How will the 2nd Avenue extension affect Q service to Astoria?

[GreatOne2k]

could run on the West End for a West End express at least to Bay Parkway. The will terminate at 9 Av during middays and evenings. Riders can use the West End for a quicker ride instead of the Culver.

[P3F]

Brighton riders want 6 Av service, too. I don't think the is going anywhere.

[Eric B]

You now being up another problem sending the down there...

 

If the is the 6 Av express, the only way it's getting down to Culver is merging north of W 4 St, which is gonna clog up both and along the way. You'll have 3 lines all scraping the wall at W 4 and Bway-Lafayette and dealing with the merging/splitting .

 

Go further down the line to Bergen, it now has to deal with the merging and splitting off. trains now already hold up southbound trains at Church Av with the fumigatons, throw the in the mix and its gonna be worse.

 

Culver express isn't gonna solve much, if anything it'll make it worse. You'll have the and going through the Bergen interlockings.

The Bergen interlocking wouldn't be the problem, because it would be the same as now, with the merging with the ; you would just have this extra service remaining on the express, and so it would be out of the way at Church also.

 

The other problem, at W4th, is the true dealbreaker. 

 

I wonder if they simply swapped the and , and the stay express (like it originally did), and go up SAS, if the might be able to handle Astoria by itself. If not, then a slight increase in frequency would be more justifiable on the Brighton than on Sea Beach.

[Art Vandelay]

Running the N up 2nd Ave with the Q to Astoria does not particularly make sense. Both the N and Q have a 6 minute headway at their peak, Neither can increase substantially due to DeKalb. It does not matter what you call each service(It does, but not for capacity issues.), but almost every alternative mentioned here is simply not a possible plan operationally. A Slightly boosted Q alone, while wreaking havoc on DeKalb would not come close to being able to handle Astoria. 

 

Doubling the Q and sending the B down Culver would result in incredibly unbalanced loads through DeKalb with severely overcrowded D trains (Probably beating out the 4 5 E and L with regards to overcrowding)and underloaded N Q Q and R's, in addition to putting IND tracks B1 and B2 well over capacity between Chrystie and wherever you switch the B to the local.(And overserving the Culver while you are at it)

Running the B down the West End as an express (Presumably along with the D) would leave the Brighton drastically underserved. You could not boost Q service enough due to Dekalb constraints. If you were to add another West End service, it would have to come via Montague. (Although the West End is not in demand of added capacity so I don't know why you would do such.)

All of these problems for no obvious benefit. I don't see that happening. 

The only real question is what they will call the Astoria-Whitehall service. I'd put money on W. People got confused when they called it the N. Who cares if people remember the old W. It is the same exact route!

[MTA Dude]

I think I've heard that people weren't comfortable with the so they took the and the couldn't leave Astoria, backing up the . This might be the craziest idea ever - no, wait. It's so crazy I'm not even gonna say it.

 

If Lower Manhattan doesn't need extra service, would it be possible to fix City Hall and terminate trains over there?

[Lance]

The only real question is what they will call the Astoria-Whitehall service. I'd put money on W. People got confused when they called it the N. Who cares if people remember the old W. It is the same exact route!

It also has the benefit of already being on the sign curtains. If a 68 needs to run on the W, the route bullet already exists, whereas a yellow T, V or whatever would require brand new rollsigns.

[Lance]

I think I've heard that people weren't comfortable with the so they took the and the couldn't leave Astoria, backing up the . This might be the craziest idea ever - no, wait. It's so crazy I'm not even gonna say it.

 

If Lower Manhattan doesn't need extra service, would it be possible to fix City Hall and terminate trains over there?

Where did you hear that? The only reasons I could see people preferring the N over the W are A) it's the Broadway express or B) they're looking for Brooklyn service from Astoria. Otherwise, it makes no sense. 

 

And no, even if by some strange reason, the W doesn't need to terminate at Whitehall St, there's no way there'd be any reason to fix up the lower level of City Hall. Those platforms cannot handle full-length trains and if I'm not mistaken, there's only one stairwell to the upper level. Spending the outrageous amount of money to renovate a station for such a short extension would be quite the waste. Not for nothing, but sounds like a Wallyhorse idea.

[Wallyhorse]

Running the N up 2nd Ave with the Q to Astoria does not particularly make sense. Both the N and Q have a 6 minute headway at their peak, Neither can increase substantially due to DeKalb. It does not matter what you call each service(It does, but not for capacity issues.), but almost every alternative mentioned here is simply not a possible plan operationally. A Slightly boosted Q alone, while wreaking havoc on DeKalb would not come close to being able to handle Astoria. 

 

Doubling the Q and sending the B down Culver would result in incredibly unbalanced loads through DeKalb with severely overcrowded D trains (Probably beating out the 4 5 E and L with regards to overcrowding)and underloaded N Q Q and R's, in addition to putting IND tracks B1 and B2 well over capacity between Chrystie and wherever you switch the B to the local.(And overserving the Culver while you are at it)

All of this is why the best hope for a Brooklyn SAS would be for the lower portion to be connected to the Fulton Street line in Brooklyn via a new Schermerhorn Street Tunnel with the using what currently is the Transit Museum (converted back to regular transit service) at Court Street and then stopping on the as-current inactive local platform at Hoyt-Schermerhorn and becoming the full-time Fulton Local to Euclid (allowing the to run with the as a Fulton Express since there would be no crossover at Hoyt). 

 

 

Where did you hear that? The only reasons I could see people preferring the N over the W are A) it's the Broadway express or B) they're looking for Brooklyn service from Astoria. Otherwise, it makes no sense. 

 

And no, even if by some strange reason, the W doesn't need to terminate at Whitehall St, there's no way there'd be any reason to fix up the lower level of City Hall. Those platforms cannot handle full-length trains and if I'm not mistaken, there's only one stairwell to the upper level. Spending the outrageous amount of money to renovate a station for such a short extension would be quite the waste. Not for nothing, but sounds like a Wallyhorse idea.

And even I realize that fixing up the lower level of City Hall would be a tremendous amount of work, even if just to use it as a barebones station when there would be a need to terminate trains there as well as extend the lower level to handle 600' trains.  Most certainly not worth it right now.

[bobtehpanda]

I think I've heard that people weren't comfortable with the so they took the and the couldn't leave Astoria, backing up the . This might be the craziest idea ever - no, wait. It's so crazy I'm not even gonna say it.

 

If Lower Manhattan doesn't need extra service, would it be possible to fix City Hall and terminate trains over there?

 

Three stops is not going to break the MTA's bank, the should probably end up serving South Ferry/Whitehall anyways, and as far as I know the MTA has not even checked the structural integrity of City Hall Lower, let alone kept it in a state in which it could be restored.

[lupojohn]

Here's my proposal:

Keep the unchanged, except for making it express in Manhattan with the .

 

The operates between 96th Street-2nd Avenue and Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue except weekends and rush hours. Rush hours send it back to Astoria in a pattern similar to the going to 179th Street. Weekends, it still terminates at 57th Street-7th Avenue.

 

The returns to its primary route between Astoria-Ditmars Boulevard and Whitehall Street-South Ferry, operating as a local all times. However, instead of operating as a weekday-only route, it runs 7 days a week. Weekdays, it runs the above route. It also has other terminals. Rush hours, it terminates at 57th-7th and goes to 59th Street in Brooklyn. You can't have 3 lines clogging up Astoria. On weekends, it runs from Astoria to 59th Street, replacing the in Astoria and helping the and also helping the in Brooklyn. Essentially, the fills in for the spots where the isn't going.

[MysteriousBtrain]

Here's my proposal:

Keep the unchanged, except for making it express in Manhattan with the .

 

The operates between 96th Street-2nd Avenue and Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue except weekends and rush hours. Rush hours send it back to Astoria in a pattern similar to the going to 179th Street. Weekends, it still terminates at 57th Street-7th Avenue.

 

The returns to its primary route between Astoria-Ditmars Boulevard and Whitehall Street-South Ferry, operating as a local all times. However, instead of operating as a weekday-only route, it runs 7 days a week. Weekdays, it runs the above route. It also has other terminals. Rush hours, it terminates at 57th-7th and goes to 59th Street in Brooklyn. You can't have 3 lines clogging up Astoria. On weekends, it runs from Astoria to 59th Street, replacing the in Astoria and helping the and also helping the in Brooklyn. Essentially, the fills in for the spots where the isn't going.

All NYC lines need 24/7 service except the obvious 42 street . And why add the to astoria when you have the ?

 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

This proposal will result in three things:

 

1. Confusion over what train is going where and when it's going there.

2. Delays at 57th & 7th with Q and/or W trains terminating there (Don't you know 57th will be a through station once SAS opens?)

3. Anger from passengers who get stuck waiting at 57th for a track to clear and crews who might have to work through their breaks if their trains are late due to said delays.

 

Do you really want to risk that? Just keep it simple and consistent:

to/from Astoria all times

to/from 2nd Ave all times

to/from Astoria on weekdays

 

The only thing I would consider doing differently with the from before it was discontinued is to run some sort of limited peak direction rush hour service from Bay Pkwy via the West End Line. Since those trains are coming out of Coney Island Yard in the morning and returning there in the evening anyway, better to run them in service than have them either deadhead to/from Whitehall or duplicate the on the Sea Beach Line. They wouldn't really duplicate the on the West End because those W's wouldn't be running on the same line in Manhattan as the D (unlike running via the Sea Beach Line).

[MysteriousBtrain]

This proposal will result in three things:

 

1. Confusion over what train is going where and when it's going there.

2. Delays at 57th & 7th with Q and/or W trains terminating there (Don't you know 57th will be a through station once SAS opens?)

3. Anger from passengers who get stuck waiting at 57th for a track to clear and crews who might have to work through their breaks if their trains are late due to said delays.

 

Do you really want to risk that? Just keep it simple and consistent:

to/from Astoria all times

to/from 2nd Ave all times

to/from Astoria on weekdays

 

The only thing I would consider doing differently with the from before it was discontinued is to run some sort of limited peak direction rush hour service from Bay Pkwy via the West End Line. Since those trains are coming out of Coney Island Yard in the morning and returning there in the evening anyway, better to run them in service than have them either deadhead to/from Whitehall or duplicate the on the Sea Beach Line. They wouldn't really duplicate the on the West End because those W's wouldn't be running on the same line in Manhattan as the D (unlike running via the Sea Beach Line).

Like the revival of rush hour nassau service?

[Brighton Express]

I think the best bet would be to send a few trains to Astoria during rush hour, similar to the to 179 St. I guess time will tell.

[CenSin]

I think the best bet would be to send a few trains to Astoria during rush hour, similar to the to 179 St. I guess time will tell.

Except for the fact that the goes there because it must.

[MysteriousBtrain]

Lets look at the most likely actions of the and look at the pros and cons...

1. Extend the to 96 Street, with few rush hour trains to Astoria.

Pros: Express riders on Broadway have direct access to Astoria, along with some of the Brighton line.

Cons: This might affect the frequency of trains to 96 Street. How would service even run? Would it be peak only? And if it is, how would it work? Select trains to Astoria become the and go on the Brighton platform at Coney Island? Not everyone agrees with this change here......

2. Bring back the . 

Pros: Express riders on Broadway will have direct access to Astoria as well as local service.

Cons: One of the most confusing things as a child is seeing the run express on Broadway weekdays while catching an local on the weekends. Would that still occur? Seems like the most agreed on option....

3. Do absolutely nothing and have the be the lone wolf at Astoria.

Pros: Just the joy of having one local line in Astoria.

Cons: Delays and overcrowding of the . It got away with it earlier, but can it be alone in the 21st century? I think not......

[MTA Dude]

The only thing I would consider doing differently with the from before it was discontinued is to run some sort of limited peak direction rush hour service from Bay Pkwy via the West End Line. Since those trains are coming out of Coney Island Yard in the morning and returning there in the evening anyway, better to run them in service than have them either deadhead to/from Whitehall or duplicate the on the Sea Beach Line. They wouldn't really duplicate the on the West End because those W's wouldn't be running on the same line in Manhattan as the D (unlike running via the Sea Beach Line).

 

I really agree on that. However, that would be somewhat confusing to riders, so, how about this:

 

When a comes out of the yard, it will be signed up as an , then run to Astoria normally. At Astoria, it will change to a and run its normal shift until whenever and whenever, and it would go back to Astoria, sign up as an , then go to the Coney Island Yard. With the R160s and R179's high tech, it shouldn't be a problem. Is there a problem with mixing the R160 and R179 fleets? I don't think so.

 

EDIT: Why isn't this freakin' thread locked so we can go back to the regular Second Avenue Subway Discussion Thread? I don't like this thread. I want it to merge into the old SAS thread.

[RollOver]

Sigh, I tried to stay out of responding any further in this thread, but whatever...

 

Sending every other to/from Astoria won't happen for a few operational reasons:

 

1. It creates confusion for people trying to get to SAS. There's 3 Bway lines, one going to Astoria, one going to SAS and the other going to QB is simple enough.

2. Alternating trains between SAS and Astoria would mean double wait times, which is worse for SAS. The whole purpose is for SAS to alleviate loads on the Lex.

3. There isn't going to be a flood of trains on the entire or lines just so you don't see the at all. That's like running a flood of trains on the entire or lines just so you don't see the in Brooklyn. Sea Beach and Brighton local services only need 6 tph during the off-peak, why? Because their current ridership can handle it.

 

I've said this countless times (yeah yeah, I know it's repetitive, but I don't seriously don't care at all) and I'll say this again. It's nonsensical to run so many trains unnecessary or split a line into having two branches just so you don't see a certain part-time line running. It's about not wasting cash. The doesn't save money for nothing. It saves money for something...something more important like new subway corridors like SAS, extension projects, station projects, new subway cars etc etc.

 

Trying to lower the amount of flagging with track/signal maintainers plaguing the system during off-peak is one thing, yeah, but frequency isn't just everything. If more service via the Bway line is needed between Astoria and Manhattan than between Manhattan and Brooklyn, then obviously the is the most logical answer, so that way, they don't have to bother running more trains on the entire line nor split the . The whole purpose is so the can go to SAS via the restoration.

 

@T to Dyre Avenue

 

Seriously, I'm sure the crews don't care at all, since the whole purpose is to get those trains to/from the CI yard via Montague/4th Ave/Sea Beach Lcl.

[MTA Dude]

Trying to lower the amount of flagging with track/signal maintainers plaguing the system during off-peak is one thing, yeah, but frequency isn't just everything. If more service via the Bway line is needed between Astoria and Manhattan than between Manhattan and Brooklyn, then obviously the is the most logical answer, so that way, they don't have to bother running more trains on the entire line nor split the . The whole purpose is so the can go to SAS via the restoration.

 

If that's the case (and I know it is the case), why does the weekend run between Manhattan and Brooklyn only? I know it's the most logical but I can't seem to figure out the reason. Also, why do I find n/b (Q)'s crowded at Canal Street before they even open their doors?

[RollOver]

Astoria ridership is probably lower on weekends than on weekdays. And as for crowding from Brooklyn, they're probably on their way to Chinatown and Midtown.

[Q113 LTD]

Whenever the Second Ave Subway is done, is the gonna be like the ,  when you have two different   trains going in the same direction but one will go to Ozone and the other split toward Far Rockaway or Rockaway Pk during rush hour?

[P3F]

Whenever the Second Ave Subway is done, is the gonna be like the , when you have two different trains going in the same direction but one will go to Ozone and the other split toward Far Rockaway or Rockaway Pk during rush hour?

No.

 

Why? Well, kind sir, please read the previous pages of this thread.

 

(Seriously, did you not read any of this thread before posting?)

[Q113 LTD]

Well sorry, I only read a few, got lazy to read them all. lol

[Fresh Pond]

All we know is that the is definitely going up 2 Av...everything else is just a thought/proposal

[Wallyhorse]

All we know is that the is definitely going up 2 Av...everything else is just a thought/proposal

Right.

 

And quite frankly, ALL of the trains should operate on 2nd Avenue once that is ready.

 

One thing I'd be looking at in fact would be to consider having the also run to 96th/2nd late nights and weekends to supplement the at that time.  Given the dense population of the UES, I would consider that, especially since in the case of the it also would have it go to midtown 24/7.