Second Avenue Subway Discussion

[cl94]

Wait. If I have this down correctly, the 96th/2nd terminal can handle 9 tph at least, because that's what the peak will continue to do. I do understand that they can't cut service when it comes to ridership and how complex the B Division is. As for the and , the combined headway in Astoria will most likely continue running 12-15 tph.

 

Agreed that some peak trains should terminate at QBP since Astoria cannot handle more than 12 tph. Right? Take a look at the delays between 30th Avenue and Ditmars Blvd northbound in the AM peak.

 

There's no way that they'd built a new terminal that can't handle a standard rush hour service frequency. 12 TPH should be easily attainable if they use higher-speed switches for the crossovers. As soon as a train pulls in, the one on the other track leaves. If the most recent FEIS stands, 125th will have 3 tracks, so they could even increase frequency if it ever gets up there.

[bobtehpanda]

Wait. If I have this down correctly, the 96th/2nd terminal can handle 9 tph at least, because that's what the peak will continue to do. I do understand that they can't cut service when it comes to ridership and how complex the B Division is. As for the and , the combined headway in Astoria will most likely continue running 12-15 tph.

 

Agreed that some peak trains should terminate at QBP since Astoria cannot handle more than 12 tph. Right? Take a look at the delays between 30th Avenue and Ditmars Blvd northbound in the AM peak.

 

12 TPH seems extremely low; of all the terminals, only Jamaica Center has that kind of limit, and that's because the crossovers are too goddamn far from the station.

 

I remember hearing somewhere that stub terminals with two tracks and no tail tracks can handle somewhere between 19-24 TPH (which is what New South Ferry runs).

[cl94]

12 TPH seems extremely low; of all the terminals, only Jamaica Center has that kind of limit, and that's because the crossovers are too goddamn far from the station.

 

I remember hearing somewhere that stub terminals with two tracks and no tail tracks can handle somewhere between 19-24 TPH (which is what New South Ferry runs).

 

Pretty accurate from what I've heard. A train can turn in the amount of time it takes for a T/O to walk the length of the train. The average person walks at 3 mph and thus could cover 600 feet in a little under 3 minutes. The average New Yorker walks faster than that. 24 TPH is a train leaving every 2.5 minutes, which means that a train departs from each individual track every 5 minutes. Just about every terminal can handle that frequency or close.

[Vistausss]

It's not about turning only. What if a train gets delayed on its way to the terminal? Or what if the train gets delayed causing the one behind it to bunch? High frequencies are nice but not always practical which is why one should avoid too high frequencies at all costs, except when it's BRT and the terminals are big enough to not get in the way of other lines.

Which is also the reason not every current terminal in NYC is used at full capacity. The new SF, for example, turned (before Sandy ruined the fun) only 21 TPH while the max is 24 TPH. And the is no under-used line by any means so...

Edited February 20, 2014 by Vistausss

[Vistausss]

I think that the   train should go on Second Avenue with the   . The   Starting from Seneca Avenue, then going up onto Queens Blvd Line, onto Second Avenue, then Fulton, and terminating at Lefferts Blvd. This will free up the    so it can go to Far Rockaway 24/7 and the    can go to Rockaway Park. I don't really care were the goes as long as there is Manhattan and Bronx service.

 

service 24/7 to Far Rock isn t really needed and to Rockaway Parkway is definetly not needed. With the exception of Far Rock and Broad Channel, the Rockaway stations are among the lowest in the whole system. Besides, the to Lefferts is not feasible (if anything, even the crazy serveral times debunked local to Lefferts would be more feasible than that!) and the will cause congestion on Second Ave. Unless you mean it should use SAS but then there s no room for it in the current plan because it will be two tracks only in most places. Unlike the last century plans ranging from 3-6 tracks.

[Union Tpke]

You could send some extra Broadway trains via QBL (there is still local capacity)

[LMDNYC]

what division is the line expected to be in?

[bobtehpanda]

what division is the line expected to be in?

 

It's an extension of the .

[Tokkemon]

B division.

[Union Tpke]

Are all new extensions of lines now considered to be part of the division the line is branching off of. The Dyre Av Line was originally part of the IND and crews switched at 180 St and the Rockaways used to be the 4th division, with crews switching at Euclid Av.

[Trainmaster5]

Are all new extensions of lines now considered to be part of the division the line is branching off of. The Dyre Av Line was originally part of the IND and crews switched at 180 St and the Rockaways used to be the 4th division, with crews switching at Euclid Av.

I've never seen or heard of the Dyre line being part of the IND at any point in time. It's true that the City of New York purchased the remnants of  the railroad that formerly ran the line but the operation started up in 1940 or so. By that time the "private" BMT and IRT companies were under the city's control but the BMT and IRT were still separate entities for the most part. The Dyre shuttle service and the operation was an IRT job. If you think about it there were no IND facilities located anywhere near the Dyre line. You are correct about crew changes being made at East 180th St, a practice that continued until the mid-'80s. I'd really like to see a source about the Dyre line and the IND because I've never heard it mentioned. I also remember crew changes at Euclid Avenue on the IND but I've never heard the Rockaways called the 4th division, either. I used to ride to the Rockaways when it was a two fare zone and the last station on the Far Rock line was Wavecrest. Mott Avenue opened a year or two later. Carry on.

[bobtehpanda]

I've never seen or heard of the Dyre line being part of the IND at any point in time. It's true that the City of New York purchased the remnants of  the railroad that formerly ran the line but the operation started up in 1940 or so. By that time the "private" BMT and IRT companies were under the city's control but the BMT and IRT were still separate entities for the most part. The Dyre shuttle service and the operation was an IRT job. If you think about it there were no IND facilities located anywhere near the Dyre line. You are correct about crew changes being made at East 180th St, a practice that continued until the mid-'80s. I'd really like to see a source about the Dyre line and the IND because I've never heard it mentioned. I also remember crew changes at Euclid Avenue on the IND but I've never heard the Rockaways called the 4th division, either. I used to ride to the Rockaways when it was a two fare zone and the last station on the Far Rock line was Wavecrest. Mott Avenue opened a year or two later. Carry on.

 

As part of "The Routes Not Taken", the story of the Dyre Av Line is particularly interesting, since its purchase directly resulted in the canceling of construction of another route, the Burke Av Line. The Burke Av Line would've proceeded past the end of the Concourse Line at Norwood-205th and proceeded east under Burke until hitting the Dyre Av Line, before turning north and following the ROW. However, this never happened because the predecessor railroad to the Dyre failed, and it was deemed more important to rescue it than to build Burke Av.

[Trainmaster5]

As part of "The Routes Not Taken", the story of the Dyre Av Line is particularly interesting, since its purchase directly resulted in the canceling of construction of another route, the Burke Av Line. The Burke Av Line would've proceeded past the end of the Concourse Line at Norwood-205th and proceeded east under Burke until hitting the Dyre Av Line, before turning north and following the ROW. However, this never happened because the predecessor railroad to the Dyre failed, and it was deemed more important to rescue it than to build Burke Av.

I've recommended the book since it came out (have it on my NOOK) because of it's stories. I'm welll aware of the Dyre line and it's history. I actually worked it for a quarter century and my mother and my uncle used to ride the railroad itself to New Rochelle. As you point out the nearest IND location was way cross town in Norwood so I can't see the Dyre shuttle line being run by the IND. The size of the rolling stock originally used was IND-BMT sized AFAIK so the p[latforms were shaved back when the line was connected to the rest of the IRT and the new cars were regular IRT types. Living in Brownsville in the late 50's-early 60's I remember the that ran from Dyre to New Lots while the Lex was running Lo-V equipment.

[Eric B]

It was staffed by IND crews, and even chained like the IND (Line “Y”, and the tracks as Y1-###, rather than ###1-Y like the rest of the IRT).

 

Back then, it was still set up according to the old companies IRT, BMT, IND, instead of the current subdivisions A and B, and the “districts” or “sections” within them (south, north, etc) and that line was given to the IND, until it was through routed with the IRT mainline.

 

I think they made it IND, because that was the original city system, and they wanted all new expansion to fall into it, but when the existing infrastructure the new line connected to demands it, it becomes the other system.

[GojiMet86]

Talking about crew changes like that, didn't they staff the Rockaways with IRT crews?

[Union Tpke]

http://www.subchat.com/readflat.asp?Id=1101203&p=1#1101227

http://www.subchat.com/readflat.asp?Id=1101203&p=2

[Trainmaster5]

It was staffed by IND crews, and even chained like the IND (Line “Y”, and the tracks as Y1-###, rather than ###1-Y like the rest of the IRT).

 

Back then, it was still set up according to the old companies IRT, BMT, IND, instead of the current subdivisions A and B, and the “districts” or “sections” within them (south, north, etc) and that line was given to the IND, until it was through routed with the IRT mainline.

 

I think they made it IND, because that was the original city system, and they wanted all new expansion to fall into it, but when the existing infrastructure the new line connected to demands it, it becomes the other system.

Thanks for the correction, Eric B. IND crews and supervision but IRT equipment. Sounds like Main St to me.

[Trainmaster5]

I went back and re-read the chapter on the Burke Avenue-Concourse extension in "The routes not Taken" and I read the Subchat conversations. When I originally read the book I was more focused on the politics and betrayal of the politicians so the Dyre shuttle part I glossed over. I made one phone call to a very knowlegeable person about NYCTA and the Bronx subways. I told him what I'd read in the book, what my fellow posters have written in this thread, and what I was taught by him and his peers.I told him that I was confused about the whole IND-TWU confrontation mentioned elsewhere. Obviously we were taught about the Main St BMT supervision setup in schoolcar with IRT crews piloting the equipment. When I brought up the Dyre Avenue-IND scenario he said to "think it through" using the date(s) given. May 15th, 1940. As Eric B pointed out on that date the city (IND) began operating the shuttle. The IRT was not a party to the transaction at all as they were soon to be taken over anyway. The city could provide the supervision for the line but the line used Ninth Avenue el cars (IRT), and the cars were maintained by the IRT because the IND didn't have the expertise nor experience. How many IND crews were qualified on Manhattan el cars ? As my rabbi pointed out, that's why there was a separate IND,  IRT, and a BMT,  and a "combined" seniority roster that existed until the late sixties. The only people qualified to operate that equipment initially were former Second, Third, Sixth, and Ninth Avenue train crews. Sorry for derailing the thread folks but thanks to you folks I made one phone call and that nagging feeling is gone. The same way I've always considered the line an IRT line, even with it's B-Division supervision, is the same way I've always considered the Dyre Line as IRT. Carry on.

[Mysterious2train]

I know there's a lot of untapped ridership, plus growth, plus transfers from the at 63 and Lex, but I can't help but wonder if the MTA's estimate of 200,000 people per weekday for Phase I is a little high. Glancing at ridership figures 59th, 68th, 77th, 86th, 96th, and 103rd on the Lex line altogether have almost 249,000 people a day, but this number includes people getting on the Broadway line at 59th, so the actual number is probably closer to 220,000-ish per day or something. 

 

The MTA themselves estimate that around 24,000 people per day would switch from the Lex line to 2 Av, so that leaves about 175,000 people each day who either don't ride the subway on the East Side now at all or would be transferring from the to get on the at its four new stops. Just for reference, 175,000 people per day is higher than than current daily ridership at 68, 77, 86 and 96 combined. So I do think the MTA is being awfully optimistic with their estimates. But we won't have ridership data for at least another 4 years, so who knows what will happen.

 

Also, does anybody have a guess as to what will happen with train storage outside of rush hour? Right now, some and trains are laid up in Astoria. Where would excess trains be laid on 2 Av? Hopefully on the tracks beyond 96 St (although they could also be stored at City Hall) Also, what'll happen to the trains that terminate in Midtown during Rush Hour and are laid up on the 63 St tracks during midday? 

[bobtehpanda]

I know there's a lot of untapped ridership, plus growth, plus transfers from the at 63 and Lex, but I can't help but wonder if the MTA's estimate of 200,000 people per weekday for Phase I is a little high. Glancing at ridership figures 59th, 68th, 77th, 86th, 96th, and 103rd on the Lex line altogether have almost 249,000 people a day, but this number includes people getting on the Broadway line at 59th, so the actual number is probably closer to 220,000-ish per day or something. 

 

The MTA themselves estimate that around 24,000 people per day would switch from the Lex line to 2 Av, so that leaves about 175,000 people each day who either don't ride the subway on the East Side now at all or would be transferring from the to get on the at its four new stops. Just for reference, 175,000 people per day is higher than than current daily ridership at 68, 77, 86 and 96 combined. So I do think the MTA is being awfully optimistic with their estimates. But we won't have ridership data for at least another 4 years, so who knows what will happen.

 

Also, does anybody have a guess as to what will happen with train storage outside of rush hour? Right now, some and trains are laid up in Astoria. Where would excess trains be laid on 2 Av? Hopefully on the tracks beyond 96 St (although they could also be stored at City Hall) Also, what'll happen to the trains that terminate in Midtown during Rush Hour and are laid up on the 63 St tracks during midday? 

 

I mean, you also have to consider the fact that the train line itself is going to cause new ridership; people will move off of buses and taxis that they're now forced to rely on because of crowding at Lex, and the areas along the line are seeing skyrocketing property prices and increasing development, and on top of that more people will make trips they otherwise wouldn't make because it's simply more convenient.

 

A general rule of thumb involving transportation forecasting is that transit ridership undershoots for a year or two after opening but then completely overshoots. It's really hard to predict something that's so wishy-washy.

[DJ MC]

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ave-subway-line-construction-progressing-officials-article-1.1795916#ixzz31zLmCht4

 

Note how it's mentioned the SAS will be fully completed by 2029, which will mark the 100th anniversary of when the SAS was first proposed. I'm 22 right now, so I'll be 37 in 2029. I bet we will only get to 125th Street and that's it.

Edited May 18, 2014 by DJ MC

[Lance]

You think we'll make it to 125th by 2029? It's going to take almost 20 years from conception to completion for the section between Lexington Av-63 St and 96 St. Somehow I doubt we'll up to Harlem by the end of the next decade, much less finish the entire line. I would like to believe otherwise, but history does not agree. It's honestly quite a shame if you ask me.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

It would be a damn shame if we don't make it to 125th by 2029. Unlike Phase 1 which had to be built entirely from scratch, Phase 2 has the advantage of the two existing tunnel sections. It seems like the most difficult part would be turning west over to Lexington Ave to connect to the , , and Metro-North trains at 125th St due to the double-deck set-up of the Lexington Ave line platforms. With two sections of currently-unused tunnel existing for a total of 16 blocks under 2nd Avenue in East Harlem, there's no reason not to be able to get at least Phase 2 up and running by then. The only way that wouldn't happen is if the usual NYC and NYS political shenanigans are allowed to get in the way. If that's allowed to happen, then it will time to do the political equivalent of "slut-shaming" City and State politicians who drop the ball on continuing construction of the 2nd Ave Subway beyond Phase 1.

 

I can understand if we can't get Phases 3 and 4 up and running by 2029. Given the history of this project and the usual political garbage we deal with in the city and state, it is over-promising to get the full 2nd Ave Subway up and running 15 years from now. Like Phase 1, almost all of the construction for those phases will have to be done from scratch and they will have to tunnel over and under existing subway lines as well as the Amtrak/LIRR and Queens-Midtown tunnels - not an easy task. But if it takes more than 15 years to get a part of the project that has much of its tunneling already done, well, that will be the usual state/city political shenanigans rearing their ugly heads again.

Edited May 19, 2014 by T to Dyre Avenue

[bobtehpanda]

It would be a damn shame if we don't make it to 125th by 2029. Unlike Phase 1 which had to be built entirely from scratch, Phase 2 has the advantage of the two existing tunnel sections. It seems like the most difficult part would be turning west over to Lexington Ave to connect to the , , and Metro-North trains at 125th St due to the double-deck set-up of the Lexington Ave line platforms. With two sections of currently-unused tunnel existing for a total of 16 blocks under 2nd Avenue in East Harlem, there's no reason not to be able to get at least Phase 2 up and running by then. The only way that wouldn't happen is if the usual NYC and NYS political shenanigans are allowed to get in the way. If that's allowed to happen, then it will time to do the political equivalent of "slut-shaming" City and State politicians who drop the ball on continuing construction of the 2nd Ave Subway beyond Phase 1.

 

I can understand if we can't get Phases 3 and 4 up and running by 2029. Given the history of this project and the usual political garbage we deal with in the city and state, it is over-promising to get the full 2nd Ave Subway up and running 15 years from now. Like Phase 1, almost all of the construction for those phases will have to be done from scratch and they will have to tunnel over and under existing subway lines as well as the Amtrak/LIRR and Queens-Midtown tunnels - not an easy task. But if it takes more than 15 years to get a part of the project that has much of its tunneling already done, well, that will be the usual state/city political shenanigans rearing their ugly heads again.

 

The sad part is, if funding was there we could at least have Phase III started; didn't the TBMs go south from 96th St?

[RollOver]

It would be a damn shame if we don't make it to 125th by 2029. Unlike Phase 1 which had to be built entirely from scratch, Phase 2 has the advantage of the two existing tunnel sections. It seems like the most difficult part would be turning west over to Lexington Ave to connect to the , , and Metro-North trains at 125th St due to the double-deck set-up of the Lexington Ave line platforms. With two sections of currently-unused tunnel existing for a total of 16 blocks under 2nd Avenue in East Harlem, there's no reason not to be able to get at least Phase 2 up and running by then. The only way that wouldn't happen is if the usual NYC and NYS political shenanigans are allowed to get in the way. If that's allowed to happen, then it will time to do the political equivalent of "slut-shaming" City and State politicians who drop the ball on continuing construction of the 2nd Ave Subway beyond Phase 1.

 

This is actually the main reason why I don't like the idea of having a free transfer between the Lex and SAS at 125-East Harlem. 125 should just be under 125 St and 2 Av instead, without a free transfer to/from the Lex, the M60 bus and Metro-North. Any , and riders coming from the Bronx who want Broadway should just continue transfering at either 59 or 14.

Edited May 20, 2014 by RollOver