that lost luster. But as you said I remember Robert Ray and Union square wreck safety and distance is always a variable.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

While it’s probably not that fast, and off-topic, I used to love riding the R32 Train through the 60th Street tunnel 20-30 years ago. As a child, it felt like it was going 80-90, with the wind making the highest pitch sound imaginable through the railfan window (my ears are still bleeding), even though it was obviously slower.

. All gravity my friend 4.23% downgrade on the Qns side 3.8% on the Manhattan side. I remember those runs on R32 and R40’s.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[bobtehpanda]

The MAS ( Maximum Allowable Speed) on the LIRR is 80 mph or so IIRC and I think their equipment is more powerful than anything NYCT runs on a regular day. I'd guess that the only two stretches in the subway system that could possibly see anything approaching even 60 mph would be on the Rockaway flats and a fully repaired Sea Beach express track style. The signal system the subways run under wasn't designed for high speed operations in the first place. CBTC wouldn't really help either because of the relatively short distance between stations and the physical layout of most sections of the system. Remember that after the Union Square wreckage the federal government stepped in and found insufficient stopping distances between signals throughout the system. That's where the speed governing and timers came from. On the LIRR sections where trains approach MAS the station are far apart, for example KO-CI-Brentwood-Deer Park on the Ronkonkoma Branch those stations are about five miles apart yet the trains usually run about 60 mph or so. I'd guess the Hicksville to Jamaica run (non stop) is the only one I've traveled where the trains run close to 80 mph and I'm guessing the " Cannonball " between Speonk and the Hamptons is a high speed run where trains run at MAS. Perhaps a newly constructed Queens bypass running isolated stopping once between the east and western ends of the borough could approach 70-80 mph but otherwise anything else is a pipedream IMO. Carry on.

 

Agreed.

 

The closer together your stop spacing, the more irrelevant higher speed becomes, and either way the subway really has no business skipping lots of dense neighborhoods at those speeds anyways. You want a 25 minute ride between 34 St and Jamaica, pay the $9.75.

Edited September 21, 2017 by bobtehpanda

[bstar1]

R32's and R42's are actually pretty fast.

[RailRunRob]

Agreed.

 

The closer together your stop spacing, the more irrelevant higher speed becomes, and either way the subway really has no business skipping lots of dense neighborhoods at those speeds anyways. You want a 25 minute ride between 34 St and Jamaica, pay the $9.75.

. 110Mph? Third rail ? Rail-shoes are capped at 100. M8’s on the NEC possibly could squeeze an extra 5 mph on AC. Whats the design speed on there Diesels and there duel powered. Typically not perfect at either power types trade off. 80-90 seems about right.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

R32's and R42's are actually pretty fast.

Compared too?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

Edited September 21, 2017 by RailRunRob

[bstar1]

R32/R42/R46/R68s run generally around the same speed, and NTTs are alittle more faster.

[RailRunRob]

R32/R42/R46/R68s run generally around the same speed, and NTTs are alittle more faster.

The DC cars are rated about the same for acceleration I’d still factor the extra 12,000 Lbs or so with the 75 footers. More weight same output. NTT have a-bit more HP plus AC traction someone correct me if I’m wrong on spec I’d go as far as saying that the 142a/188’s are the fastest on the rails today. Output to weight ratio.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

Edited September 21, 2017 by RailRunRob

[TheNewYorkElevated]

Wow, just really wow...

 

http://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/transit/2017/09/20/second-avenue-subway-reportedly-opened-with-thousands-outstanding-defects-mta-nyc.html

[CenSin]

Agreed.

 

The closer together your stop spacing, the more irrelevant higher speed becomes, and either way the subway really has no business skipping lots of dense neighborhoods at those speeds anyways. You want a 25 minute ride between 34 St and Jamaica, pay the $9.75.

That doesn’t do anything to equalize the commute times for those living in far-flung neighborhoods. A lot of Coney Island is dirt-poor (and I can see it in the streets). That should not mean that they have to endure longer commutes or pay more to get to work in a reasonable time frame because everything closer to Manhattan is priced out of reach. The neighborhoods served by the bypass would be the same as those served by the nearby Queens Boulevard Line. Making it a true bypass means commute times for Jamaica that are closer to commute times for Forest Hills (assuming that will be skipped too). And why would someone living near the in Jamaica go out of their way to take the LIRR which costs more and takes just as long because they have to bus their way there? They have to take the subway at the other end of their LIRR trip anyway.

[RailRunRob]

That doesn’t do anything to equalize the commute times for those living in far-flung neighborhoods. A lot of Coney Island is dirt-poor (and I can see it in the streets). That should not mean that they have to endure longer commutes or pay more to get to work in a reasonable time frame because everything closer to Manhattan is priced out of reach. The neighborhoods served by the bypass would be the same as those served by the nearby Queens Boulevard Line. Making it a true bypass means commute times for Jamaica that are closer to commute times for Forest Hills (assuming that will be skipped too). And why would someone living near the in Jamaica go out of their way to take the LIRR which costs more and takes just as long because they have to bus their way there? They have to take the subway at the other end of their LIRR trip anyway.

. I guess my question would be what changed? The goal is to move people as many as possible as quickly as possible. There were plans for two bypasses at some point or another Super Express on 2nd Ave and the other in Qns. What changed? Those plans were acceptable then. Are the changes and growth in population what’s changed views? To Bob’s point that Subway trains have no business skipping dense area’s if that’s the case we probably wouldn’t have express service at all! I don’t see the issue with having services of various speeds and types capacity and moving bodies is the overall goal. This bypass could go great with a Laurelton, Rosedale extension of the IMO. Why couldn’t the and originating in Jamaica and Forest Hills handle the traditional Qns Blvd runs. Sure we have to figure out some bottlenecks and swap a service or two to fill gaps if the rerouted or maybe a SAS service would be better.Point is if a bypass can move more people from farther reaches I’m for it! Figuring the service patterns and what’s available don’t think thats a issue.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Wallyhorse]

Wow, just really wow...

 

http://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/transit/2017/09/20/second-avenue-subway-reportedly-opened-with-thousands-outstanding-defects-mta-nyc.html

That was the pressure to get this done on time.

[Union Tpke]

On 9/21/2017 at 6:47 AM, TheNewYorkElevated said:

Wow, just really wow...

 

http://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/transit/2017/09/20/second-avenue-subway-reportedly-opened-with-thousands-outstanding-defects-mta-nyc.html

This honestly isn't a surprise. Prince Andrew rushed it so that he could look good.

Look what opened.... It was supposed to open in the Spring...and then everyone forgot about it.

http://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/transit/2017/09/22/new-center-gives-glimpse-of-second-avenue-subway-s-future.html

[bobtehpanda]

On 9/21/2017 at 4:24 AM, CenSin said:

That doesn’t do anything to equalize the commute times for those living in far-flung neighborhoods. A lot of Coney Island is dirt-poor (and I can see it in the streets). That should not mean that they have to endure longer commutes or pay more to get to work in a reasonable time frame because everything closer to Manhattan is priced out of reach. The neighborhoods served by the bypass would be the same as those served by the nearby Queens Boulevard Line. Making it a true bypass means commute times for Jamaica that are closer to commute times for Forest Hills (assuming that will be skipped too). And why would someone living near the in Jamaica go out of their way to take the LIRR which costs more and takes just as long because they have to bus their way there? They have to take the subway at the other end of their LIRR trip anyway.

I've always assumed Forest Hills to be the terminus, since it's the only 'official' plan I've ever actually seen a map for. It also nicely dovetails with two facts:

1. The LIRR ROW only really has room for two additional tracks until the junction with the RBB in Rego Park.
2. Forest Hills is currently the QBL terminal, so the Bypass can pick up the slack of whatever services terminate at Forest Hills (and also prevent the from doing that slow merge onto the local tracks)

On 9/21/2017 at 7:11 AM, RailRunRob said:

. I guess my question would be what changed? The goal is to move people as many as possible as quickly as possible. There were plans for two bypasses at some point or another Super Express on 2nd Ave and the other in Qns. What changed? Those plans were acceptable then. Are the changes and growth in population what’s changed views? To Bob’s point that Subway trains have no business skipping dense area’s if that’s the case we probably wouldn’t have express service at all! I don’t see the issue with having services of various speeds and types capacity and moving bodies is the overall goal. This bypass could go great with a Laurelton, Rosedale extension of the IMO. Why couldn’t the and originating in Jamaica and Forest Hills handle the traditional Qns Blvd runs. Sure we have to figure out some bottlenecks and swap a service or two to fill gaps if the rerouted or maybe a SAS service would be better.Point is if a bypass can move more people from farther reaches I’m for it! Figuring the service patterns and what’s available don’t think thats a issue.

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

I used to ride the subway and bus all the way to the county line. Queens Plaza to Forest Hills already contains one of the longest interstations in the network. Skipping one stop in the middle will save a total of maybe a minute, generously, and even so I would argue that a stop at Woodside is necessary, as well as a stop at Rego Park, simply for the network opportunities. The interstations would still be pretty damn long.

Currently, all population growth that has happened (and is overcongesting the current QBL) is happening in Western Queens, not in the east. So train services should reflect that reality - the cut-rate commuter express should not be bypassing the plebians in the sardine cans.

But let's talk about what this means for Eastern Queens. Today, the is scheduled to make it from Herald Square to 179th St in 42 minutes. The local on Queens Blvd is scheduled to run at an average 18MPH. Assuming that any future extension has the same stop spacing as the (R), the  can make it to Springfield/Hillside in 48 minutes, and the county line on Hillside from 34th St in just under an hour. Remove the BS speed restrictions on QBL and you can shave that even more. There's no need to arbitrarily have a super-express that skips people for minimal time benefit.

[RailRunRob]

8 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

I've always assumed Forest Hills to be the terminus, since it's the only 'official' plan I've ever actually seen a map for. It also nicely dovetails with two facts:

1. The LIRR ROW only really has room for two additional tracks until the junction with the RBB in Rego Park.
2. Forest Hills is currently the QBL terminal, so the Bypass can pick up the slack of whatever services terminate at Forest Hills (and also prevent the from doing that slow merge onto the local tracks)

I used to ride the subway and bus all the way to the county line. Queens Plaza to Forest Hills already contains one of the longest interstations in the network. Skipping one stop in the middle will save a total of maybe a minute, generously, and even so I would argue that a stop at Woodside is necessary, as well as a stop at Rego Park, simply for the network opportunities. The interstations would still be pretty damn long.

Currently, all population growth that has happened (and is overcongesting the current QBL) is happening in Western Queens, not in the east. So train services should reflect that reality - the cut-rate commuter express should not be bypassing the plebians in the sardine cans.

But let's talk about what this means for Eastern Queens. Today, the is scheduled to make it from Herald Square to 179th St in 42 minutes. The local on Queens Blvd is scheduled to run at an average 18MPH. Assuming that any future extension has the same stop spacing as the (R), the  can make it to Springfield/Hillside in 48 minutes, and the county line on Hillside from 34th St in just under an hour. Remove the BS speed restrictions on QBL and you can shave that even more. There's no need to arbitrarily have a super-express that skips people for minimal time benefit.

I get your points. What I'm saying create more capacity it was never really about speed what express line in NYC really is?  You'd be pulling bodies from SE Queens all the feeder bus lines into Jamaica.  extension to Rosedale by the time it pulls into Parsons it's packed  A stop at Sutphin and right to LIC and Manhattan. Great use of a bypass route. I'm I wrong for thinking that would free up some space along the QBL? Afterall the riders from SE Qns are skipping Forest Hills and Jackson Hts altogether.  I understand the question is where do the trains go can the 53rd/60th/63rd street tube handle more trains? Manhattan trunks? What about the merger points? Lost service if you reroute? Maybe this is an SAS thing? Lower Montauk anyone? Kinda a bypass shurgs..  Would be nice to speard things out on the QBL but to your point with Western Qns and congestion, those trains are going to have start coming in a bit lighter. Reroute the folks from further out that could happen. 

Edited September 27, 2017 by RailRunRob