Department of Subways - Proposals/Ideas

[Jova42R]

Just now, bobtehpanda said:

Tbh, if you build this we should probably just abandon WTC terminal entirely since it's shit.

I agree. Just run s to a short-turn terminal along the line:

I think that the best short-turn stations would be:

• Chatham Sq
  • Pros:
    • s have exclusive use of the tunnel
    • can be a 4-track terminal
    • can have tail tracks
    • could theoretically turn 20TPH
    • provisions for extensions
  • Cons:
    • Less service to Brooklyn
    • No other train connections
• Sands St
  • Pros:
    • could have a connection with the
    • provisions for extensions
    • can be a 4-track terminal
    • more service to DUMBO
  • Cons:
    •  share tunnel
    • no tail tracks
    • less service to Navy Yard
• Navy Yard East
  • Pros: 
    • provisions for extensions
    • can be a 4-track terminal
    • more service to DUMBO and Navy Yard
  • Cons: 
    •  share tunnel
    • no tail tracks
    • no other train connections

Weighing these, I'd say that Chatham Sq is best. In addition, you could theoretically build a new tunnel connecting with the , allowing massive operational mobility

[bobtehpanda]

1 minute ago, Jova42R said:

I agree. Just run s to a short-turn terminal along the line:

I think that the best short-turn stations would be blah blah blah

The entire point of not using WTC is to get rid of short turns.

[Jova42R]

1 minute ago, bobtehpanda said:

The entire point of not using WTC is to get rid of short turns.

So just cut the  entirely? or run it via the ? But how'd you manage to but upwards of 20TPH through Cranberry-Fulton?

Edited April 20, 2020 by Jova42R

[bobtehpanda]

4 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

So just cut the  entirely? or run it via the ? But how'd you manage to but upwards of 20TPH through Cranberry-Fulton?

@Around the Horn was proposing what I believe is a new underground tunnel for the 8th Avenue local via an undergrounded Myrtle line.

read, think, then reply.

Edited April 20, 2020 by bobtehpanda

[Jova42R]

Just now, bobtehpanda said:

@Around the Horn was proposing what I believe is a new underground tunnel for the 8th Avenue local via an undergrounded Myrtle line.

Exactly. But where would you terminate the ? That's why I was saying Chatham Sq.

• If you went to Middle Village, it would become a duplicate of the .
• You can't put over 20TPH in Cranberry

Where would the  go?

[bobtehpanda]

4 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Exactly. But where would you terminate the ? That's why I was saying Chatham Sq.

• If you went to Middle Village, it would become a duplicate of the .
• You can't put over 20TPH in Cranberry

Where would the  go?

through the new tunnel to Middle Village, most likely. or somewhere else if you feel like building that.

there's no reason to waste perfectly good train capacity by stopping it downtown.

who cares about duplicates? at the end of the day riders care about space in a train car going to where they want to go. In fact you could just have the completely replace the  .

Edited April 20, 2020 by bobtehpanda

[Jova42R]

3 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

through the new tunnel to Middle Village, most likely. or somewhere else if you feel like building that.

there's no reason to waste perfectly good train capacity by stopping it downtown.

As that would be duplicative to the , here's another idea:

split at Park Av,

run it down Franklin on a viaduct, then via the Franklin Shuttle (re-double-tracked, but still skipping the stations that would be on sidings, s would still be 2 cars), then in a tunnel (or on a viaduct) via Linden-Utica to Kings Plaza.

Good?

Edited April 20, 2020 by Jova42R

[bobtehpanda]

46 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

As that would be duplicative to the , here's another idea:

the only people who give a shit about "duplicative" letters are railfans.

[Jova42R]

2 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

the only people who give a shit about "duplicative" letters are railfans.

So why not just call it one letter? It makes more sense?

[Deucey]

8 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

So why not just call it one letter? It makes more sense?

If one goes on 8th Av and another up 6th or 2nd Av, they’re different routes that get different names.

This isn’t Paris or London...

[bobtehpanda]

8 minutes ago, Deucey said:

If one goes on 8th Av and another up 6th or 2nd Av, they’re different routes that get different names.

This isn’t Paris or London...

Paris does do this, and gets crazier; they assign RER "service" names to indicate specific stopping patterns like so

Quote

 

RER trains display a "nom de mission" or "name of service", not the name of the destination station. These are invented names designating (and distinguishing) individual services ("runs"), and are accompanied by a two-digit number, for example ZARA59 or DJIB72.

The first letter corresponds to the destination (gare d'arrivée):

Letter To Examples of names of services

• B La Défense BYLL, BORA, BTON
• D Noisy-le-Grand - Mont d'Est DYNO, DJIN, DOMI
• N Boissy-St-Léger NELY, NAGA
• O Torcy OKEY, ORKA, OFRE
• Q Marne-la-Vallée – Chessy QUDO, QIKY, QBIK, QAHA
• R La Varenne-Chennevières RHIN, RUDI
• T Poissy TERI, TJAC, TIKY
• U Cergy – Le Haut UPAL, UDON, UXOL
• W (empty train) WQWZ
• X Le Vésinet – Le Pecq XUTI, XOUD
• Y Rueil-Malmaison YCAR, YVAN
• Z Saint-Germain-en-Laye ZARA, ZEUS, ZINC

The second letter corresponds to the stations served and the origin station: a letter can have different meanings, depending on the destination. For instance, second letter "E" indicates:

with first letter "N" or "Z", all stations Saint-Germain-in-Laye – Boissy-St-Léger (NELY or ZEUS);

with first letter "Q", Poissy to Marne-la-Vallée – Chessy, all stations except Neuilly-Plaisance and Bry-sur-Marne (QENO).

The third and fourth letters are used to form a pronounceable name, changed when the service number (odd 01-99 eastward, even 02-98 westward) reaches the maximum. For example, successive trains to Boissy-St-Léger are called NEGE96, NEGE98, then NELY02, NELY04, etc. Each service is uniquely identifiable, as there cannot be two "NEGE" services with the same number in the same day.

 

 

[Around the Horn]

1 hour ago, Jova42R said:

Exactly. But where would you terminate the ? That's why I was saying Chatham Sq.

• If you went to Middle Village, it would become a duplicate of the .
• You can't put over 20TPH in Cranberry

Where would the  go?

The idea is that the takes over the 's route and all trains would be trains. Correct me if I'm wrong @bobtehpanda

[bobtehpanda]

29 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

The idea is that the takes over the 's route and all trains would be trains. Correct me if I'm wrong @bobtehpanda

With your proposed deinterlining, probably yeah.

[bobtehpanda]

14 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

So I've got a bit of a wacky idea (I'll admit that right off the bat) that came about because of a discussion elsewhere about bringing back the els...

Bring back the Myrtle Avenue el, with a portal underground somewhere where feasible and then after stops in Downtown Brooklyn and DUMBO, cross into Manhattan at Catherine Street, turning onto Worth Street at Chatham Square and then using the bellmouths south of Canal Street to merge with the . This line would allow for the merge at Myrtle-Broadway to be completely eliminated (but kept for non-revenue moves/disruptions).

After Central Avenue, the would stop at:

-Myrtle Avenue-Broadway (upper level)

-Throop Avenue

-Nostrand Avenue B44 SBS potential connection to

-Vanderbilt Avenue

-Jay St-MetroTech

-High Street-Brooklyn Bridge

-Chatham Square

-Foley Square

-Canal Street

You're probably thinking what on earth is it connecting to that line for? Well, this line would also allow for @RR503's QBL deinterlining proposal. I'll explain:

Instead of just the , the and would be the 8th Avenue/53rd Street/Queens Blvd Locals (with the shifting to 8th Av Express and the removed from QBL entirely).

As a result, we can bring back the as a full ten car train to Jamaica Center and on the south end as Culver Express (eliminating the ) to pair with the as 6th Avenue/63rd Street/Queens Blvd Expresses. Now both Jamaica branches retain full ten car trains, as opposed to trying to fit in 8 car trains somewhere.

With the removed from the Jamaica Line, the can also be beefed up to take advantage of the 24 TPH capacity of the Williamsburg Bridge.

Thinking about this, I think this would have to be paired with going on the Jamaica Line to work. Otherwise it removes the fairly easy Midtown connection on the Jamaica Line, resulting in several problems

• prior to deletion in favor of the , Delancey Essex was already identified as a problematic transfer hotspot. The solved this problem.
• If you want to get to Midtown all of your options are either an extremely indirect via Downtown Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan or two-transfer ride. We know most riders prefer Midtown.
• Because the one-seat-ride is no longer an option, the Jamaica Line has no advantages over the Canarsie Line, so this would probably make overcrowding worse.

[LGA Link N Train]

@Around the Horn there's one thing I'm still confused by: 

How are trains going to go underground after trans-versing the Myrtle Upper Level?

[Jova42R]

24 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

@Around the Horn there's one thing I'm still confused by: 

How are trains going to go underground after trans-versing the Myrtle Upper Level?

See below:

Quote

I think that reactivation would be a great idea, however, you can't keep it on Myrtle. There are no spots to go underground, so you'd have to go over the Bklyn Bridge, which would require trams, which would require the  to be booted back to the Willy B, which defeats the purpose

I'd run it via the Navy Yard, then underground across the Navy Yard (see my earlier map)

[Jova42R]

53 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

With your proposed deinterlining, probably yeah.

 

1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

The idea is that the takes over the 's route and all trains would be trains. Correct me if I'm wrong @bobtehpanda

That's what I was saying!

I understand

[Deucey]

1 hour ago, bobtehpanda said:

Paris does do this, and gets crazier; they assign RER "service" names to indicate specific stopping patterns like so

I stayed in Clichy. Drank by the Tower. Eff Line 13.

London? Don’t get me started on the Northern Line.

[Around the Horn]

2 minutes ago, Deucey said:

London? Don’t get me started on the Northern Line.

I've always thought they should split it into the Northern and Southern lines just to be funny

[LGA Link N Train]

1 hour ago, Jova42R said:

See below:

I'd run it via the Navy Yard, then underground across the Navy Yard (see my earlier map)

I get how you want to make the line transition. I’m just confused by how the trains would go underground in the original proposal that @Around the Horn made.

[Jova42R]

2 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

I get how you want to make the line transition. I’m just confused by how the trains would go underground in the original proposal that @Around the Horn made.

Maybe by destroying a bit of Fort Greene Park?

But that'd get massive community opposition.

[LGA Link N Train]

14 minutes ago, Jova42R said:

Maybe by destroying a bit of Fort Greene Park?

But that'd get massive community opposition.

Maybe...

On a side note, if someone asks a question and it’s not directed towards you, then please don’t answer. 

[mrsman]

2 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Thinking about this, I think this would have to be paired with going on the Jamaica Line to work. Otherwise it removes the fairly easy Midtown connection on the Jamaica Line, resulting in several problems

• prior to deletion in favor of the , Delancey Essex was already identified as a problematic transfer hotspot. The solved this problem.
• If you want to get to Midtown all of your options are either an extremely indirect via Downtown Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan or two-transfer ride. We know most riders prefer Midtown.
• Because the one-seat-ride is no longer an option, the Jamaica Line has no advantages over the Canarsie Line, so this would probably make overcrowding worse.

You are right that extending  to Downtown Brooklyn, Navy Yard, and Myrtle Ave would not divert any Midtown-bound traffic to the new  as it is now a long route that goes out of the way.  But by doing this, we do free up a lot of capacity on the Williamsburg Bridge Route.  Maybe enough capacity to have a new route, let's call it the orange (K)*.  This train will be an express route from Broadway Junction, stopping at Myrtle/Broadway, and Marcy and then following the old M route to the 6th Ave local and QBL express.  To the extent that it only stops at the longer express platforms along the Broadway Brooklyn el, the train can be full length without platform extensions.  Also, given its express nature, it may be able to pull off a lot of people from other trains, being the most direct Midtown route for anyone coming along the  at Broadway Junction and the new   train at Myrtle/Broadway.

* Or perhaps this can be name  as the old is superflous with the new .

[Jova42R]

Hi all,

I have made a Bronx LRT/Trolley map. I know that street running is seen as not that great (as @Union Tpke, @XcelsiorBoii4888, @engineerboy6561 and @B35 via Church have said), but all of the street running sections (which makes up roughly 75-80% of the system) would run on DEDICATED bus lanes with DEDICATED LRT signals.

Here's the map:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=18NHwrP-Y3xCLjkjnhc0VyHPb8ZthWKZr&usp=sharing

In terms of each line, I think that most of these lines are meant to be subway-underserved area connectors, so BEFORE YOU SAY THAT ONLY 2 LINES CONNECT TO MANHATTAN, REALIZE THAT THIS IS NOT THE MAIN PURPOSE.

I would appreciate any feedback.

Thanks!

@Jova42R

[Collin]

It was posted on Vanshnookenraggen a while back having Second Avenue services replace the  over the Manhattan Bridge.  But the current plan does not allow for a connection to the Manhattan Bridge from Second Avenue.  Phases 3 and 4 really need to be rethought since they don't allow for Second Avenue to tie into the existing network.  I think it should be built with the station locations unchanged from what they currently are, but with better connections to the rest of the network.  I used some of their ideas, and made my own changes to them.

I think that when Phase 1, 2, and 3 are built with a 2 track line, the Second Avenue services should replace the  over the Manhattan Bridge, and the  reinstated to run from Forest Hills, via QB LCL, via 53rd, 6th Ave LCL, to Church Ave via Culver LCL.  This would allow the  to go express at least during weekdays.

The  should run from 125th Street and via West End in Brooklyn (Brighton LCL if de-interlining).  A different service that I'll call  will run from Forest Hills, via QB LCL, Second Ave, then via Brighton EXP.  This would be a part time service not running overnight, and would replace the  in Queens.  To allow Broadway to run at full capacity, 57th Street 7th Avenue would be reconfigured so that both local and express trains could either terminate there, or continue to either 2nd Avenue or Astoria without causing merging problems.  The normal service pattern would have the  terminate there while the other three would keep their current service pattern.  I'm envisioning something similar to 145th Street on CPW.

With a 4 track line from 55th Street south, there would be two additional services added down to Hanover Square.  A subway to Red Hook has been spoken of, usually the .  However, 2nd Avenue would be better lined up for a new tunnel to Red Hook with a stop on Governor's Island.  After Red Hook it could continue and connect with the 4th Avenue 9th Street complex (transfer, not a track connection).  I also think 2nd Avenue would connect well with the Montague Street Tunnel, allowing it to tie in with DeKalb and the rest of the BMT.  Vanshnookenraggen also proposed connecting it into Fulton Street via Court Street (Transit Museum would need to be relocated).  They had the  going on Fulton, but I think it should be the 2nd Avenue route instead.

An IND Worth Street Line was also discussed here, and I have a different idea for how to use it.  Instead of connecting to Myrtle Ave, it should run to Brooklyn Navy Yard, then it could connect with the , and replace the Franklin Avenue before connecting into the Brighton Line and continuing down it.