Map Drawings Made By JennM7Lover

[Cait Sith]

The to 95th, while a novel idea, couldn't work.

 

1. People constantly neglect the . Skip-stop service would be impossible to time if to extended both or just one. Delays along 4th Avenue could cause bunching, and if you just extended the and not the timing trains to run correctly for skip-stop service would be a PITA.

 

2. As shown by the old to Bay Parkway, little to no one needs Nassau Avenue from South Brooklyn. A similar thing would happen with the 's, with trains remaning crowded and  's carrying air along 4th Avenue. It's not practical.

 

3. Finally, car lengths. This isn't that bad of an issue, but if trains do see usage, the shorter trains could pose a problems.

 

Delays anywhere can cause bunching, that's a known fact.

 

As for the "shorter trains", when the ran along 4th Avenue, they had no problems...

[realizm]

^^^^ Agreed, the shorter cars shouldn't pose a problem. Currently with the along the current route serving the QBL as it is with it's shorter cars, are not causing any problems with passenger loads there either.

 

But in general the error in the premature scrapping of the R32's that I'm sure the MTA are lamenting over as we speak, will indeed cause indirect problems with the rolling stock needed to supplement the Brooklyn service.

Ditto on the former Brooklyn ( M ) service. passenger load problems were not necessary a problem either, I remember this from when I grew up in South Brooklyn.

[Threxx]

^^^^ Agreed, the shorter cars shouldn't pose a problem. Currently with the along the current route serving the QBL as it is with it's shorter cars, are not causing any problems with passenger loads there either.

 

But in general the error in the premature scrapping of the R32's that I'm sure the MTA are lamenting over as we speak, will indeed cause indirect problems with the rolling stock needed to supplement the Brooklyn service.

 

 

Ditto on the former Brooklyn ( M ) service. passenger load problems were not necessary a problem either, I remember this from when I grew up in South Brooklyn.

 

Passenger load problems weren't an issue because there were no passengers to load in the first place... 

 

If you want to supplement the in Brooklyn, bring back the and run it from 95th or another terminal to Astoria... that would be much more useful than a to 95th...

[realizm]

Passenger load problems weren't an issue because there were no passengers to load in the first place... 

 

If you want to supplement the in Brooklyn, bring back the and run it from 95th or another terminal to Astoria... that would be much more useful than a to 95th...

 

 The , that's a good idea....

 

I remember that they did used to supplement the service before 2010 with extended service during rush hours via Sea Beach from CI yard into service, then 4th Ave local to Manhattan via tunnel.

 

Now I am pretty sure they did that for three reasons: mainly, to get those R68's the SMEE's and the then new R160's out there from CI yard or back, doing so running those trains designated in revenue service, to accomidate for long headways or delays on all BMT Broadway bound trains particularly on the and to provide more trains for the Brooklyn Chinatown and Boro Park communities which is growing at a fast rate. Thereby cutting wait times. The , that's a good idea....

 

I remember that they did used to supplement the service before 2010 with extended service during rush hours via Sea Beach from CI yard into service, then 4th Ave local to Manhattan via tunnel. Now I am pretty sure they did that for three reasons: mainly, to get those R68's the SMEE's and the then new R160's out there from CI yard or back, doing so running those trains designated  in revenue service, to accomidate for long headways or delays on all BMT Broadway bound trains particularly on the and to provide more trains for the Brooklyn Chinatown and Boro Park communities which is growing at a fast rate. Thereby cutting wait times. 

 

When they still had the ( M ) .... I hear you on the problems on the Jamaica/broadway line in Brooklyn and how that can cause problems with the / , since this was done before with some trains to Brooklyn before during the AM/PM rush. Which of course are not something considered routine as we never saw this supplemental service on the official map or the signs.

 

 

[JennM7Lover]

Yeah the during the aftermath of 9/11, to 95th Street, and also the < R > from Nassau st in 1985. There's a 1985 map somewhere in the archives, I gotta find it and repost the link so you can see it..... Wait a sec found it!Link: http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/topic/29725-1985-new-york-city-subway-map/?p=454039Pics (Courtesy of R32's: 

 

 

Anyways, the reason.of why I asked is because I was not born in 1985. And I sadly don't have.this station map. I do have the.November 1995 version. A friend had it, and gave it to me as a birthday present. I really like those types pf maps..You know with the actual map in the front and the strip map in the back..(Ha..say that 11 times fast)...map in the back.

[GreeneggsnPelham]

Not to mention, I did hear some whispers about the going to 9 Av, but those got nixed pretty quickly.

[JennM7Lover]

Not to mention, I did hear some whispers about the going to 9 Av, but those got nixed pretty quickly.

I heard about that too..It would have been a good thing for the to go to 9 Avenue. But I would live it if the went to Bay Parkway as well.

[GreeneggsnPelham]

That might fall under the same situation that doomed the rush-hour brown : outside of a few stations on the 4 Avenue line, there's really no need to have two trains running on the West End. Most, if not all, of those (M)s barely had any passengers on them, and the was alright on its own. Unfortunately, given the way the works, there's not gonna be any extensions of the Jamaica line at all. Besides 9 Av, there aren't really many places along the 4 Av/West End line to short turn trains given current track geometry.

 

On fantasy maps, I fiddled with the idea of the ending at Barclay's Center [4 Av platforms] or at Prospect Park but that ran into two problems: 1) You'd hold up trains at Barclay's if you terminated on the express track (or s if you did it on the local), and 2) the Prospect Park tunnel couldn't handle another line in addition to the and ; even if they built a connection from the s/b express connecting to the oft-unused s/b local before Prospect Park, I wouldn't see the getting that much ridership. Anything outside of the Financial District is (sadly) a pipe dream.

 

Back to your maps though--would love to see your rendition of a 2nd Avenue Subway in its entirety (if it were up to you).

 

-A

[JennM7Lover]

That might fall under the same situation that doomed the rush-hour brown : outside of a few stations on the 4 Avenue line, there's really no need to have two trains running on the West End. Most, if not all, of those (M)s barely had any passengers on them, and the was alright on its own. Unfortunately, given the way the works, there's not gonna be any extensions of the Jamaica line at all. Besides 9 Av, there aren't really many places along the 4 Av/West End line to short turn trains given current track geometry.

 

On fantasy maps, I fiddled with the idea of the ending at Barclay's Center [4 Av platforms] or at Prospect Park but that ran into two problems: 1) You'd hold up trains at Barclay's if you terminated on the express track (or s if you did it on the local), and 2) the Prospect Park tunnel couldn't handle another line in addition to the and ; even if they built a connection from the s/b express connecting to the oft-unused s/b local before Prospect Park, I wouldn't see the getting that much ridership. Anything outside of the Financial District is (sadly) a pipe dream.

 

Back to your maps though--would love to see your rendition of a 2nd Avenue Subway in its entirety (if it were up to you).

 

-A

 

Sure thing..if I had some black ink to draw it in.

[JennM7Lover]

 

 

 

 

 

Here it is.. the future of 2nd Avenue, the . Drawn by me. I don't have a turquoise crayon or marker to cplor this in with.

[JennM7Lover]

 

 

 

 

 

And here is my version of the to Euclid Avenue via lines.

[qjtransitmaster]

The to 95th, while a novel idea, couldn't work.

 

1. People constantly neglect the . Skip-stop service would be impossible to time if to extended both or just one. Delays along 4th Avenue could cause bunching, and if you just extended the and not the timing trains to run correctly for skip-stop service would be a PITA.

 

2. As shown by the old to Bay Parkway, little to no one needs Nassau Avenue from South Brooklyn. A similar thing would happen with the 's, with trains remaning crowded and  's carrying air along 4th Avenue. It's not practical.

 

3. Finally, car lengths. This isn't that bad of an issue, but if trains do see usage, the shorter trains could pose a problems.

You sure about that? If to brooklyn can work then the can do the same nice try. Want to be useful on 4th ave simple make it express to 95th via 4th ave express then watch ridership plummet south of 59th street. LOL.

[Threxx]

You sure about that? If to brooklyn can work then the can do the same nice try. Want to be useful on 4th ave simple make it express to 95th via 4th ave express then watch ridership plummet south of 59th street. LOL.

 

The difference between the and the is that the would serve Midtown, and downtown.

[realizm]

You sure about that? If to brooklyn can work then the can do the same nice try. Want to be useful on 4th ave simple make it express to 95th via 4th ave express then watch ridership plummet south of 59th street. LOL.

Now the only problem is that the MTA may not want to deal with the payroll with using more train crews or paying them the OT. Plus perhaps the lack of available rolling stock that we have. It could cmplicate hings in a way that can be felt all the way back to Queens. That's the catch. I guess added service via Nassau might do the trick. However we cant have trains and trains competing for a terminal @ Broad. They did it according to the map but what happened was that (I think) Demand droppoed because the workforce in the financial district dropped. But now it seems to be slowly increasing with an improved economy.

[GreeneggsnPelham]

You sure about that? If to brooklyn can work then the can do the same nice try. Want to be useful on 4th ave simple make it express to 95th via 4th ave express then watch ridership plummet south of 59th street. LOL.

 

You want three express services on 4 Avenue? The would be unaffected as it doesn't need to switch when it branches off to West End. But at 59 St? You'd have the switching from exp to local which will cause delays for the because the trailing-point switch is set against them, and cause delays for the which continues on as normal. So there'd be a bottleneck at 59. Same deal when coming into 95 St. As Realizm put it, both lines would be "competing for a terminal" once they got to 95 St. Unless you terminate service at Whitehall, there's no way a to 95 St will be a good idea, whether it's local or express. The track geometry and demand don't necessitate it.

 

-A

[Brighton Express]

I was always for the down Brighton Express, seeing it would offer more transfers than the , but a to 95 would suit me just fine. Count me in.

[JennM7Lover]

So I see we have some that are with it, yes that does include me, but I also see others that are against the to/from 95 Street. The has to terminate SOMEWHERE other than Chambers or Broad Streets.

[GreeneggsnPelham]

There's really nowhere else to terminate the without causing service delays/minor disruptions along other routes. Not to mention the constant switching @ the Montague St connection. Plus, like someone already mentioned, with the comes the and added service means added time, and throwing off the synchronization of the skip stop. To play devil's advocate: a to 9 Av would be sufficient enough to meet the demand on 4 Av IMO. Plus, if someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't trains already empty-ish by the time they get to Chambers/Fulton/Broad? My theory is that the supplements the as it gets riders from Jamaica & East New York to Midtown.

 

-A

[JennM7Lover]

There's really nowhere else to terminate the without causing service delays/minor disruptions along other routes. Not to mention the constant switching @ the Montague St connection. Plus, like someone already mentioned, with the comes the and added service means added time, and throwing off the synchronization of the skip stop. To play devil's advocate: a to 9 Av would be sufficient enough to meet the demand on 4 Av IMO. Plus, if someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't trains already empty-ish by the time they get to Chambers/Fulton/Broad? My theory is that the supplements the as it gets riders from Jamaica & East New York to Midtown.

 

 

Yeah..around there..cuz more people rely pn the than the / .

 

-A

[JennM7Lover]

I'm back everyone..with an update on my YouTube uploads. I have uploaded a few more train route maps:

 

 

One on the Rockaway Park-Far Rockaway

 

 

 

 

The

 

 

 

 

The

 

 

 

 

The

 

 

 

 

The

 

 

 

 

And the current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On a later date, I will make more. But tell me what do all of you think of my updates.

[qjtransitmaster]

Kill the extend the to Coney island via Brighton express. Boost service. Restore Bedford park extension on .

[realizm]

On a later date, I will make more. But tell me what do all of you think of my updates.

 

Finally I found time to take a look at your latest maps. I really did the unique and creative way you drew the maps, then make it a video out of it. No railfanners usually present fantasy maps in this fashion which is vey unique and makes your vids a showstopper and an eyecatcher. +1.

 

Just two things though:

 

1) Supplemental IND Grand Concourse service is needed to allow for rush hour express service, so two services will be needed. In real time, the is crushloaded during rush hours from 42nd Bryant Park all the way on up the CPW to Fordham Road on the GC in the Bronx. That shows the demands by straphangers for express service via the Grand Concourse during rush hours. I used to live there and my stop to travel was Fordham Road on the .

 

2) On the Rockaway Park, many residents there in that area need rush hour thru service to Manhattan. Better to keep the to Rockaway Park and Far Rock/Mott Ave as it is.

 

Otherwise from that, no complaints.

[JennM7Lover]

Finally I found time to take a look at your latest maps. I really did the unique and creative way you drew the maps, then make it a video out of it. No railfanners usually present fantasy maps in this fashion which is vey unique and makes your vids a showstopper and an eyecatcher. +1.

 

Just two things though:

 

1) Supplemental IND Grand Concourse service is needed to allow for rush hour express service, so two services will be needed. In real time, the is crushloaded during rush hours from 42nd Bryant Park all the way on up the CPW to Fordham Road on the GC in the Bronx. That shows the demands by straphangers for express service via the Grand Concourse during rush hours. I used to live there and my stop to travel was Fordham Road on the .

 

2) On the Rockaway Park, many residents there in that area need rush hour thru service to Manhattan. Better to keep the to Rockaway Park and Far Rock/Mott Ave as it is.

 

Otherwise from that, no complaints.

Well..two things..

 

1. My artwork isn't that great as the artwork in the subway system. LOL. But I'm trying each day to make my artwork the best. It takes practice. Thanks for liking these.

 

2. That map, I made that when the ran during the days after Sandy. I just designed it in another way.

[realizm]

Well..two things..

 

1. My artwork isn't that great as the artwork in the subway system. LOL. But I'm trying each day to make my artwork the best. It takes practice. Thanks for liking these.

 

2. That map, I made that when the ran during the days after Sandy. I just designed it in another way.

 

Oops. Ok in that case then that's a different story. And yeah no flattery on that, I really like the unorthodox way you present the maps. Fun to watch, for real.

[JennM7Lover]

 

Well..two things..

1. My artwork isn't that great as the artwork in the subway system. LOL. But I'm trying each day to make my artwork the best. It takes practice. Thanks for liking these.2. That map, I made that when the ran during the days after Sandy. I just designed it in another way.

 

 

 

Oops. Ok in that case then that's a different story. And yeah no flattery on that, I really like the unorthodox way you present the maps. Fun to watch, for real.

 

Should I do more on a future date?

 

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2