L Train Service Between Brooklyn & Manhattan May Be Shut Down For Years

[MysteriousBtrain]

When the is rerouted to Broadway Junction, will the run express in the peak direction from there temporarily?

Too soon to say. It can happen, but don't count on it happening.

[paulrivera]

I would think the would be the peak express (Junction-Myrtle-Marcy in the AM, Marcy-Myrtle-Junction in the PM) when this happens, if only to minimize all the switching moves between Marcy and the Junction. Presumably the would terminate on the middle track at Broadway Junction, right?

[LTA1992]

That would make the most sense.

[Wallyhorse]

I would think the would be the peak express (Junction-Myrtle-Marcy in the AM, Marcy-Myrtle-Junction in the PM) when this happens, if only to minimize all the switching moves between Marcy and the Junction. Presumably the would terminate on the middle track at Broadway Junction, right?

 

That would make the most sense.

Definitely would make the most sense.  This is why they should never have cut Atlantic Avenue to two tracks, however, as you could have then had the continue one more stop to Atlantic Avenue and terminate there during this time.  

 

What I would be looking at doing is after Marcy Avenue, during this period have the (J)/(Z) run skip-stop to Broadway Junction (in addition to the regular skip-stop) while the runs express to BJ.

 

Maybe during the station repairs they can also lengthen those platforms to accommodate 10-car trains as part of an overall lengthening over time, doing so as each station is rehabbed.

[Lance]

There are a set of perfectly good switches just west of Broadway Junction the could use to terminate. Terminating at Broadway Junction, the will likely switch from the Jamaica-bound track to the middle one. Returning back to Manhattan and Queens, trains will likely come from the middle track and switch back to the Manhattan-bound one immediately after leaving Broadway Junction. There is little need for reverse-peak service, changing the and services or anything of that nature.

 

EDIT: Naturally, the MTA has something else in mind:

During the shutdown, trains to and from Manhattan will be rerouted along the and tracks from Marcy Av to Broadway Junction, though peak hour frequency will be reduced by 25 percent. To accommodate displaced customers, and trains will make all stops between Marcy Av and Broadway Junction, while trains will operate at peak frequency for extended durations each day.

http://www.mta.info/news-bushwick-m-brooklyn-new-york-city-transit-subway/2016/03/18/vital-construction-will-occur-two

[MysteriousBtrain]

There are a set of perfectly good switches just west of Broadway Junction the could use to terminate. Terminating at Broadway Junction, the will likely switch from the Jamaica-bound track to the middle one. Returning back to Manhattan and Queens, trains will likely come from the middle track and switch back to the Manhattan-bound one immediately after leaving Broadway Junction. There is little need for reverse-peak service, changing the and services or anything of that nature.

 

EDIT: Naturally, the MTA has something else in mind:

http://www.mta.info/news-bushwick-m-brooklyn-new-york-city-transit-subway/2016/03/18/vital-construction-will-occur-two

Sounds like the worst of the is expected in the school year of 2017-18, with peak frequencies going down by 25%. Can't wait to see how that turns out.

[Around the Horn]

Sounds like the worst of the is expected in the school year of 2017-18, with peak frequencies going down by 25%. Can't wait to see how that turns out.

They'd better run those trains between 71 Av and 2 Av or else Queens Blvd will be a mess...

[itmaybeokay]

They'd better run those trains between 71 Av and 2 Av or else Queens Blvd will be a mess...

 

Yeah, I love how this talks about everything they're doing to boost service in the BMT south yet they're decidedly quiet on how they're going to shore up queens blvd. 

[LTA1992]

Yeah, I would have to agree with terminating half of all services at 2 Avenue. You can't add more service since the will be back by the time this happens. So the former is the only doable option.

[CenSin]

Definitely would make the most sense.  This is why they should never have cut Atlantic Avenue to two tracks, however, as you could have then had the continue one more stop to Atlantic Avenue and terminate there during this time. 

Perfectly logical, but it’s too late to undo that. When the WMTA removed two switches at one of the DC Metro stations, it took them a decade to realize the folly of hampering operational flexibility. They reinstalled the switches recently. The MTA, however, has no money to justify spending it on adding extra tracks and platforms after they’ve just removed it and any such work is not going to be a walk in the park.

[NewFlyer 230]

I don't understand why the frequency has to be decreased. The is also expected to have it construction done also around that time so they can't just cut service plus Queens Blvd will lose some of its service.

[bobtehpanda]

I don't understand why the frequency has to be decreased. The is also expected to have it construction done also around that time so they can't just cut service plus Queens Blvd will lose some of its service.

 

They have already said that the repairs are happening first, and then the repairs will occur.

[P3F]

Perfectly logical, but it’s too late to undo that. When the WMTA removed two switches at one of the DC Metro stations, it took them a decade to realize the folly of hampering operational flexibility. They reinstalled the switches recently. The MTA, however, has no money to justify spending it on adding extra tracks and platforms after they’ve just removed it and any such work is not going to be a walk in the park.

Reagan Airport station?

[Wallyhorse]

Perfectly logical, but it’s too late to undo that. When the WMTA removed two switches at one of the DC Metro stations, it took them a decade to realize the folly of hampering operational flexibility. They reinstalled the switches recently. The MTA, however, has no money to justify spending it on adding extra tracks and platforms after they’ve just removed it and any such work is not going to be a walk in the park.

What it shows is previous management not thinking things could change (which they did) in later years and those tracks potentially being needed a decade after they were torn down.  At least they kept enough of the infrastructure up so they CAN go back to four or six tracks at Atlantic Avenue if necessary. 

 

This is also why I came up with the plan of re-routing the to Canarsie (via the then then ) while during the shutdown cutting the to between Broadway Junction and either Bedford or Lorimer (along with extending the to Euclid and so forth), mainly to keep people off the going to Court Square as much as possible and potentially creating overcrowding there and overcrowding the coming from 71-Continental) in addition to the other changes I previously outlined.  Far from perfect, but given you have 300,000+ people to re-route in most cases, that is not going to be easy no matter what is done. 

[Lance]

Most people would see something like this and think about how to contain this to affect the fewest lines possible. You on the other hand see this and think "how can I screw up everything?" Right now, this project is contained to the , and lines due to service changes and reroutes and the by proxy because more riders will have to use the Canarsie line for service to/from Manhattan.

 

Your idea for the to Canarsie spreads this mess over to the , and lines and causes more disruptions for the and lines as well. Do you like having the switches at W 4 Street in constant motion or something? It's enough of a problem on the weekends with the Fix and Fortify work on the 53rd Street and Cranberry tubes to cause delays in service. Now imagine that at the height of the rush hour. Then there's the merging with the Jamaica line. Remember, your idea calls for four lines along the Jamaica line between Essex St and Broadway Junction. That won't delay service at all...

 

Another thing you probably haven't considered is the number of trains needed for your extension. The runs much more frequently than the does, so where are you pulling those extra cars from? The from 168 Street to Canarsie is about the same length as the normal route to/from Euclid Av, so that's out. Sure, you can pull some more trains out of Jamaica, which will reduce the spare factor significantly, but who's going to run them?

 

The biggest question of them all is does this service serve a benefit and does that benefit outweigh the costs? Who benefits from this? The eastern portion of the Canarsie line doesn't need the for Manhattan service. They already have a dedicated line. It's called the . The Jamaica line has the and and will have the because of the reroute of service. So, basically, your is an extra on top of an extra.

 

Like I said before, you have a lot of ideas. The problem is, a lot of them aren't all that useful.

[Wallyhorse]

Most people would see something like this and think about how to contain this to affect the fewest lines possible. You on the other hand see this and think "how can I screw up everything?" Right now, this project is contained to the , and lines due to service changes and reroutes and the by proxy because more riders will have to use the Canarsie line for service to/from Manhattan.

 

Your idea for the to Canarsie spreads this mess over to the , and lines and causes more disruptions for the and lines as well. Do you like having the switches at W 4 Street in constant motion or something? It's enough of a problem on the weekends with the Fix and Fortify work on the 53rd Street and Cranberry tubes to cause delays in service. Now imagine that at the height of the rush hour. Then there's the merging with the Jamaica line. Remember, your idea calls for four lines along the Jamaica line between Essex St and Broadway Junction. That won't delay service at all...

 

Another thing you probably haven't considered is the number of trains needed for your extension. The runs much more frequently than the does, so where are you pulling those extra cars from? The from 168 Street to Canarsie is about the same length as the normal route to/from Euclid Av, so that's out. Sure, you can pull some more trains out of Jamaica, which will reduce the spare factor significantly, but who's going to run them?

 

The biggest question of them all is does this service serve a benefit and does that benefit outweigh the costs? Who benefits from this? The eastern portion of the Canarsie line doesn't need the for Manhattan service. They already have a dedicated line. It's called the . The Jamaica line has the and and will have the because of the reroute of service. So, basically, your is an extra on top of an extra.

 

Like I said before, you have a lot of ideas. The problem is, a lot of them aren't all that useful.

As said previously on the extension, during peak hours because of capacity issues between Chambers and Hoyt-Schermerhorn, select E trains (above the number the goes to Euclid) would during rush hours go to Chambers as they do now (including ALL such to/from 179), with those to Chambers running local and those to Euclid running express on 8th Avenue to minimize track merges (those local would have a <E> designation during rush hours). 

 

I know full well this is WAY far from perfect and have said so many times.  This is going to be a very bad situation no matter what and I think no matter what is chosen it will be far worse than most will think in my opinion.  Yes, I do spread it out much more, but the idea is to prevent for example Court Square from becoming even more of a massive zoo than it already will likely be regardless by having people to go on the Broadway-Brooklyn route (either from Broadway Junction or Myrtle-Wyckoff) or for instance having taking the the opposite direction to Fulton Street (where I would have an OOS transfer to the Atlantic Terminal complex) as much as possible, while keeping those who need Manhattan off the as much as possible to minimize overcrowding there and on the Crosstown.

 

Given what some have already demanded (a new tunnel be built before any shutdown by some), I suspect even if it my idea moves slow, this would at least be better in the minds of some than what the MTA is planning as it's going to be bad no matter what.

[LTA1992]

If there is one thing that would kill your idea, it's this: There is no extra room in the Cranberry Tubes for the . 

[Wallyhorse]

If there is one thing that would kill your idea, it's this: There is no extra room in the Cranberry Tubes for the . 

As said, it would be as many trains as currently are ©'s (on weekdays).   Weekends, when there is more room overall might be different, but on weekdays all over that the goes to Euclid currently would go to Chambers (obviously that would be determined).

[richardye1]

If there is one thing that would kill your idea, it's this: There is no extra room in the Cranberry Tubes for the . 

isn't he rerouting the ? That would give a lot more space to the Cranberry tubes.... The trains terminating at Chambers as well would help combat this issue.

 

My stand on the topic is against it. The W 4th Street Switches cannot be touched. And the three lines   at Bway local track Lafayette would be way too much to handle without delays. It would be impossible. I am unsure of the rail condition at the Junction for that connection of yours. But this is an interesting idea.... hmm i just don't think it could work

[RailRunRob]

My question is when where coming up with some of these proposals do we really understand the logistics of how this all works? I get the Trains are cool thing! Some people love cars, comic books, video games I get it. Im just asking do we understand the full gamut? Fluid dynamics of moving people and trains? Points of failure? Scheduling, assigning cars, population and shifting demographics? Electrical distribution and limitations? I guess my question would start out of the 300K riders where are these rides originating from? Point of entry to the system? Out of this 300k how many people are entering the system @ Myrtle or Halsey street? How many are transferring from the at East New York? Anybody coming from at Lorimer Street? How many riders in Greenpoint whats the %? Can the serve as a entry point instead of the ? If I want take pressure off of the line just have to create diversion points. Just like alleviating pressure on a Dam with something like a spillway..  I honestly feel like you have to break the line up into different parts and maybe even breaking it down into the major transfer points.

 

Canarsie- ENY   diversion points

ENY-Myrtle  diversion point

Myrtle- Lorimer diversion point (Bus)

 

 Like water through a pipe.

 

Canarsie to ENY what percentage of that 300,000 enters the system in between these two points? If it's 10-15% you work to divert as many people as you can to alternate lines before reaching Bushwick. Same math between the next 5 to 6 stations? The 300,000 is the convergent point of the tube... After people have spilled into the line from all the stations and other transfer points. If you can get as many as possible to other routes before hitting Williamsburg it's way more manageable with Bus filling the leftovers. There's no way around its going to put a strain on lines in the area. But it's not as if one  line is going to carry all the load it's spread over five lines and five or six river crossings. 

[Lance]

As said previously on the extension, during peak hours because of capacity issues between Chambers and Hoyt-Schermerhorn, select E trains (above the number the goes to Euclid) would during rush hours go to Chambers as they do now (including ALL such to/from 179), with those to Chambers running local and those to Euclid running express on 8th Avenue to minimize track merges (those local would have a <E> designation during rush hours). 

 

I know full well this is WAY far from perfect and have said so many times.  This is going to be a very bad situation no matter what and I think no matter what is chosen it will be far worse than most will think in my opinion.  Yes, I do spread it out much more, but the idea is to prevent for example Court Square from becoming even more of a massive zoo than it already will likely be regardless by having people to go on the Broadway-Brooklyn route (either from Broadway Junction or Myrtle-Wyckoff) or for instance having taking the the opposite direction to Fulton Street (where I would have an OOS transfer to the Atlantic Terminal complex) as much as possible, while keeping those who need Manhattan off the as much as possible to minimize overcrowding there and on the Crosstown.

 

Given what some have already demanded (a new tunnel be built before any shutdown by some), I suspect even if it my idea moves slow, this would at least be better in the minds of some than what the MTA is planning as it's going to be bad no matter what.

Now I'm confused. Are we talking about the Myrtle Ave closure or the Canarsie tubes one? Regardless, as it doesn't matter all that much anyhow, you're creating more of a mess than necessary. Taking your "(E) to Euclid Av" idea, you need more trains to maintain the current service between Jamaica Center and the World Trade Center. It doesn't if those Brooklyn trains run local, express, skip-stop or if they're designated by circles, diamonds or trapezoids. For every train you have running to Brooklyn, that means one less train that's returning to Queens, thus reducing overall service, hence my insistence why that line shouldn't be touched. And that doesn't even get into the fact you're confusing riders by moving services around that have been the same for well over 20 years.

 

Now back to the crux of this thing. Like I've said a few times now, during the Canarsie tubes shutdown (and this is anticipating a full 24/7 closure), riders from the eastern end will still have several options for Manhattan service. They have the and at Broadway Junction and the at Myrtle-Wyckoff Avs. Running the there, while beneficial to a few, will mostly just be a hindrance to the Eastern Division lines already there. Preliminary plans call for increases in service on the , and through the duration of this work. Where are you fitting these trains?

 

As for your concerns that Court Sq will become a zoo of sorts, I don't see how so. Maybe I'm wrong (won't be the first time), but most of the riders will use the as a shuttle of sorts between Lorimer St/Metropolitan Av and Broadway-Hewes St/Lorimer St (depending on where the out-of-system transfer is placed), hence the increase in train service and number of cars required. I don't see all that many people riding the all the way to Court Sq for Manhattan service when there are quicker options on the .

 

I've said it before, and it bears repeating. I think you like trying to recreate the Rainbow Pride maps of the late '60s with today's trunk colors, regardless if the moves actually help all that much.

 

If there is one thing that would kill your idea, it's this: There is no extra room in the Cranberry Tubes for the . 

Actually, the and would be fine running through the Cranberry tubes, even if both lines ran at their current frequencies. It'd be a tight squeeze and everything would have to run smoothly, but it wouldn't be impossible. After all, both lines did run together for a time in the early '70s. That's probably the only thing Wallyhorse actually got right.

[CenSin]

This is also why I came up with the plan of re-routing the to Canarsie (via the then then ) while during the shutdown cutting the to between Broadway Junction and either Bedford or Lorimer (along with extending the to Euclid and so forth), mainly to keep people off the going to Court Square as much as possible and potentially creating overcrowding there and overcrowding the coming from 71-Continental) in addition to the other changes I previously outlined.  Far from perfect, but given you have 300,000+ people to re-route in most cases, that is not going to be easy no matter what is done. 

After that AM rush hour mess with the last week, I’m more keen than ever to oppose interlining. Rerouting the to Canarsie is still better than the .

[Around the Horn]

No way is the going to Canarsie. none. West 4th (station and interlocking) will be hell in a handbasket...

 

I'm fine with two sections of the :

1. Bedford Av to Broadway Junction (upper)

2. Chambers Street (or some other suitable Manhattan terminus) to Canarsie-Rockaway Parkway, stopping at Broadway Junction lower level.

or:

Just have the run between Bedford Av and Rockaway Parkway.

 

As part of this service plan, a special M14L Select Bus would operate between Lorimer St and 14 Street-8th Avenue (laying over at Abingdon Sq) via bus only lanes on the Williamsburg Bridge.

[Wallyhorse]

No way is the going to Canarsie. none. West 4th (station and interlocking) will be hell in a handbasket...

 

I'm fine with two sections of the :

1. Bedford Av to Broadway Junction (upper)

2. Chambers Street (or some other suitable Manhattan terminus) to Canarsie-Rockaway Parkway, stopping at Broadway Junction lower level.

or:

Just have the run between Bedford Av and Rockaway Parkway.

 

As part of this service plan, a special M14L Select Bus would operate between Lorimer St and 14 Street-8th Avenue (laying over at Abingdon Sq) via bus only lanes on the Williamsburg Bridge.

My plan for the Manhattan portion of the would be to take several sets of four-car trains across before the closure and use those as a Manhattan shuttle between 1st and 8th Avenues, storing 1-2 trains if possible on the layup track between 6th and 8th Avenues and the others as needed EITHER just inside whichever tunnel is NOT completely closed OR when needed using one of the tracks between 1st and 3rd Avenue (single tracking on the other).  There are still those who use the between Union Square and 8th Avenue in particular and that likely won't change.

[bobtehpanda]

My plan for the Manhattan portion of the would be to take several sets of four-car trains across before the closure and use those as a Manhattan shuttle between 1st and 8th Avenues, storing 1-2 trains if possible on the layup track between 6th and 8th Avenues and the others as needed EITHER just inside whichever tunnel is NOT completely closed OR when needed using one of the tracks between 1st and 3rd Avenue (single tracking on the other).  There are still those who use the between Union Square and 8th Avenue in particular and that likely won't change.

 

If only there was an alternative route available for 14th St. Maybe they could run a bus route on the surface stopping at all the major avenues. They could even name it after 14th St. The '14' bus, if you will. 

 

We shouldn't humor anyone dumb enough to take the between 8 Av and Union Sq. You'd waste so much time trying to get to the deep platform at 8 Av that walking or a bus would probably be faster.