Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[Chris89292]

2 hours ago, Vulturious said:

I was going to say the same thing, they could also easily name it Lexington Av-125 St like other stations stopping at Lexington Av.

All train terminals are called based on the neighborhood and street or landmark, it’ll probably be called Harlem-125th Street  

[CenSin]

2 minutes ago, Chris89292 said:

All train terminals are called based on the neighborhood and street or landmark

The practice is pretty arbitrary.

New Lots Avenue

Nereid Avenue

Bedford Park Boulevard

168 Street

Church Avenue

Broad Street

8 Avenue

96 Street

Franklin Avenue

[Chris89292]

15 minutes ago, CenSin said:

The practice is pretty arbitrary.

New Lots Avenue

Nereid Avenue

Bedford Park Boulevard

168 Street

Church Avenue

Broad Street

8 Avenue

96 Street

Franklin Avenue

Nereid Avenue serves the same area of Wakefield so it wouldn’t make sense calling it Wakefield-Nereid Avenue, sometimes the Neighborhoods name is just too long, East New York-New lots Avenue is too long, same goes for Upper East Side-96 Street too long for a station name, it doesn’t change the fact that the majority of the terminals are called based on the neighborhood or landmark it serves 

[CenSin]

2 hours ago, Chris89292 said:

Nereid Avenue serves the same area of Wakefield so it wouldn’t make sense calling it Wakefield-Nereid Avenue, sometimes the Neighborhoods name is just too long, East New York-New lots Avenue is too long, same goes for Upper East Side-96 Street too long for a station name, it doesn’t change the fact that the majority of the terminals are called based on the neighborhood or landmark it serves 

That doesn’t explain the lack of a neighborhood/landmark designation for Church Avenue or 8 Avenue, which you glossed over, because their names would not be too long compared to the examples you gave, and they would also not duplicate neighborhood/landmark designations assigned to adjacent stations:

• Kensington–Church Avenue (24 characters)
• Chelsea–8 Avenue (16 characters)

And the length of the name surely did not prevent these, each of which are equal in length or longer than the longest hypothetical station name you gave as examples of “too long”:

• Aqueduct–North Conduit Avenue (29 characters)
• Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue (29 characters)
• Jamaica Center–Parsons/Archer (29 characters)
• Ozone Park–Lefferts Boulevard (29 characters)
• Van Cortlandt Park–242 Street (29 characters)
• 116 Street–Colombia University (30 characters)
• Rockaway Park–Beach 116 Street (30 characters)
• Atlantic Avenue–Barclays Center (31 characters)
• West 4 Street–Washington Square (31 characters)
• West 8 Street–New York Aquarium (31 characters)
• 47–50 Streets–Rockefeller Center (32 characters)
• Flatbush Avenue–Brooklyn College (32 characters)
• Jackson Heights–Roosevelt Avenue (32 characters)
• Christopher Street–Sheridan Square (34 characters)
• Middle Village–Metropolitan Avenue (34 characters)
• 81 Street–Museum of Natural History (35 characters)
• 42 Street–Port Authority Bus Terminal (37 characters)
• Westchester Square–East Tremont Avenue (38 characters)
• Sutphin Boulevard–Archer Avenue–JFK Airport (43 characters)

Now onto the issue of consecutive stations with the same neighborhood/landmark designation: the real reason is probably consecutive stations with the same neighborhood/landmark, although that hasn’t prevented the following two station names:

• Franklin Avenue–Medgar Evers College (36 characters)
• President Street–Medgar Evers College (37 Characters)

(Astoria Boulevard and Astoria–Ditmars Boulevard are close calls. 😉)

[Vulturious]

5 hours ago, Chris89292 said:

All train terminals are called based on the neighborhood and street or landmark, it’ll probably be called Harlem-125th Street  

I genuinely couldn't care what the name is, honestly. My only care when it comes to SAS is it needs to be done as soon as possible, as competently built as possible, and as cost efficient as possible. Unfortunately, only one of these three will happen, can you guess which one?

[Kamen Rider]

17 hours ago, CenSin said:

Maybe they will think ahead and give it a crosstown friendly name, given that they did entertain the idea of going all the way across 125 Street.

They can pay to replace signs once, or they can pay to replace them twice. (And one more time when the comes around.)

They will have to replace or change the signs at least twice just with the planned construction.

When this phase opens, it will still be just the Q. First change will add the shorter T, second change will add the full length T.

[Kamen Rider]

17 hours ago, Chris89292 said:

All train terminals are called based on the neighborhood and street or landmark…

Not only is it arbitrary, it’s a relatively new change for most stations. 
 

heck, they’re not even consistent with the name order.

 

For examples, at Fresh Pond Road, for example, the M plays as such.

”this is a Middle Village, Metropolitan Avenue Bound M local train, the next and last stop is: Metropolitan Avenue- Middle Village”

Then there are the non-terminal stations with the neighborhood names like 61st- Woodside.

we also have the stations who have just the neighborhood/landmark name, no street identification.

Prospect Park

Sheepshead Bay

Brighton Beach

Broad Channel

 

 

[Mpn4179]

On 5/14/2023 at 11:45 AM, 40 to 241st said:

So were deleting the M15

No. The M15 Local will be intact, however the M15-SBS will be subject to elimination depending on when Phase 4 is completed, the  runs full service to Hanover Square, and how SAS will affect the M15 services (Local and SBS) as a whole.

Most likely, the M15 services will start to be affected when Phase 3 is completed and the  starts running between 125th Street and Houston Street. If the M15-SBS loses riders, they will probably go after the M15-SBS short turns between 125th St and Houston St in the morning and reduce some runs in the off-peak hours. While they’re doing that, they’ll probably increase local service while extending the Pike St-Cherry St runs to South Ferry to offset the loss of some of the SBS runs.

When Phase 4 is completed, and the  runs full service, the M15 services might be affected even more. Since the  and the M15-SBS are technically competing services, if SBS loses more service to the , they might give it the B82-SBS treatment (weekdays only), or they will axe it altogether and slightly increase the local service throughout the day to offset the loss of the SBS. However, the late night local service will go to hourly service instead of half hourly due to the  running every 20 minutes.

Either way, if SAS gets completed and fully implemented, it will affect the M15 services in some way or form.

[randomnewyorker23]

according to the manhattan bus map the M15 also runs on 1st Ave, but idk, the M15 might be here to stay, especially at the rate construction is going because the MTA's favorite thing to do to stations is overbuild them.

 

Also I hope they don't rename the  platform, they most likely won't, and please I don't want to hear more Jessica erasure.

Edited June 3, 2023 by randomnewyorker23

[Mpn4179]

9 hours ago, randomnewyorker23 said:

according to the manhattan bus map the M15 also runs on 1st Ave, but idk, the M15 might be here to stay, especially at the rate construction is going because the MTA's favorite thing to do to stations is overbuild them.

 

Also I hope they don't rename the  platform, they most likely won't, and please I don't want to hear more Jessica erasure.

Yes, the M15 runs on First Avenue, but that’s because 1st and 2nd Avenues are one-way streets. 2nd Avenue runs southbound and 1st Avenue runs northbound.

No matter what happens to SAS, the M15 Local will always be there.

When the full length SAS is finally completed and implemented, the M15 Select Bus might not be there.

[zacster]

The M15 SBS will also remain.  Let's say I live in Stuy Town and commute to NYU-Langone.  That's an easy quick trip on the SBS, but on the local bus it will take forever.  Or let's say I work at HSS, that's a longer trip uptown on the local bus.  I don't want to walk over to 2nd Ave and then back to take the subway.  Going the other way I'd have no choice but I'd want to keep my one way ride intact.  I used to take the SBS on occasion from 42nd St down to Grand and there is no way I'd take a local bus, something I did a few weeks ago going from NYU Hosp down to 14th, because I was already at 38th St.  It really is slow, even midday when there isn't as much traffic.

And one thing that the MTA is already doing that would improve service greatly on the local buses is OMNY.  Dipping cards in the machine was always a bad idea as everybody has to stop and wait on boarding.  I was always surprised that they didn't change it to a Metrocard swipe system instead.  Tap and ride will be much better.  It would be better too on the subway if the machine didn't hesitate the way it does.

[LGA Link N Train]

Ima drop a personal opinion I have on the timeline of SAS.

By the Time Phase 2 is in the middle of or near the completion of its construction, thats when I think  Should get the ball rolling on Phase 3 so that by the time Phase 2 is Open for Service, Phase 3 would already be underway and we waste less time with getting it done. And same with Phase 4. Do I believe that’ll happen? Unlikely but hey, you never know.

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

11 minutes ago, LGA Link N Train said:

Ima drop a personal opinion I have on the timeline of SAS.

By the Time Phase 2 is in the middle of or near the completion of its construction, thats when I think  Should get the ball rolling on Phase 3 so that by the time Phase 2 is Open for Service, Phase 3 would already be underway and we waste less time with getting it done. And same with Phase 4. Do I believe that’ll happen? Unlikely but hey, you never know.

Originally the plan of SAS was to build the phases in a rapid succession so that as soon as one phase was finished the next phase would be ready to start work. However, SAS Phase II was cut/"postponed" from the 2015-2019 budget when Phase I was opening, and then COVID hit which further kicked the can down the road. It seems like the MTA is slowly getting their ducks in a row to hopefully start construction of Phase II by the end of this year.

Phase III is going to be logistically very complex just because of the density it runs under and the phase being physically the largest adding 6 new stations. If the MTA wants to start Phase III as soon as Phase II is done, they'd probably want to start doing some investigations and general planning pretty soon, but as I've said before MTA views Phase III as lower priority so unlikely this will happen.

[CenSin]

1 hour ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

MTA views Phase III as lower priority so unlikely this will happen.

IMHO, phase 3 to Houston Street is probably the last important phase of SAS. It’ll take a whole load off the . Phase 4 won’t do much because the alternative is much more attractive: express service down the entire length of the east side to City Hall, and then all stops in the Financial District where the majority of phase 4 will be. Having worked in the area, the aren’t so far from where the will be that people would choose the slower route. There are two stations to the ’s four stations, and half the amount of service (remember the reverse split at 72 Street). It’s likely the walk to the will be shorter for more people and the wait half as long too.

If there could be a phase 4A that extended the SAS one more stop from Houston Street to Grand Street with a transfer to Bowery to cover Financial District, the MTA could honestly call it a day. Nassau Street is underutilized, and could use some more traffic from up north. The side benefit to those living along Broadway/Jamaica Avenue might be more TPH.

Edited June 5, 2023 by CenSin

[T to Dyre Avenue]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again- there should be a Queens-SAS service south of 63rd St in addition to the . Either on its own line in Queens or via QBL, although the QBL option would give non-  SAS trains a yard without having to deadhead there. 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

12 hours ago, CenSin said:

IMHO, phase 3 to Houston Street is probably the last important phase of SAS. It’ll take a whole load off the . Phase 4 won’t do much because the alternative is much more attractive: express service down the entire length of the east side to City Hall, and then all stops in the Financial District where the majority of phase 4 will be. Having worked in the area, the aren’t so far from where the will be that people would choose the slower route. There are two stations to the ’s four stations, and half the amount of service (remember the reverse split at 72 Street). It’s likely the walk to the will be shorter for more people and the wait half as long too.

If there could be a phase 4A that extended the SAS one more stop from Houston Street to Grand Street with a transfer to Bowery to cover Financial District, the MTA could honestly call it a day. Nassau Street is underutilized, and could use some more traffic from up north. The side benefit to those living along Broadway/Jamaica Avenue might be more TPH.

I tend to agree; a transfer at Grand St would be really nice, but honestly, I think is a bit overrated if there's already a solid transfer to the  at second Avenue. I think instead of Phase 4, MTA would be much better off spending their money to connect SAS to Brooklyn, perhaps by taking over Fulton St local or smtg. The current proposal does nothing to address overcrowding on the  coming in from Brooklyn (which are the only 2 lines from Brooklyn which serve the East Side of Manhattan).

Given there's quite poor connectivity between the IND Brooklyn lines and IRT/BMT Brooklyn lines, I think having a  as Fulton Local would really help commuters who rely on the IND lines but need to get to work on the East Side of midtown; currently this type of commute involves at least 2 transfers

 

[darkstar8983]

2 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

I tend to agree; a transfer at Grand St would be really nice, but honestly, I think is a bit overrated if there's already a solid transfer to the  at second Avenue. I think instead of Phase 4, MTA would be much better off spending their money to connect SAS to Brooklyn, perhaps by taking over Fulton St local or smtg. The current proposal does nothing to address overcrowding on the  coming in from Brooklyn (which are the only 2 lines from Brooklyn which serve the East Side of Manhattan).

Given there's quite poor connectivity between the IND Brooklyn lines and IRT/BMT Brooklyn lines, I think having a  as Fulton Local would really help commuters who rely on the IND lines but need to get to work on the East Side of midtown; currently this type of commute involves at least 2 transfers

 

What if Phase 3 connects the following:

- 63 St tunnel between Roosevelt Island and Lexington Av-63 St

Stops at 55 St (transfer to , Grand Central/42 St (transfer to  , MNRR, and LIRR, 34 St/2 Av (transfer to M34/M34A SBS) , 23 St/2 Av (transfer to M23 SBS), 14 St/2 Av (transfer to 3 Av   station), Houston St/2 Av  Station, and Grand St Station for the  

- connects to Nassau St southbound using Bowery and Canal St abandoned platforms, terminating at Chambers St (east platforms), while the  use the west platforms (with some reconfiguration of the interlocking around Chambers St

- connects to Williamsburg Bridge towards Essex St and headed eastbound 

- going directly to Brooklyn after Grand St to Hoyt-Schemerhorn via Fulton Local outer platform tracks and transfer to  trains, then local to Euclid Av

 

As for service patterns, the train could be supplemented as follows:

- Rerouted  from 6 Av to 2 Av (and supplement 6 Av service with a revived  train to Church Av and implement Culver Express service) 

- Rerouted  train from Nassau St to 2 Av, and replace Nassau service with a shuttle train.

 

This way the  runs the Manhattan segment, while supplemented with the:

-  in upper Manhattan (72 St to 125 St)

- the  reroute from 55 St to Houston St.

 

*As for terminating the rerouted , maybe terminating the trains at a 4-track Grand Central Station could suffice, or rerouting via Queens Blvd and cutting off 60 St/Broadway connection to QB. 

 

 

 

[Wallyhorse]

10 minutes ago, darkstar8983 said:

What if Phase 3 connects the following:

- 63 St tunnel between Roosevelt Island and Lexington Av-63 St

Stops at 55 St (transfer to , Grand Central/42 St (transfer to  , MNRR, and LIRR, 34 St/2 Av (transfer to M34/M34A SBS) , 23 St/2 Av (transfer to M23 SBS), 14 St/2 Av (transfer to 3 Av   station), Houston St/2 Av  Station, and Grand St Station for the  

- connects to Nassau St southbound using Bowery and Canal St abandoned platforms, terminating at Chambers St (east platforms), while the  use the west platforms (with some reconfiguration of the interlocking around Chambers St

- connects to Williamsburg Bridge towards Essex St and headed eastbound 

- going directly to Brooklyn after Grand St to Hoyt-Schemerhorn via Fulton Local outer platform tracks and transfer to  trains, then local to Euclid Av

 

As for service patterns, the train could be supplemented as follws

- Rerouted  from 6 Av to 2 Av (and supplement 6 Av service with a revived  train to Church Av and implement Culver Express service) 

- Rerouted  train from Nassau St to 2 Av, and replace Nassau service with a shuttle train.

This way the  runs the Manhattan segment, while supplemented with the:

-  in upper Manhattan (72 St to 125 St)

- the  reroute from 55 St to Houston St.

*As for terminating the rerouted , maybe terminating the trains at a 4-track Grand Central Station could suffice, or rerouting via Queens Blvd and cutting off 60 St/Broadway connection to QB. 

Some thoughts on this:

Connecting to Nassau, I would do it where the SAS would come in on what (with the northbound platforms at Canal Street and Bowery re-activated for this) coming in on the outer tracks of both platforms between Chambers and Bowery while the / would use the inner tracks between those stations (as the inner tracks at Chambers are actually relay tracks).

The in this would run as it eventually would in lower Manhattan with the intent of then continuing to Brooklyn via a new Schermerhorn Street tunnel that would come in on the Brooklyn side at the current transit museum (with that obviously moved) and then at Hoyt-Schermerhorn come in what is actually the local (unused) track there before going to Euclid as the Fulton Local (extended late nights to Lefferts) while the and  both run express on Fulton.

The in this could be supplemented by a Nassau SAS that could actually wind up as a "Teal " that would move to the SAS, running via Montague and Nassau to the Bowery station (as part of this, as much as possible those stations are lengthened to allow for at least nine-car trains if not 10) and then joins the SAS at Houston and if there is the connector to QBL from  the SAS at 63rd runs via that to QBL, possibly replacing the on the QBL express to Parsons-Archer with the becoming a full-time local to 71-Continental (with this IR) a full-time express to Parsons-Archer).  

[Vulturious]

4 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

I tend to agree; a transfer at Grand St would be really nice, but honestly, I think is a bit overrated if there's already a solid transfer to the  at second Avenue.

I'm going to have to disagree with your opinion about the transfer at Grand St being overrated since to me it doesn't make sense. Just because there's a solid connection to the  at Houston St-2 Av, that doesn't mean they should stop there. The  already isn't looking valuable in terms of transfers, the and  would give it extra value especially since they are express service in Brooklyn and Manhattan, something the  doesn't really connect to much at all. With the exception of the  (and maybe the  depending on whether a connection is built or not), the  doesn't really have any other kind of connections to express trains.

[CenSin]

8 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

I tend to agree; a transfer at Grand St would be really nice, but honestly, I think is a bit overrated if there's already a solid transfer to the  at second Avenue. I think instead of Phase 4, MTA would be much better off spending their money to connect SAS to Brooklyn, perhaps by taking over Fulton St local or smtg. The current proposal does nothing to address overcrowding on the  coming in from Brooklyn (which are the only 2 lines from Brooklyn which serve the East Side of Manhattan).

Given there's quite poor connectivity between the IND Brooklyn lines and IRT/BMT Brooklyn lines, I think having a  as Fulton Local would really help commuters who rely on the IND lines but need to get to work on the East Side of midtown; currently this type of commute involves at least 2 transfers

 

Yea. Brooklyn connectivity should be considered, but we’re talking about cost-cutting measures that would still yield a useful trunk line.

Stopping at the , people would miss out on a lot. The  dump a lot of people on the . Having only the  leaves large swaths of Brooklyn with only the Lexington Avenue options without the  connection.

[Wallyhorse]

1 hour ago, CenSin said:

Yea. Brooklyn connectivity should be considered, but we’re talking about cost-cutting measures that would still yield a useful trunk line.

Stopping at the , people would miss out on a lot. The  dump a lot of people on the . Having only the  leaves large swaths of Brooklyn with only the Lexington Avenue options without the  connection.

And this is one of the reasons I would be potentially looking at moving the SAS to 1st Avenue south of 23rd Street much like the old 2nd Avenue EL was actually on 1st Avenue until 23rd:

Moving the SAS to 1st Avenue would more easily allow the  (or another route) to connect to the Culver Line and run with the  on Culver and very possibly as a full-time (except late nights) Culver Express that would include rehabbing the lower level of Bergen Street and possibly building a crossover or cross-under to allow for transfers to an SAS line at Bergen from those taking the or  from points railroad north of Bergen.  This also could allow a line from the Williamsburg Bridge (maybe the ?) operate via the SAS and then a connection to QBL from 63rd (though that would mean this  would skip Queens Plaza and come in on the QBL local at 36th).  If this is the case, maybe this can be a way to drive for 2nd Avenue to be south of 63rd four tracks with possibly what would be the "express" tracks then going to a new lower level of 72nd Street, possibly with such then (with in this scenario most likely a train from the Culver Line) going to a new, short-turn terminal at 79th Street/York-1st Avenue that would IMO correct one of the problems with the current SAS in not having a stop on 79th in an area of Manhattan that is THAT densely populated. 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

5 hours ago, Vulturious said:

I'm going to have to disagree with your opinion about the transfer at Grand St being overrated since to me it doesn't make sense. Just because there's a solid connection to the  at Houston St-2 Av, that doesn't mean they should stop there. The  already isn't looking valuable in terms of transfers, the and  would give it extra value especially since they are express service in Brooklyn and Manhattan, something the  doesn't really connect to much at all. With the exception of the  (and maybe the  depending on whether a connection is built or not), the  doesn't really have any other kind of connections to express trains.

This is a fair point, but I don't think there's much of a benefit of the  over the  if you're going into midtown; it's only 2 extra stops.

Where it matters more is from  (and indirectly  riders) coming in from Brooklyn who might otherwise use the . Some how suggested having SAS take over  over the Manhattan Bridge and having 6th Av express go into Williamsburg or smtg instead. This solves the problem of east side access for 4th Av and Brighton Riders, but cheaper. And if you have the  go via some sort of revived South 4th St Line, then they could stop at 2nd Av so you'd have a full  transfer anyways.

The  is more important of a transfer though cause it doesn't even directly have a transfer to the  in Brooklyn.

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

15 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

And this is one of the reasons I would be potentially looking at moving the SAS to 1st Avenue south of 23rd Street much like the old 2nd Avenue EL was actually on 1st Avenue until 23rd:

Moving the SAS to 1st Avenue would more easily allow the  (or another route) to connect to the Culver Line and run with the  on Culver and very possibly as a full-time (except late nights) Culver Express that would include rehabbing the lower level of Bergen Street and possibly building a crossover or cross-under to allow for transfers to an SAS line at Bergen from those taking the or  from points railroad north of Bergen.  This also could allow a line from the Williamsburg Bridge (maybe the ?) operate via the SAS and then a connection to QBL from 63rd (though that would mean this  would skip Queens Plaza and come in on the QBL local at 36th).  If this is the case, maybe this can be a way to drive for 2nd Avenue to be south of 63rd four tracks with possibly what would be the "express" tracks then going to a new lower level of 72nd Street, possibly with such then (with in this scenario most likely a train from the Culver Line) going to a new, short-turn terminal at 79th Street/York-1st Avenue that would IMO correct one of the problems with the current SAS in not having a stop on 79th in an area of Manhattan that is THAT densely populated. 

I rmbr at one point the MTA wanted to do that weird subway shuttle loop thing to serve the Lower East Side. Geography of the lower East Side sucks because it really sticks out so much, so the only way for the subway to adequately serve it is to have a North-South trunk cross Avenues over or to have an abundance of lines coming in from Williamsburg.

[Chris89292]

1 hour ago, Wallyhorse said:

And this is one of the reasons I would be potentially looking at moving the SAS to 1st Avenue south of 23rd Street much like the old 2nd Avenue EL was actually on 1st Avenue until 23rd:

Moving the SAS to 1st Avenue would more easily allow the  (or another route) to connect to the Culver Line and run with the  on Culver and very possibly as a full-time (except late nights) Culver Express that would include rehabbing the lower level of Bergen Street and possibly building a crossover or cross-under to allow for transfers to an SAS line at Bergen from those taking the or  from points railroad north of Bergen.  This also could allow a line from the Williamsburg Bridge (maybe the ?) operate via the SAS and then a connection to QBL from 63rd (though that would mean this  would skip Queens Plaza and come in on the QBL local at 36th).  If this is the case, maybe this can be a way to drive for 2nd Avenue to be south of 63rd four tracks with possibly what would be the "express" tracks then going to a new lower level of 72nd Street, possibly with such then (with in this scenario most likely a train from the Culver Line) going to a new, short-turn terminal at 79th Street/York-1st Avenue that would IMO correct one of the problems with the current SAS in not having a stop on 79th in an area of Manhattan that is THAT densely populated. 

You know that will basically be impossible now, the second Avenue subway will be running along 2nd Avenue like they planned, they cannot change the plan now at 1/4 of the project, unless they plan to do a huge study plan along 1st Avenue before phase 3 starts, which wouldn’t happen till like 2050, looking at how slow the process is taking for phase 2 to start

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

21 minutes ago, Chris89292 said:

You know that will basically be impossible now, the second Avenue subway will be running along 2nd Avenue like they planned, they cannot change the plan now at 1/4 of the project, unless they plan to do a huge study plan along 1st Avenue before phase 3 starts, which wouldn’t happen till like 2050, looking at how slow the process is taking for phase 2 to start

Given it'll probably be at least 25 years after the original study before Phase 3 starts, I think it'd be worth at least doing a minor "re-study" before constructing Phase III cause needs may have changed within that time.